It is always the same Muslims who often say sexist/racist/homophobic/etc things who ask people to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I sincerely hope you apply this benefit of the doubt principle diligently in your daily life. Because I don’t see any one of you give the benefit of the doubt on the instances you are the ones discriminated against and hurt by bigotry.

CAN I JUST [ELEMENTARY SPOILERS]

stardust-rust:

Guys, Elementary’s Irene Adler was a COMPLETE opposite of BBC’s Irene.

BBC Irene is first presented as this cunning, intelligent, independent and sexy woman who confused Sherlock with her nakedness. She ‘beat’ Sherlock and manipulated the Holmes brothers like a violin, proving herself their equal. But then we find out that all along she’d been with Moriarty as a semi-pawn, and all her planning had actually been Moriarty’s.

None of the genius was hers, she only got the information through her ~womanly wiles~ and required Moriarty to help her with her plans. So unhappy with how that turned out. Not to mention the very ick lesbian-cured-by-a-man bit, where her love for him betrays her in the most ridiculous way with the worst pun I’d ever heard (SHER-locked indeed, jesus fucking christ). The ending of course, as we all know, is her on her knees in some sandy supposedly Middle-Eastern nowhere, about to be beheaded of all things, and Sherlock swooping in to save the damsel. *SEVERE EYE ROLL*

BUT IN ELEMENTARY

Irene is first presented as a victim of Moriarty, a pawn of his that he manipulated to shatter Sherlock and destroy his morale. She has been mentally-fucked with, she is a shell of her former self, she is a woman without agency in this battle between two men. Then in a complete turnaround plot twist, it was Irene’s nakedness that betrayed her and gave Sherlock clarity to her real involvement with Moriarty, and later on, she IS Moriarty. All of Moriarty’s plans and genius and insidious intellect has been hers all along, and to quote “As if men had a monopoly on murder.” (you’re an evil bitch Irene, but goddamn I love you). And in the end she didn’t need rescuing by him, he needed rescuing from her by the lovely and incredibly talented Joan ‘Badass’ Watson.

It was JOAN that saw her weakness and took her down like a ton of bricks because NO ONE calls her a mascot and goddamn gets away with it. Oh and no one fucks with her BFF either. So yes, Elementary’s Irene was also in love with Sherlock, but their love made them weak for each other, almost a stalemate. It took Joan to break that unhealthy relationship and give Sherlock his life, and his focus, back to him.

Then he rightfully acknowledged Joan’s badassery by naming a bee after her. (And I think it’s Euglossa Watsonia. I know Sherlock said “Euglassia” but Euglossa is an actual bee type).

tumblrofthrones:

theyoungw0lf:

I feel like even though Sansa hates the Lannisters and what they did to her family, Tyrion is generally nice to her. He promises not to hurt her and he refuses to consummate the marriage because she doesn’t want to. He saved her from Joffery and stood up for her to him. Yet she hates him just because of his family. Tyrion hates his family as much as she does. He had no part in Ned Stark’s death. He was being held captive by Cat then. Even then after being held captive he still doesn’t hate the Starks. 

I’m not saying Sansa should go head over heels in love with Tyrion cause he’s a fabulous guy but she should at least appreciate that she wasn’t married to Joffery and that Tyrion is at least trying to be nice to her because he’s seen how miserable she is here at King Landing and how horrible Cersei and Joffery have been treating her. At least he’s trying. 

She doesn’t owe him anything. She’s being forced into a marriage. She’s a fourteen year old hostage. He’s a grown man too scared to say no to his dad even though he could actually leave if he wanted to, but he likes power and being a Lannister. She doesn’t need to appreciate anything. Tyrion doesn’t get a cookie for not raping Sansa. She doesn’t want him and she doesn’t have to justify it.

majdalshams replied to your post: So, I just learnt about what happened in Woolwich…

My friend told me that the bbc said that the language which the suspects used strongly indicates that they were Muslims so you can see the smooth transition to the terrorist labeling

I see. I’m totally not surprised. I’ve been reading several articles, I saw the (disgusting) video and yeah, no real and conclusive hint that they are really Muslim and/or that religion had anything to do with it at all. 

Medias, keep failing. 

So, I just learnt about what happened in Woolwich and apparently it’s already labelled as a terrorist attack? 

I know there is not really a fixed definition of terrorism, but I don’t think this one assault fits the definition at all. Murder, homicide, yes. But not terrorism. 

And is there any proof that those two people are Muslims? (there are reports that say those two guys were actually shouting “allahu akbar” but no witness seems to mention that “detail” from what I’ve read so far). Even if they were, it might have no connection whatsoever to the assault (But go tell that to the medias). 

Here it goes again though. 

If there is one thing more annoying than SJW on this website, it is anti-SJW. 

barbreyryswells replied to your post: monpetitsoulierr replied to your post: I watched…

I haven’t read the book but iv heard its pretty gr9 and its obviously a classic about being disillusioned by the American dream, class dysphoria, consequences of excess and materialism etc etc

Ah, presenting the story like that makes the book more appealing. :D That’s something I found lacking in the movie personally. True, there were some scenes which were reminiscent of the particular social context the characters were in (especially towards the end) but I personally didn’t find that enough. It probably is more present in the book though. If it is, then I’d be more interested in it.