ok new What Is Ruby and I Want Susan To Come Back theory

ruby could be susan's daughter with a human, and through some sort of timelord scieney stuff susan hid ruby's timelord genetics in the midst of the time war and plopped her on earth in a random year hoping that the time war wouldn't find her there, and susan loving earth and london in particular having spent part of her childhood with the doctor there, which would explain why she reads as human on the initial scan the doctor ran on her ANDDD!! why her mysterious cloaked mother would go out of her way to not let the doctor know who she is but ensure the doctor finds the child.

this is even compatible w/ looms btw cos in lungbarrow leela is pregnant w/ a half-timelord child so thats a thing ANDD!!!! how 'the memory changed' if she's a timelord obviously she can go back in time, and the doctor seems to be sensitive to minor changes (he noticed the memory Changing and mavity/gravity too)

and with ruby's genetics not matching anything in the database, if the human in question was from another time then of course they wouldn't be in the database, or even susan scrambling the genetic in some way so that even though she's Human all traces of the specific human beings she's descended from are erased. AND if she's a direct descendant of the doctor then she also has whatever Other Thing the doctor is in her genetics as well.

8th-13th Doctor: i will never tell my companions anything about me. Species? No. Planet? No. The Time War? No. Getting a single personal fact about me will be like pulling teeth.

15th Doctor: hello girl i met 2.25 hours ago my home is a planet called gallifrey ruled by the time lords but i’m not a time lord (but a secret third thing so secret even i dont know it) and i’m not FROM gallifrey and i dont know who i am and i cant even ask because all the time lords were murdered for like the third time :) want to go meet the beatles

the last like five days visualized

so you know how in space babies ruby is all like, are they growing the children for food, and the doctor responds really strongly how that's a silly idea? my dude, like a day ago you were both literally fighting goblins that feast on human babies, ruby made a perfectly reasonable guess here

I'm in this tweet and I don't like it

hey uh. so what’s up with these lyrics actually.

you know how song for ten included lyrical foreshadowing for doomsday? murray gold doesn’t pull this shit accidentally. well i haven’t heard anybody discussing how ominous these lyrics really are. “what you intend i can’t defend” “i think this song will never end”??

pretend, descend (into hell? where are we descending? and most importantly, pretend to do what?? one more penny for the “it’s all happening inside a tv show” jar)

Land’s End — presumably foreshadowing for the cliffside where the TARDIS will land in 73 yards…

?? im being serious they wouldn’t write complete nonsense right. what does this mean. there’s a special little dance you’ll run the risk of WHAT. what the fuck does this mean, mr gold

This is such an important thing for every neurodivergent person to hear ^^ Already, RTD is making an effort to include those who feel out of place for other reasons than just sexuality or gender identity...immediately I was like " ok doc if you say so *increases self esteem*" New new who is uwu

If I hear one more person on twt/insta whine about how Doctor Who has become too "woke" I will hit them with physical CDs of all the other seasons so maybe they remember how progressive it was and how subtle political commentary has been the heart of this show all along

Ladybug and Chat Noir hosting a podcast where they're going to interview Adrien Agreste and so Adrien has to enlist Félix to pretend to be him and Félix gets to just. Make fun of Adrien to his face and to a national audience. Chat Noir keeps arguing with Félix’s Adrien about his own opinions so the next day all the news is about how much everyone thinks Chat Noir hates Adrien Agreste

Help prevent the UK government from screwing over disabled people

The UK government have quietly put out a consultation suggesting a bunch of terrible reforms to PIP (disability benefits). It's just an online form with a lot of questions asking what you think about their ideas.

Any person anywhere in the world can respond to the consultation, and every response will help. If you're not sure what to say, I just wrote up my own response so anyone can use it for inspiration. Feel free to share.

My response: https://medium.com/@averixus/responding-to-the-uk-governments-pip-consultation-9cf97ea9a5aa

The form itself: https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=6fbxllcQF0GsKIDN_ob4wy4AdhV04YtOnxNXoi82ciFUN00yS0lJSTgzOVNaUzI1TVpYRkZGN1RUQSQlQCN0PWcu

UKfems have you written to your MPs yet

"Last month, the UK’s four-year-long review of medical interventions for transgender youth was published. The Cass Review, named after Hilary Cass, a retired pediatrician appointed by the National Health Service to lead the effort, found that “there is not a reliable evidence base” for gender-affirming medicine. As a result, the report concludes, trans minors should generally not be able to access hormone blockers or hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and instead should seek psychotherapy. While the review does not ban trans medical care, it comes concurrently with the NHS heavily restricting puberty blockers for trans youth.

The conclusions of the Cass Review differ from mainstream standards of care in the United States, which recommend medical interventions like blockers and HRT under certain circumstances and are informed by dozens of studies and backed by leading medical associations. The Cass Review won’t have an immediate impact on how gender medicine is practiced in the United States, but both Europe’s “gender critical” movement and the anti-trans movement here in the US cited the report as a win, claiming it is the proof they need to limit medical care for trans youth globally. Notable anti-trans group the Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine called the report “a historic document the significance of which cannot be overstated,” and argued that “it now appears indisputable that the arc of history has bent in the direction of reversal of gender-affirming care worldwide.”

Most media coverage of the report has been positive. But by and large that coverage has failed to examine extensive critiques from experts in the US and elsewhere. Research and clinical experts I interviewed explained that the Cass Review has several shortcomings that call into question many of its findings, especially around the quality of research on gender medicine. They also question the credibility and bias underpinning the review. I spoke with four clinical and research experts in pediatric medicine for gender-diverse youth to dive into the criticisms.

“I urge readers of the Cass Review to exercise caution,” said Dr. Jack Turban, director of the gender psychiatry program at the University of California, San Francisco and author of the forthcoming book Free to Be: Understanding Kids & Gender Identity."

The massive, raging hard-on the UK currently has for the age 25, not to mention that it's based on a misrepresentation of a study on brain development, is soooo sinister. First the cass report, now petitions to impose extra rules on driving in under-25s. Twenty-five. Like, even if it was based in good faith on safety, why not propose it within the bounds of how recently since getting a provisional license, etc.? Why does age have anything to do with it, if it's to do with experience and training? It's transparently based on an image of young people being irresponsible and underdeveloped, a viewpoint propagated by groups who see young people as a political threat. I would not be surprised if the ultimate fantasy is to increase the voting age to 25.

Welcome to the UK, the world's sixth largest economy, where there are 171 billionaires and the Prime Minister and his wife have a combined fortune of £730m.

why don’t you support Keir Starmer?

He hasn’t really given me or many others on the left a good reason to support him. He gutted the left of the party when he came into leadership, he has continued to suppress leftist candidates in local elections, he helped stitch up Corbyn with the anti-senitism smear job only to never talk about it again, and literally told us that if we don’t like it then we can leave - which a lot of us did.

More than that, He has failed to take up a principled stance on Palestine, has failed to offer anything even approaching reasonable measures to avert a climate crisis or to address the growing wealth gap between rich and poor, which are the biggest issues he needs to address. His last news worthy act was to take in a member of the Tory party who was a right-wing xenophobe even by Tory stands, that didn’t exactly signal a shift to the left when he gets in power.

Labour are trying to occupy the centrist space at the moment to poach disaffected Tory voters, and while I understand that strategy, it is losing him the left wing vote. He’s ultimately an electoral opportunist whose values seem to change depending on what he thinks will get him the votes. I realise that isn’t exactly new for Labour politicians, but personally I find it hard to vote for someone when you have no idea what they or their party even stand for anymore.