Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2014-08-07 07:26 pm
[ SECRET POST #2774 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2774 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 011 secrets from Secret Submission Post #396.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-08-08 01:02 am (UTC)(link)With stuff like this, there's such an obvious, simple countermeasure: all of the pictures of promos with Nine and Rose that DON'T have them in this approved posture and position. Like this one (http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/doctor-rose-series-1-promo.jpg) or this (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6FNYbh5HRag/UHX3_fCPo8I/AAAAAAAAC1A/mKCV1HpaQR4/s1600/rose+7.jpg). I mean, I can cherry pick my findings like that too.
Not to mention, I really, really don't have a problem with a show called Doctor Who featuring the Doctor in the forefront. Especially when he's the person that must ultimately carry the show.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-08-08 01:43 am (UTC)(link)I'm sure we could find some promos from later on that look more equitable.
...Or we could just challenge ourselves to parse the hierarchy illustrated by this pic:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RXE9pA6t_ug/ThTcco72PCI/AAAAAAAAADg/4UBVn6oL9Gg/s1600/0067b9db.jpg
Jack is least important because he's down low, or is it Jackie because she's most in back?
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-08-08 05:28 am (UTC)(link)