it's totally ok to dislike things. right?
i have to go delete some posts
One Nice Bug Per Day
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open

shark vs the universe
wallacepolsom

Product Placement
dirt enthusiast

⁂

Kaledo Art
sheepfilms

No title available
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
AnasAbdin
tumblr dot com
almost home

Origami Around

oozey mess
Three Goblin Art
hello vonnie
occasionally subtle

seen from France

seen from United States

seen from Germany
seen from Türkiye

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Vietnam

seen from Australia
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
@top10trucks
it's totally ok to dislike things. right?
i have to go delete some posts
heh. didn't even stand a chance.
to everyone in the notes asking for a translation: panel 1: "weigh your heart" (the suffix pronoun for heart should be .k not .ti i think but i see what you are going for. also, my copy of faulkner doesn't have a copy of the word but it's pretty clear from context what it means) panel 4: "what"
anyway op good job this is really funny and better than 99.9% of hieroglyphs on the internet
@thatlittleegyptologist
xAa is 'to throw/dispatch/abandon' because fAj is the verb 'to weigh' (this can be checked on the Thesaurus Linguae Aegyptiae), .tj should be =k as already pointed out.
Thus with xAa as the imperative 'dispact/throw', the scales determinative doesn't belong to that word and is thus a word in and of itself the 3-consonant jws.w (the .w is just a plural, it's still 3-consonants), and then .tj which should be =k.
It's more: xAa jws.w ib=k 'chuck your heart on the scales' *ma'at gets obliterated* ptr 'what'.
As an aside; it's not good practice with Middle Egyptian to go 'we can infer this from context' when you can't find that word in one dictionary. You should be consulting at least three. Also, because my ass has been doing this for nearly 20 years, just so you're all aware xAa is in Faulkner:
This is page 183 of my personal copy of Faulkner's Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. xAa is right there! You'll see that the picture of the entry for the TLA also cites it as FCD 'Faulkner's Concise Dictionary' 183.
You know the art is good when the academics start getting spicy in the notes
'minion' -too closely associated with those yellow things
'goon' -linguistic drift gave her a new meaning. i hope her new life is good for her. i miss her.
'henchman' -too gendered. can be shortened to 'hench' in a pinch, but lacks punch.
'servant' -too domestic to apply to all those who serve evil.
'underling, subordinate' -this one only works if they get off on being beneath you and/or you don't properly pay your workers.
'associate' -this one's good for grizzled mercenaries or lone agents but doesn't work good for broad swathes of an organization.
'slave' -same as underling but more intense. really fun for some of the group. unsavory for others in a way that limits the scope of the thing.
'thrall' -only really applies if you're brainwashing them and that's not something i've learned how to do en masse yet
'flunky, toady, stooge, lackey' -these are just insulting, and that isn't conducive to a healthy work environment. imagine going to work and your job title is 'stooge'.
'acolyte' -works for those that worship you, but again. lacks the scope.
'supporter, follower' -unspecific and vague
'assistant, helper, aide' -not sinister at all. just means you're doing things for me. swagless in this manner. could be good if used to describe someone who's so clearly more that as a way to emphasize their obedience via understatement, but that's only useful for a few members of the organization. and even then, 'associate' works better.
'cohort' -untested in the field. suggests an equal footing in the affair, ideal for post-structuralist evil organizations with a bottom-up power structure that's held in the hands of the evil workers themselves. perhaps we'll explore it together?
may I suggest: 'grunt' – time-tested by crime bosses with a variety of goals and organizational mandates. implies a subservient position with none of the innate baggage of lackey et al.
GRUNT IS PRETTY GOOD
i'm like a fujoshi but for dead people
if you could see the thread i'm hanging on by you would not say these things to me
This is what hieroglyphs and figures in ancient Egyptian temples looked like before their colors faded. They were recreated using a polychromatic light display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, following thorough research.
earlier this year 2 boys got expelled from my school for going on a teachers email and sending another teacher an email that says “you’re a disgusting little man” and i laugh about it all the time because imagine opening an email from your coworker and thinking it’s important and then it says that
Have you guys seen that clip
Go off Kermit
we're just normal men
Why the heck is this dude trying to confirm if the frog puppet is hetrosexual???
assessing the situation before he shoots his shot
Happy Pride to Kermit the Frog, questioning king
I should be doing more to appreciate the lack of marvel movies in today's popular culture. I once yearned for marvel movies to have this level of irrelevance. They used to feel almost ozymandian, like an empire that had no beginning and no end. and now tony stark iron man is naught but two vast and trunkless legs of stone.
i realise this probably isn't going to move the revolution forward in any meaningful way but i do think we gotta kill these guys first