Game of Thrones Daily
AnasAbdin

Kaledo Art

Kiana Khansmith
Claire Keane
occasionally subtle
todays bird
taylor price

Andulka
dirt enthusiast

tannertan36

#extradirty
Sweet Seals For You, Always
sheepfilms
No title available
Today's Document
🪼
TVSTRANGERTHINGS

shark vs the universe
Xuebing Du

seen from Poland
seen from Argentina

seen from Malaysia
seen from Argentina

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Costa Rica
seen from Bosnia & Herzegovina

seen from Brazil
@honeygojicha
Superheroes that are like “if we kill them we’re just as bad as they are uwu” ? Micro dick energy
The only exception is Aang, whose whole “I’m not gonna kill him if i can find another way” thing is less false moral equivalency and more “I’m twelve and I have been through way too much bullshit this year to add ‘commit my first murder’ to the list.”
I do respect superheroes who don’t kill, and I really think “we’re as bad as they are if we do it” is a terrible oversimplification of why someone would come to that moral conclusion.
Three reasons why a hero might not kill:
1. They are not granted by their society a “licence to kill.” Many (not all) people accept that a soldier or a judge might need to kill a wrongdoer in the course of their duties. Those people (should) act under strict rules and processes to determine when a death is just. A society, to be peaceful, usually functions under a guarantee that people won’t on their own judgement decide to off people. Vigilantes don’t usually have state-sanctioned authority, but they do rely on public goodwill to be counted as heroes and not menaces or even villains. A hero, especially an independent, self-proclaimed one, may lack the authority or judgement to serve as executioner. Most just societies require a trial before delivering a sentence.
2. They don’t need to. Paradoxically, or maybe not so much so, the stronger a hero is, the less they need to kill. One of the most common defenses for a murder is “self defense,” the idea that the person making the plea was in so much danger from the deceased that killing them was justifiable. But once you’re a swordsman swift enough to cut bullets or a muscleman strong enough to lift trucks, who’s that big a threat? As your control over your power and your ability to master an opponent both increase (and barring completely wild or uncontrolled abilities, these two are very linked) the easier it becomes to hold back, to subdue with the minimal amount of damage and to render even the worst villains neutralized without going nuclear. 3. The power to kill is bad for their mental health. Not everyone can perform even a “just” killing with a clean conscience. A hero might fear the trauma of killing, and seek to avoid the damage. Or a hero might introspect, and realize that, should they kill today, tomorrow the choice will be easier. Killing an opponent, rather than subduing them, is often the easy way out, and a hero who comes to rely on that solution might find themselves killing more and more, Even if killing isn’t addictive, a hero might still fear that mindset.
Now, a common version of this problem is Batman, who wouldn’t kill the Joker even if the Joker is at maximum edge, dealing out huge terrorist acts and body counts. The best reason for Batman not to kill him isn’t “I am as bad as the Joker if I kill,” but more, “I am a man who uses superheroism as a trauma coping mechanism, and if I start committing extrajudicial killings my mental state and my loose alliance with the police will both deteriorate.”
THANK. YOU.
The thing with telling “cliche” stories, but with representation, is… these stories aren’t cliche for us.
Picture this. The people at the table next to you have been getting chocolate cake as a dessert for YEARS. After every meal, they get a chocolate cake. Now, it’s been years, and the people at that table can barely stand chocolate anymore. They want maybe a cheesecake. Or lemon mousse.
But your table? Has NEVER had chocolate cake. Mousse is also good, but you are SO hungry for that chocolate cake, cause you never had it before, and it’s brand new for you, and you’ve been watching the other table eat it for YEARS.
That’s what’s like getting a “cliche” story that’s representative. Has it been done a million times before? Yes. Has it ever been done for US? Well… no. Maybe it’s the 500th chocolate cake in existence, but all the other chocolate cakes weren’t meant for us (girls/PoC/queer folk/disabled folk/etc)
So it being cliche is not a bad thing. You may not want chocolate cake anymore. But we want our slice too.
The fact that we can accidentally bite the insides of our cheeks has to be the biggest design flaw of the human body.
NO SORRY IT’S THE FACT THAT OUR TRACHEA AND ESOPHAGUS CROSS AND BRIEFLY OCCUPY THE SAME HOLE DOLPHINS DON’T HAVE THIS PROBLEM.
WE ONLY GET ONE SET OF ADULT TEETH THAT ARE DESIGNED TO LAST MAYBE HALF OUR EXPECTED LIFESPAN
OUR LOWER BACKS ARE STRUCTURALLY FUCKED FROM MAKING A SHITTY TRANSITION TO BEING BIPEDS
INTELLIGENT DESIGN MY ASS, BUT AT THE VERY LEAST WE’RE NOT HORSES
“In conclusion, the humans were extremely angry until they saw the horse, and then thought ‘Well, that bastard’s got it rough, this ain’t so bad’“
That last bit sounds straight out of a Douglas Adams novel
Superheroes that are like “if we kill them we’re just as bad as they are uwu” ? Micro dick energy
The only exception is Aang, whose whole “I’m not gonna kill him if i can find another way” thing is less false moral equivalency and more “I’m twelve and I have been through way too much bullshit this year to add ‘commit my first murder’ to the list.”
I do respect superheroes who don’t kill, and I really think “we’re as bad as they are if we do it” is a terrible oversimplification of why someone would come to that moral conclusion.
Three reasons why a hero might not kill:
1. They are not granted by their society a “licence to kill.” Many (not all) people accept that a soldier or a judge might need to kill a wrongdoer in the course of their duties. Those people (should) act under strict rules and processes to determine when a death is just. A society, to be peaceful, usually functions under a guarantee that people won’t on their own judgement decide to off people. Vigilantes don’t usually have state-sanctioned authority, but they do rely on public goodwill to be counted as heroes and not menaces or even villains. A hero, especially an independent, self-proclaimed one, may lack the authority or judgement to serve as executioner. Most just societies require a trial before delivering a sentence.
2. They don’t need to. Paradoxically, or maybe not so much so, the stronger a hero is, the less they need to kill. One of the most common defenses for a murder is “self defense,” the idea that the person making the plea was in so much danger from the deceased that killing them was justifiable. But once you’re a swordsman swift enough to cut bullets or a muscleman strong enough to lift trucks, who’s that big a threat? As your control over your power and your ability to master an opponent both increase (and barring completely wild or uncontrolled abilities, these two are very linked) the easier it becomes to hold back, to subdue with the minimal amount of damage and to render even the worst villains neutralized without going nuclear. 3. The power to kill is bad for their mental health. Not everyone can perform even a “just” killing with a clean conscience. A hero might fear the trauma of killing, and seek to avoid the damage. Or a hero might introspect, and realize that, should they kill today, tomorrow the choice will be easier. Killing an opponent, rather than subduing them, is often the easy way out, and a hero who comes to rely on that solution might find themselves killing more and more, Even if killing isn’t addictive, a hero might still fear that mindset.
Now, a common version of this problem is Batman, who wouldn’t kill the Joker even if the Joker is at maximum edge, dealing out huge terrorist acts and body counts. The best reason for Batman not to kill him isn’t “I am as bad as the Joker if I kill,” but more, “I am a man who uses superheroism as a trauma coping mechanism, and if I start committing extrajudicial killings my mental state and my loose alliance with the police will both deteriorate.”
THANK. YOU.
She’s a Prophet!
The Supreme possesses the powers of the Seven Wonders, one being Divination, the power of sight
What I thought peer pressure was gonna be: “here try this DRUG”
What peer pressure actually is: “when are you gonna make a fursona”
Fred and George would have been in slytherin if Rowling didn’t hate slytherins so much and that’s that on that
Add Percy to the list. Man’s personality revolves around the central Slytherin trait: ambition.
Truth
My hot take: that’s not how the Hat works at all.
After reading the first book for about tenth time, I finally realised that the most important part was the one that was made out by author (whom I despise as much as the next fan by now) to be most important. Rowling isn’t that big and hidden codes and meanings. The inportant part was that Harry intensely didn’t want one of the houses.
The Hat always keepa on mind what the hild wants because a person can change and evolve so many different ways outside the four vaguely-defined groups that were created in the first place just to make the teaching process easier.
My hottest take: Bellatrix is a Gryffindor.
An exemplary one at that.
But all of the purebloods at some point in history decided Slytherin was the equivalent of a Posh Private Ivy League Exclusive Fancy Business Class College and raised their kids to want to be Slytherins, to be close to their cousins and their kind in general, to belong with their family. That’s what, I believe, motivates Draco, amongst others, and most other pureblood children.
Notably, Sirius very much did not want to be like his family and wanted to get the furthest away, and was probably honest with the Hat, and the Hat listened.
Another hot take: the Weasleys were the reverse Slytherins. Molly and Arthur may well have supported those stereotypes about Slythring being the baddie club. After all, they lost actual family in the First War, when a lot of Death Eathers were following a notable Slytherin and shouting that the actual founder would have supported their views. So their children grew up wanting to be like their parents, and Very Much Not Slytherins (Ron tells Harry about not wanting to be in Slytherin, and where would he get that opinion from). And then the Weasley children kept coming, and kept wanting to be with their family, so the Hat listened.
Ginny also would have fit Slytherin very well. But I bet she wanted to be close to people she knew and could have reached more easily for help and support. And the Hat listened.
I strongly believe that only when a child doesn’t have those strong connections at heart to begin with, then the Hat offers a few pointers, to see what sparks the interest of a child, to then get thrm interested in the crowd with vaguely similar interests. And that was the cause behind Hermiones long sorting. Hat clearly said that she would be a great Ravenclaw, but what was the girls wish and why? We can only speculate as her discussion with the Hat is not shown in detail, but bear in mind Hermione read most books before the start of school year, and might have formed her opinion on what kind of person she would like to be, so she chose Gryffindor. And the Hat listened to her presentation and debated the little witch a bit, but in the end, the Hat granted a wish.
The Hat listens to what the kids want, because they are small and their personality could change about five dozen times in seven years, and there are more personality types than four and in the end they know themselves best.
Lazaro Spring 2019 Bridal Collection
This dress has everything:
-cool witch feather trim for a “I’m totally prepared to curse your family for seven generations over minor slights” aesthetic.
- shimmering effects reminiscent of the cold and uncaring stars that won’t help that asshole now.
-corseted middle for my back pain, voluminous skirt because knowing if I actually have legs is a privilege
-FUCKING POCKETS HOLY SHIT, for carrying knives and small animal bones.
All it needs now is a matching hat.
Today, I learned an important lesson from my therapist.
At the end of our hour, she told me that although I’ve been hurt and broken badly, she can see I still have parts that aren’t shattered. I laughed lightly and I said “Yeah, one day that will be all of me, no parts shattered anymore”, And she said “No, it won’t.”
And, for a second, I felt my heart break - but she continued. “But it will be the most dominant part of you. Think of your body - if you break your shoulder, even after it heals it will be tender. It will be a sore spot. You will be careful with it. There will be a gentleness when you care for it. If you crack a rib, laughing will hurt and, even after there is no longer a fracture, you may laugh lighter just in case. You can heal, but it is okay to be aware of the parts of you that once hurt the most. The most important thing to know is that where there is tenderness, let there be gentleness.”
“The most important thing to know is that where there is tenderness, let there be gentleness.”
qfmft
do u think that angels having sex with humans was seen as like beastiality in angel-world
do you think that when you reach the gates of heaven they’ll show you this post
bold of you to presume I can die
Pretty sure they actually answer this in the bible and the answer is yes. The whole ‘Lucifer and the lesser angels want have free will’ part has the ‘angels also wanting to be gendered so they can be with humans’ part in it.
god was kinkshaming satan
God got a virgin pregnant without consent, he can mind his business
She did consent tho, like, that’s a whole thing, I’ve been in masses where the main focus was Mary’s Yes. It didn’t happen without warning, an angel was literally like “hey my pal up there is thinking u should birth his humansona” and she was like “that’d be an honor”
I didn’t claw my way out of hell just to be sent back there by reading the word Humansona,
Honestly, as a German I can not quite understand the obsession of the English speaking world with the question whether a word exists or not. If you have to express something for which there is no word, you have to make a new one, preferably by combining well-known words, and in the very same moment it starts to exist. Agree?
Deutsche Freunde, could you please create for me a word for the extreme depression I feel when I bend down to pick up a piece of litter and discover two more pieces of litter?
um = around
die Welt = world
die Umwelt = environment
ver = prefix to indicate something difficult or negative, a change that leads to deterioration or even destruction that is difficult to reverse or to undo, or a strong negative change of the mental state of a person
der Müll = garbage, trash, rubbish, litter
-ung = -ing
die Vermüllung = littering
ver- = see before
zweifeln = to doubt
-ung = see before
die Verzweiflung = despair, exasperation, desperation
die Umweltvermüllungsverzweiflung = …
This is a german compound on the spot master class and I am LIVING
#my german is still too basic for this but I desperately want a compound word for how much these compound words piss me off
das Monster = monster
das Wort = word
der Groll = grudge, anger, malice, rancor
der Monsterwortgroll = …
Monsterwortbildungsimitationsunfähigkeitsverzweiflungsgroll
die Bildung = formation
die Imitation = imitation
un- = un-, in-
fähig = able
-keit = -ility
die Unfähigkeit = inability
der Monsterwortbildungsimitationsunfähigkeitsverzweiflungsgroll = anger about the inability to imitate the formation of monster words
@iasus
When you’re a necromancer but you make strengtg one of your highest stats
what the fuck is going on with this post
this post is blocking the next post from having access to the tumblr blue sea
hey everyone i’m swimming lol
women that wear men’s cologne are hotter than god
@ Scorpios I know a lot of you are proud because you think you’re some manipulating master and you know how to wrap people around your fingers but really y'all don’t have shit on Pisces.
Just want to make it clear: I don’t find this something to be proud of but some SCORPIOS definitely think it is. I’m just saying that they need to calm them egos down.
Signs that think they’re good manipulators: libra, Scorpio, Signs that actually are: Cancer, Pisces
libra: oh my god you are so pretty i like you so much!!!! will you do this thing for me??
scorpio: if you dont do this thing for me youll get to feel my revenge!!
cancer: i do so much for you! it would be so heartless of you not to do something for me :(
pisces: you dont have to do it… really!!! im just saying…. that… i am so lost… and desperate… getting some help would make me feel better…. but dont feel obliged to do it please! you dont have to i swear!!! it would just be nice if you did…
Tony: I got Netflix for you like you asked!
Peter: OH That’s Awesome! I’ve been mooching off of Neds account for years. This will be nice.
Tony: Wait, what do you mean account?
Peter: His Netflix account?
Tony:…..
Peter: Like his profile? I wanted one of my own they’re like $8
Tony:…
Tony:….Ohhhh… You mean the account on the service….
Peter: Yeah, what did you think I mean? Wait, what did you buy?
Tony:…
Tony:……..Netflix…