Read less, more TV!

A blog about BBC Sherlock. Mostly. Also dogs and whatever else catches my fancy. Make yourself at home.
Got a blog on blogger too! (en español)



bootycap:

a moment of silence for all the wonderful WIPs that are probably sitting abandoned on hard drives, possibly never to be touched again


faypunk:

all love should be conditional. those who would hurt you do not deserve your love and that is a perfectly acceptable condition.



an autism self-diagnosis masterpost

bookhobbit:

In the last few months a couple of people have contacted me looking for resources about autism, especially self-diagnosis. I did try to help, but I often forgot what resources I used, so I had trouble tracking them down again.

I don’t want that to keep on happening, so here is an attempt at a great big list of self-diagnosis resources for people who think they might be autistic and want to know more. There are probably others, but hopefully this’ll be helpful to someone.

Wherever possible, I have tried to link to works by autistic people rather than works by the psychiatric community (which is, obviously, allistic-dominated).

This is because autistic people know how autism works much better than any allistic person can. So, if you’re wondering why so much of the list is blog posts instead of medical articles, that’s why.  

Finally, this is very much a work in progress, so please feel free to suggest things to add or change.

And I would like to extend a thousand thanks to mildlyautisticsuperdetectives for beta-ing this for me. She is amazing and you should totally check out her blog.

Read More


mediapathic:

nextyearsgirl:

This is an enormous chain and I’m sorry, but I need to say this:

The laws in the Old Testament were set forth by god as the rules the Hebrews needed to follow in order to be righteous, to atone for the sin of Adam and Eve and to be able to get into Heaven. That is also why they were required to make sacrifices, because it was part of the appeasement for Original Sin.

According to Christian theology, when Jesus came from Heaven, it was for the express purpose of sacrificing himself on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven. His sacrifice was supposed to be the ultimate act that would free us from the former laws and regulations and allow us to enter Heaven by acting in his image. That is why he said “it is finished” when he died on the cross. That is why Christians don’t have to circumcise their sons (god’s covenant with Jacob), that is why they don’t have to perform animal sacrifice, or grow out their forelocks, or follow any of the other laws of Leviticus.

When you quote Leviticus as god’s law and say they are rules we must follow because they are what god or Jesus wants us to do, what you are really saying, as a Christian, is that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was invalid. He died in vain because you believe we are still beholden to the old laws. That is what you, a self-professed good Christian, are saying to your god and his son, that their plan for your salvation wasn’t good enough for you.

So maybe actually read the thing before you start quoting it, because the implications of your actions go a lot deeper than you think.

This is a theological point that doesn’t come up often enough.


The Problem with Privilege: On John Watson, Romance and Duty

teameand221b:

image

JOHN: I’ve thought long and hard about what I want to say to you.
JOHN: These are prepared words, Mary.
JOHN: I’ve chosen these words with care.
MARY: Okay.
JOHN: The problems of your past are your business. The problems of your future … are my privilege.
JOHN: It’s all I have to say. It’s all I need to know.

The first time I watched “His Last Vow” I was struck by the intensity of John’s declaration to Mary, just before he burns the A.G.R.A drive in the Holmes’ crackling, Christmas-bedecked hearth. Though at odds with my desire to see John and Sherlock reunited (sans Mary), I was touched by this gesture. I was also left wondering why John placed so much emphasis on the prepared nature of his statement. Eventually, I figured it was not the first time that the writers had rather explicitly told us viewers something, under the guise of dialogue between two characters. (Think of Mycroft [the writers] and Sherlock [the viewers] in the mind palace in “The Sign of Three” wherein the former asks, “What do we say about coincidences?” and to which Sherlock replies, “The universe is rarely so lazy.”)

As to John’s HLV speech, I also found myself thinking, “Man, that was a pretty romantic thing to say,” despite the dark heaviness in his tone, body language, and facial expressions. And you know what? It sounded romantic because it was romantic. It’s idyllic, this notion of leaving the past behind and accepting certain things about each other – especially the questionable things – as forever mysterious, inconsequential, or both. It’s not strange that John would be prone to romanticism; it’s canonical, based on what we know about his tendency to make people into heroes (Sherlock calls him on this) and his need for excitement-based relationships (Sherlock, Mycroft and Mary all accuse him of this). On closer examination, however, one particular word in this neatly prepared statement kept needling me: privilege.

Read More



arglist:

“where are you going to college”

“what do you want to go to college for”

“have you decided what you want to do with the rest of your life based on 12 years of studying material that has little real world practical applicability”

image


Theme by Little Town