valeria2067:

sherlockbbc:

WAIT
ARE THEY.. ARE THEY StaNDING ON THE cOUCH???!

I think they ARE standing on the couch!  

In fact, THIS REQUIRES A FICLET!

—

Sherlock is pacing the floor in front of the sofa, arms flailing, angry comments about incompetent yarders spewing from his lips, his feet nearly stepping on those of a rather amused John Watson.

“Right,” John huffs. He steps up onto the sofa’s leather seat cushion and stands with his back against the wall.

Sherlock stops in mid-pace. “John, what are you doing?

“I’m conducting an experiment, Sherlock.”

“YOU’RE conducting an experiment?  What sort of experiment requires you to stand on our sofa?”

“Call it a personality test.  Or a test of endurance. For you.”

A frown creases Sherlock’s brow, and his lips turn down a bit at the corners. “And just what do you expect to prove, John?”

John smiles and looks away for a moment before meeting Sherlock’s eyes again. “I expect to prove, Sherlock, that you can’t even function in the same room with me if I seem taller than you.”

Sherlock rolls his eyes. “How very immature. I thought you were above that, Doctor.”

“Oh, I’m above EVERYTHING right now. It’s quite nice, this view.” John laughs and looks at his wristwatch. “Go on, then. Do your deduction thing. I’ll just wait right here, shall I?”

“You actually think I care about our height?”

John smirks, his tongue filling out one side of his cheek. “Prove me wrong.”

I takes less than six minutes for Sherlock to find himself standing next to John on the couch, directly between his flatmate and a bullet-ridden spray-painted smiley face.

John makes a point of saying absolutely nothing.

“Shut up,” replies Sherlock

To be honest, I’d be more worried about how they have a portal gun.

(Source: pingbangpong, via darkpinkhanky-deactivated201203)

Something Positive, used without permission in the hope Randy gets more readers <3

Someone get me this for Christmas? 

darkpinkhanky:

killerqueer:

street-howitzer:

nerdydyke:

tooltoulto:

404debbiicakesnotfound:

chikaradesu:

leelonglover:

I LOVE YOUUUU <3

this.. is amazing <3 thank you

THIS. ALWAYS.

Reasons to actually sit down and read the Bible, to be able to politely reply to such situations. Knowledge really is power.

This is why as an athiest I actually own a bible. So I can pull out the bullshit and properly cite it too.

It is even more useful to understand the languages in which the Bible was originally written.

There are two different words which are translated into English as “abomination”. This post unfortunately muddles up ritualistically unclean practices, like hair-cutting, and taboos agreed upon by the general moral sense of all living believers, like homosexuality. It’s more useful, IMO, to argue that taboos change over time, and that, per the original wording of the Old Testament, homosexuality is far more of a cultural taboo than a religious one.

Also, religion is not “doing what I am told regardless of what is right”. Unless you define “religion” as “a specific authoritarian strain of certain Abrahamic religions”. Which erases far more people of religion than it includes.

Kind of on the above note, my Ethics teacher posits that because the practice of older men taking on boys of quite a young age (children really) and tutoring them in return for sexual favours, this law was put forward to stop this kind of abusive practice, rather than a loving, consensual relationship between to adults, which is the modern idea of homosexuality and not the Biblical one.

 …aaaand then we get into the in-depth debates about the eremenos system and whether you actually consider it to be abusive when you consider most of the boys were over or pretty much at the UK age of consent, it was something you had to agree to no differently than arranged marriages, and most erastes/eremenos couples remainded good friends until they died. I think a couple of famous philosophers actually mention their erastes at some points, always with affection and respect.

*cough* but anyways… i approve wholeheartedly of the original response :D

 The eromenos relationship worked, and was rather common. It was in fact considered abuse if you didn’t get chosen as an eromenos ;-)

Boys would be between the ages of 14 and 20, so it fits roughly within Canadian law, and very very rarely involved anal sex. This was seen to be abusive to the eromenos; most sexual activity between the erastes and eromenos was intercrural, to maintain the boy’s honour. It was also morally expected to take an eromenos, so this necessarily implies two things:

1. The relationship was not considered abusive, but a loving mentorship.
2. Greek sexuality was not measured in binary terms.

Homosexuality did not exist in that term in the culture. There was an active/passive contrast, but the idea that one could only be attracted to one gender was largely made popular after the advent of Christianity. Needless to say, homophobia did not exist within Greek times.

Sometimes, I genuinely think the Greeks, as a society, were much more advanced than our modern world.

(via darkpinkhanky-deactivated201203)