There are mysterious happenings early in the morning, and the crows bear witness--and have the gossip for you! Prints in my shop~

ellievsbear
Phantogram Three
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Sade Olutola
The Bowery Presents
Fai_Ryy

izzy's playlists!
One Nice Bug Per Day
Cosmic Funnies
$LAYYYTER
macklin celebrini has autism
Interview Vampire Daily
No title available
ojovivo

@theartofmadeline
🪼
Cosimo Galluzzi

Jar Jar Binks Fan Club

#extradirty
seen from Bangladesh

seen from Oman

seen from United Kingdom

seen from China

seen from Malaysia

seen from Türkiye
seen from Germany

seen from Türkiye

seen from Russia
seen from Brazil
seen from India
seen from Dominican Republic

seen from Canada
seen from Thailand

seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Iraq
@mildswearingat4am
There are mysterious happenings early in the morning, and the crows bear witness--and have the gossip for you! Prints in my shop~
Yes, that is my circus, and, yes, those are my monkeys, but I am not on shift yet.
My problem with the term "hubris" in literary analysis is that folks like to toss it around in contexts in which it just plain doesn't apply. The notion of hubris inherently presumes that humans have assigned stations beyond which it's morally – and, often, metaphysically – wrong to reach. Most modern fictional milieux simply lack such an implicit hierarchy. That character isn't guilty of hubris; they're guilty of negligent risk management.
Folks will analyse a fictional character who accidentally blew up half a city and act like the resulting seven-digit body count is purely ancillary to the real crime of aspiring to exceed one's God-given place in the Great Chain of Being.
The definition that I feel is being thrown around is:
Hubris is when a character has an expectation of their ability to perform a great feat that significantly exceeds their actual ability to do so and possibly the ability of anyone to do so; it causes a dramatic downfall because the character's failure is inevitable and its consequences are catastrophic.
This justifies the use in the context of "blew up a city trying to ascend to godhood" without presuming that the ascension itself was inherently wrong. Though, that belief might still be there anyway?
The problem is that, in my experience, even when folks think they're using that definition, in very short order it usually collapses back into talking like the desire to exceed one's grasp was itself the principal crime, rather than the subsequent lack of heed for the consequences.
This is actually such a crucial part of healing from neglect and abuse and I have to add to this.
Because indeed, people who like you will not roll their eyes and sigh at the idea of accommodating your needs, they will value your voice and be upset with you about injustice done to you, not at you for "being difficult". They will be happy when you find a way to live a better life, and help you to get there. If you are struggling, someone who loves you wants to see you smile, not tell you to smile because "you have it so good".
Basically.
I don’t say this often, but you really should unmute and listen to the song

whats YOUR deadly sin
pride
greed
lust
envy
gluttony
wrath
sloth
no nuance just pick one
Friends, romans, people who are nonbinary except at work, lend me your ears,
soliloquy by an immortal cave painter.
pencil, ink, and ochre on paper
There is no such thing as “the evil kill-people disorder that makes you kill people”; it has always been a myth made up by demonization to sell more ableism.
"the evil abuse-people disorder that makes you abuse people" is also a myth, no matter what people on TikTok try to tell you
pros of an original setting: you're not constrained by the politics, geography, history, or even physics of the real world even a little bit
cons of an original setting: you have to Name Everything now. Good luck!
A reminder that darker fiction has a right to exist and explore themes that people are uncomfortable with. Yes, even if it's romanticized. Yes, even if you personally don't like it.
Authors have always written about things that they don't agree with morally, and I hope to god they always will, despite how shitty people treat them for doing that now.
Whoever invented the word "dead" to describe things that aren't alive was really going off. Love how monosyllabic it is, with a hard final consonant. Very definite. Very fatal. Good word.
Lil' ceramic rhino beetle from last month (sold)! 🍊
People are unfazed if you hate women but if you dislike dogs they assume you're a bad person
Tumblr users will read a post complaining about normalized misogyny and hyperfocus on your claim that it's ok to dislike dogs