"wholesome" and "pure" are not antonyms of "sexual" btw
This post brought to you by Song of Songs
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open

No title available

#extradirty
tumblr dot com
will byers stan first human second

JVL
wallacepolsom

No title available
dirt enthusiast
🪼

blake kathryn

PR's Tumblrdome
noise dept.
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

roma★

Janaina Medeiros
taylor price

Product Placement
Cosmic Funnies
AnasAbdin

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia

seen from Türkiye
seen from Malaysia

seen from Türkiye

seen from North Macedonia
seen from Indonesia
seen from Brazil
seen from Türkiye
seen from South Korea
seen from Switzerland
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from North Macedonia
seen from United States

seen from North Macedonia
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from North Macedonia
@esters-notepad
"wholesome" and "pure" are not antonyms of "sexual" btw
This post brought to you by Song of Songs
Did you know that the english word “star” and the japanese word 星(ほし)don’t actually mean the same thing?
Language does not simply name pre-existing categories; categories do not exist in 'the world'
— Daniel Chandler, Semiotics for Beginners
I read this quote a few years ago, but I don’t think I truly understood it until one day, when I was looking at the wikipedia article for “star” and I thought to check the Japanese article, see if I could get some Japanese reading practice in. I was surprised to find that the article was not titled 「星」, but 「恒星」, a word I’d never seen before. I’d always learnt that 星 was the direct translation for “star” (I knew the japanese also contained meanings the english didn’t, like “dot” or “bullseye”, but I thought these were just auxiliary definitions in addition to the direct translation of “star” as in "a celestial body made of hydrogen and helium plasma").
To try and clear things up for myself, I searched japanese wikipedia for 星. It was a disambiguation page, with the main links pointing to the articles for 天体 (astronomical object) and スター(記号)(star symbol). There was no article just called 「星」.
It’s an easy difference to miss, because in everyday conversation, 星 and star are equivalent. They both describe the shining lights in the night sky. They both describe this symbol: ★. They even both describe those enormous celestial objects made of plasma.
But they are different - different enough to not share a wikipedia article. 星 is used to describe any kind of celestial body, especially if it appears shiny and bright in the night sky. “Star” can be used this way too (like Venus being called the “morning star”), but it’s generally considered inaccurate to use the word like this, whereas there is no such inaccuracy with 星. You can say “oh that’s not actually a star, it’s a planet”, but you CAN’T say 「実はそれは星ではなく惑星だよ」 (TL: that’s not actually a hoshi, it’s a planet). A planet IS a 星.
星 is a very common word, essentially equivalent to “star”, but its meaning is closer to “celestial body”. I haven’t looked into the etymology/history but it’s almost like both english and japanese started out with a simple, common word for the lights in the sky - star/星 , but as we found out more about what these lights actually were, english doubled down on using the common word for the specific scientific concept, while japanese kept the common word generic and instead came up with a new word for the more specific concept. If this is actually what happened, I’d guess that kanji probably had something to do with it - 星 as a component kanji exists inside the word for planet, 惑星, and in the word for comet, 彗星, and in the scientific word for “star”, 恒星, so it makes sense that it would indicate a more general concept when used standalone.
This discovery helped me understand that quote - categories don’t exist in the world, we are the ones who create them. I thought that the concept of “star” was something that would be consistent across all languages, but it’s not, because the concept of “star” is not pre-existing. Each language had to decide how to name each of those similar star-like concepts (the ★ symbol, hot balls of gas, twinkling lights in the sky, planets, comets, etc), and obviously not every language is going to group those concepts under the same words with the same nuance.
Knowing this, one might be tempted to say that 恒星(こうせい) is the direct translation for “star”. But this isn’t true either. In most of the contexts that the word “star” is used in english, the equivalent japanese will be simply 星. Despite the meanings not lining up exactly, 星 will still be the best translation for “star” most of the time. This is the art of translation - knowing when the particulars are less important than the vibe or feel of a word. For any word, there will never be an exact perfect translation with all the same nuances and meanings. Translation is about finding the best solution to an unsolvable problem. That's why I love it.
Your sixth most recent emoji is how your guardian angel feels about you
- Sun Wukong
I like to imagine a scenario where humanity just never developed energy guns and has stuck to kinetic weaponry forever and at some point some alien species thinks about messing with the wrong apex predator species.
Alien 1: "Captain, I assure you, our ships can't be breached by anything weaker than a concentrated proton beam. They barely have lasers. We'll be fine."
Alien 2: "Sub relativistic projectile incom-" gets hit by a railgun shell at mach fuck
This is just canon Halo Humanity vs covenant lore btw
Also humanity versus the replicators on Stargate SG1.
there’s direct, and then there’s my former priest meeting me after two years
him: do you still love Jesus?
me: y-yes…
him: as much as He loves you?
me: not quite
Yesterday, my 6y/o decided to name her so far nameless baby doll MacGyvie. "Actually, his name is MacGyver, but he's so little, we call him MacGyvie." I offered to sew a pair of jeans and a leather jacket for the doll, but my daughter turned me down. "He's much too young for that stuff."
New clothes for MacGyvie!
That itty-bitty shirt collar... people who think it's difficult to sew shirts should try making a shirt for a 10 cm doll. But it turned out pretty good in the end, I think! Like a 90s business shirt.
Nature sings Christ's resurrection
More from my flower's collection. It's indeed true that spring and resurrection can be found in the simple things in life. When people give you "death", look at nature. God is there too as He is the Creator of nature.
This is the closest I've gotten to finishing a jug of milk before the expiration date in the last three years
You guys (=American supermarkets) should sell milk by the litre like we do. It's a much more suitable amount for small households, and those who need more can always buy more cartons.
if u like, reblog to remind folks that you will still love them even though they have visible mental illness
Oh great, my (already much too long) WIP just sprouted another chapter.
i speak the secret language where all sentences are true
i speak the other secret language where all sentences tell lies, lets go guard some doors
I would not want to be scissoring around in the sky with the top two while coming in to land on a stormy night...
... I didn't know Kia made planes.
When the seatbelt sign comes on by you got assigned the pride month buckles
mutuals
Which is prev?
Unmarried girl
Apologist
Craftsman who works with a wheel
Archivist
Dying person
Educator
Girl
Jurist
Knife sharpener
Lawyer
Librarian
Just done
How many times can I screw this up?
How badly can I screw this up? Before you’re just done with me.
Questions like this can really haunt us in a relationship. Because everyone has their breaking point. And because, if we’re honest with ourselves, you and I have within us the (all too often realized) capacity to screw up any relationship.
I’m not talking about intentional stuff. Our problem is more subtle. Whether it’s through what we do or say without thinking. Or what we fail to do. You and I have some serious skills in this area.
If we’ve ever wondered why someone has abandoned us, why they’re just done with us? The odds are that you and I are at least part of the reason why.
It’s something we don’t like to think about. Because it makes us wonder which relationship we’re going to screw up next. And who’s going to be just done with us.
Which is why today’s Gospel is so important. After all Peter has done. Denying Jesus on Good Friday. Abandoning his ministry and going back to his old job.
After giving Jesus every reason to be done with him – to treat Peter just like Peter treated Him – Jesus doesn’t throw away their relationship. Jesus invites Peter to come back, to come home.
The simple truth? Our capacity to screw up any relationship is a tiny, feeble thing – when compared to the love of God for us.
Because God has no interest in throwing away His relationship with you.
There is nothing that you can do to change that. Nothing that will make God say, “I’m just done with you.”
No matter what you’ve done, God will not abandon you.
No matter how far you’ve gone, God is inviting you to come back, to come home.
Today’s Readings