Oh.

Welcome to the blog of a closeted geek.

Current obsessions include, but are not limited to: Star-Trek, classical painting techniques, Almost Human, nightlife, science fiction, and avoiding all responsibilities.

Seth MacFarlane on Gene Roddenberry: Hall of Fame 2010

"Now how many science fiction franchises are so well-founded that they could tell a purely character based story with no pyrotechnics. Gene knew Star Trek was not about the space battles the special effects, the action - anybody could do that. It was about the people, and the ideas. Some of the best star trek installments looked like they cost a nickel. They did comedy beautifully - maybe you'd remember Leonard Nimoy got the job directing "Three Men And A Baby" because of Star Trek V. Also not to be undervalued is that Gene's shows took science seriously and as a result Roddenberry left his mark on generations of scientist, physicians and astronauts who credit star trek as the reason they entered their professions. Roddenberry's vision of the future literally shaped our presen" (x)

(Source: science-officer-spock, via jelff)

http://spockshair.tumblr.com/post/83637578101/dontputdescartesbeforedeshorse-alright-folks

dontputdescartesbeforedeshorse:

ALRIGHT FOLKS!

There have been calls to officially organize this. LET’S DO IT.

We need to find a date to get #stoporci2014 trending on twitter, but first we need to collect all the tumblr/twitter accounts that want to do this.

One person obviously can’t…

(Source: sartrek)

chakrabot:

maja-stina:

fandomsandfeminism:

generalmaluga:

albinwonderland:

fandomsandfeminism:

betterthanabortion:

"My body, my choice" only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake.

Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to.
See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon. 
Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy. 
To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died. 
You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies. 

reblogging for commentary 

But, assuming the mother wasn’t raped, the choice to HAVE a baby and risk sacrificing their “bodily autonomy” is a choice that the mother made. YOu don’t have to have sex with someone. Cases of rape aside, it isn’t ethical to say abortion is justified. The unborn baby has rights, too. 

First point: Bodily autonomy can be preserved, even if another life is dependent on it. See again the example about the blood donation. 
And here’s another point: When you say that “rape is the exception” you betray something FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN about your own argument.
Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all.
If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other. 
When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting.
When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.” 
And that is gross. 

This has been added to since I last saw it, so reblogging again.

Busted wide open.

chakrabot:

maja-stina:

fandomsandfeminism:

generalmaluga:

albinwonderland:

fandomsandfeminism:

betterthanabortion:

"My body, my choice" only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake.

Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to.

See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon. 

Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy. 

To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died. 

You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies. 

reblogging for commentary 

But, assuming the mother wasn’t raped, the choice to HAVE a baby and risk sacrificing their “bodily autonomy” is a choice that the mother made. YOu don’t have to have sex with someone. Cases of rape aside, it isn’t ethical to say abortion is justified. The unborn baby has rights, too. 

First point: Bodily autonomy can be preserved, even if another life is dependent on it. See again the example about the blood donation. 

And here’s another point: When you say that “rape is the exception” you betray something FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN about your own argument.

Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all.

If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other. 

When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting.

When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.” 

And that is gross. 

This has been added to since I last saw it, so reblogging again.

Busted wide open.

(via bewaretheides315)

http://usscamelot.tumblr.com/post/83316518352/andromeda3116-no-but-galaxy-quest-is

andromeda3116:

no but galaxy quest is legitimately the best movie ever

  • it’s a love letter to fandom — it totally subverts the “gross man-child in the basement” perception of a fanboy and it’s the fans’ dedication to the show that saves the day
  • i repeat: the fandom saves everyone’s…

(via jelff)

(Source: slideitinme, via bewaretheides315)

spicyshimmy:

you’re only a true star trek fan if you like star trek in any capacity, or if you’re a ventilation unit on a star trek set. sorry i dont make the rules

vulcansmirk:

petimetrek:

This time blame spockshair and ahren

#au where when jim and spock finally get married and get a house and a cat #and even after years of being married the cat and spock are hard to tell apart #because they both sleep curled up halfway on his stomach #and both make odd purring sounds the entire time (via arthurpoo)


Are we really so different that we must be horrified of one of them uncovered, and completely okay with the other?

this is now my most favorited post ever

sherlockedtrekkie:

juniperhoot:

t-high-la420:

look me straight in the eye and tell me kirk wasnt goin in for a smooch

Get a room, gentlemen.

does that grabbing motion

look familiar to anyone else?

kirk’s signature grab and kiss, perhaps?

in conclusion: kirk was going for a kiss. no question about it.

(Source: gyuki, via museaway)

stuffimgoingtohellfor said: John knew--in an abstract sort of way--that Dorian had had a partner before him, but that didn't mean he had to like it, especially when the idea went from the abstract to the concrete.

museaway:

He wasn’t jealousDorian was a DRN. DRNs had been designed to serve with humans. It’s not like Dorian came off the production line and was immediately put into storage to wait until John Kennex woke up from a coma and smashed an MX.

Of course Dorian had a partner before. John had had a partner before, so why did it make him frown to see a picture of Dorian at a crime scene with another detective? The date read December 12, 2043, just a month before Dorian was decommissioned. John sighed and waved his hand to close the file. 

What the hell were they putting in the coffee lately?