🐶  Doge Meme

🤧  Loss Meme

👋🏼  Bye Felicia Meme

🥺  Loss Memes

🐈  Cat Memes

👊  You Can Do It Meme

century Memes

Cheteshwar Pujara
Cheteshwar Pujara
Died
Died
The
The
Adams
Adams
Hurtfully
Hurtfully
Aing
Aing
A True Hero
A True Hero
john
john
dont go
dont go
like comment share
like comment share 

    
                    

                

            
        
    

    
    
    






            

            
            

                

                    
                

                

                    
                    
                    

                        


	


    🔥 Popular | Latest






    

    
        
            
                

                    

                        
                        
                        
                    

                    
                    

                        
                            17 of the most viral images of all time that have helped define the 21st century so far
                        
                    

                    
                

            
        
    
        
            
                

                    

                        
                    

                    
                    

                        
                            India vs West Indies: KL Rahul's "Mystery" Century Celebration Triggers Meme Fest On Twitter
                        
                    

                    
                

            
        
    
    






    

    
    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        crispy-ghee:

3 of Cousin’s other children: Little Knife, Little Flame, and Naniandi. (aka, the last of the group of Cousin’s kids that I’ll draw because he has like 50 or something and I’m not designing all of them, I’m sorry. Feel free to pretend that your OC is Cousin’s kid, it’ll probably work out.)Little Knife:  Cousin’s youngest son and the last he had with Fury before she died. A cocky little shit sometimes, but with good reason. While smaller than all his sibs, his agility and stealth made him an asset to hunting parties. 

His relationship w/ Jagged-Tooth sucks. He and Kal'thnde are very close, tho, as Cousin was already aging and too busy chaperoning youngbloods to pay him as much attention as he should’ve, Kal and his sisters more or less raised him and got between him and Jagged-Tooth often.



Lauded for his nimbleness and his lightning speed while maintaining near-silence, he has become an asset in his hunting party. His abilities also make him sought after for off-world reconnaissance, where he travels to planets to review and evaluate their suitability for hunting.Little Knife is one of the 20 or so Yautja who join Cousin to form the Yautja Faction, against the orders of the Elder Council. 12 of his brothers also form the team, including Jagged-Tooth and Kal’thnde. Little Flame: 

Celebrated Huntress, Several times Champion of inter-tribal games and so coveted and beloved beyond her own clan. Aggressive, abrasive, but loyal, like her father in his youth. Little Flame is close to Kal and Little Knife, and was one of Cousin’s children that fought against Jagged-Tooth’s bad attitude–ballsy, as he’s biotic. She and the eldest brother never really learned to get along, but there is begrudging respect for each others achievements.

Little Flame basically saved her father’s life when at one point she heard whispers that some elders were speaking of sending Enforcers or some other group of Hunters to go after Cousin and his Renegades. She sent him warnings, and killed most of the would-be trackers herself.Naniandi: 

Cousin’s eldest Daughter. Sometimes called Furious Patience, a play on her mother’s name (Patient Fury), since she’s so much like her. One of the tribe matriarchs, and often invited alongside the tribe’s elders to speak diplomacy with other clans when needed. Naniandi is the closest Jagged-Tooth is to any of his family, maybe having to do w/ how much like his mother she is, even though she is a century or so younger than him. She’s basically all around respected by everyone in Cousin’s family, as well as their overall clan

It’s Naniandi’s influence and hard work that made it possible for Cousin and the remainder of the Yautja faction to return to Homeworld after they’d disgraced themselves to go fight alongside Shepard. She ultimately convinced the elders to reinstate honor and title to her father.

Yautja joke (but only a little) about wishing to birth armies. Compared to others his age, Cousin only has a moderate amount of offspring, but those that survived into his old age came out fierce, capable, and loyal to their family. It’s thanks to them he could be with Shepard.

: crispy-ghee:

3 of Cousin’s other children: Little Knife, Little Flame, and Naniandi. (aka, the last of the group of Cousin’s kids that I’ll draw because he has like 50 or something and I’m not designing all of them, I’m sorry. Feel free to pretend that your OC is Cousin’s kid, it’ll probably work out.)Little Knife:  Cousin’s youngest son and the last he had with Fury before she died. A cocky little shit sometimes, but with good reason. While smaller than all his sibs, his agility and stealth made him an asset to hunting parties. 

His relationship w/ Jagged-Tooth sucks. He and Kal'thnde are very close, tho, as Cousin was already aging and too busy chaperoning youngbloods to pay him as much attention as he should’ve, Kal and his sisters more or less raised him and got between him and Jagged-Tooth often.



Lauded for his nimbleness and his lightning speed while maintaining near-silence, he has become an asset in his hunting party. His abilities also make him sought after for off-world reconnaissance, where he travels to planets to review and evaluate their suitability for hunting.Little Knife is one of the 20 or so Yautja who join Cousin to form the Yautja Faction, against the orders of the Elder Council. 12 of his brothers also form the team, including Jagged-Tooth and Kal’thnde. Little Flame: 

Celebrated Huntress, Several times Champion of inter-tribal games and so coveted and beloved beyond her own clan. Aggressive, abrasive, but loyal, like her father in his youth. Little Flame is close to Kal and Little Knife, and was one of Cousin’s children that fought against Jagged-Tooth’s bad attitude–ballsy, as he’s biotic. She and the eldest brother never really learned to get along, but there is begrudging respect for each others achievements.

Little Flame basically saved her father’s life when at one point she heard whispers that some elders were speaking of sending Enforcers or some other group of Hunters to go after Cousin and his Renegades. She sent him warnings, and killed most of the would-be trackers herself.Naniandi: 

Cousin’s eldest Daughter. Sometimes called Furious Patience, a play on her mother’s name (Patient Fury), since she’s so much like her. One of the tribe matriarchs, and often invited alongside the tribe’s elders to speak diplomacy with other clans when needed. Naniandi is the closest Jagged-Tooth is to any of his family, maybe having to do w/ how much like his mother she is, even though she is a century or so younger than him. She’s basically all around respected by everyone in Cousin’s family, as well as their overall clan

It’s Naniandi’s influence and hard work that made it possible for Cousin and the remainder of the Yautja faction to return to Homeworld after they’d disgraced themselves to go fight alongside Shepard. She ultimately convinced the elders to reinstate honor and title to her father.

Yautja joke (but only a little) about wishing to birth armies. Compared to others his age, Cousin only has a moderate amount of offspring, but those that survived into his old age came out fierce, capable, and loyal to their family. It’s thanks to them he could be with Shepard.


        

            
            

                
                
                    crispy-ghee:

3 of Cousin’s other children: Little Knife, Little Flame, and Naniandi. (aka, the last of the group of Cousin’s kids that I’ll draw because he has like 50 or something and I’m not designing all of them, I’m sorry. Feel free to pretend that your OC is Cousin’s kid, it’ll probably work out.)Little Knife:  Cousin’s youngest son and the last he had with Fury before she died. A cocky little shit sometimes, but with good reason. While smaller than all his sibs, his agility and stealth made him an asset to hunting parties. 

His relationship w/ Jagged-Tooth sucks. He and Kal'thnde are very close, tho, as Cousin was already aging and too busy chaperoning youngbloods to pay him as much attention as he should’ve, Kal and his sisters more or less raised him and got between him and Jagged-Tooth often.



Lauded for his nimbleness and his lightning speed while maintaining near-silence, he has become an asset in his hunting party. His abilities also make him sought after for off-world reconnaissance, where he travels to planets to review and evaluate their suitability for hunting.Little Knife is one of the 20 or so Yautja who join Cousin to form the Yautja Faction, against the orders of the Elder Council. 12 of his brothers also form the team, including Jagged-Tooth and Kal’thnde. Little Flame: 

Celebrated Huntress, Several times Champion of inter-tribal games and so coveted and beloved beyond her own clan. Aggressive, abrasive, but loyal, like her father in his youth. Little Flame is close to Kal and Little Knife, and was one of Cousin’s children that fought against Jagged-Tooth’s bad attitude–ballsy, as he’s biotic. She and the eldest brother never really learned to get along, but there is begrudging respect for each others achievements.

Little Flame basically saved her father’s life when at one point she heard whispers that some elders were speaking of sending Enforcers or some other group of Hunters to go after Cousin and his Renegades. She sent him warnings, and killed most of the would-be trackers herself.Naniandi: 

Cousin’s eldest Daughter. Sometimes called Furious Patience, a play on her mother’s name (Patient Fury), since she’s so much like her. One of the tribe matriarchs, and often invited alongside the tribe’s elders to speak diplomacy with other clans when needed. Naniandi is the closest Jagged-Tooth is to any of his family, maybe having to do w/ how much like his mother she is, even though she is a century or so younger than him. She’s basically all around respected by everyone in Cousin’s family, as well as their overall clan

It’s Naniandi’s influence and hard work that made it possible for Cousin and the remainder of the Yautja faction to return to Homeworld after they’d disgraced themselves to go fight alongside Shepard. She ultimately convinced the elders to reinstate honor and title to her father.

Yautja joke (but only a little) about wishing to birth armies. Compared to others his age, Cousin only has a moderate amount of offspring, but those that survived into his old age came out fierce, capable, and loyal to their family. It’s thanks to them he could be with Shepard.

: crispy-ghee:

3 of Cousin’s other children: Little Knife, Little Flame, and Naniandi. (aka, the last of the group of Cousin’s kids that I’ll draw because he has like 50 or something and I’m not designing all of them, I’m sorry. Feel free to pretend that your OC is Cousin’s kid, it’ll probably work out.)Little Knife:  Cousin’s youngest son and the last he had with Fury before she died. A cocky little shit sometimes, but with good reason. While smaller than all his sibs, his agility and stealth made him an asset to hunting parties. 

His relationship w/ Jagged-Tooth sucks. He and Kal'thnde are very close, tho, as Cousin was already aging and too busy chaperoning youngbloods to pay him as much attention as he should’ve, Kal and his sisters more or less raised him and got between him and Jagged-Tooth often.



Lauded for his nimbleness and his lightning speed while maintaining near-silence, he has become an asset in his hunting party. His abilities also make him sought after for off-world reconnaissance, where he travels to planets to review and evaluate their suitability for hunting.Little Knife is one of the 20 or so Yautja who join Cousin to form the Yautja Faction, against the orders of the Elder Council. 12 of his brothers also form the team, including Jagged-Tooth and Kal’thnde. Little Flame: 

Celebrated Huntress, Several times Champion of inter-tribal games and so coveted and beloved beyond her own clan. Aggressive, abrasive, but loyal, like her father in his youth. Little Flame is close to Kal and Little Knife, and was one of Cousin’s children that fought against Jagged-Tooth’s bad attitude–ballsy, as he’s biotic. She and the eldest brother never really learned to get along, but there is begrudging respect for each others achievements.

Little Flame basically saved her father’s life when at one point she heard whispers that some elders were speaking of sending Enforcers or some other group of Hunters to go after Cousin and his Renegades. She sent him warnings, and killed most of the would-be trackers herself.Naniandi: 

Cousin’s eldest Daughter. Sometimes called Furious Patience, a play on her mother’s name (Patient Fury), since she’s so much like her. One of the tribe matriarchs, and often invited alongside the tribe’s elders to speak diplomacy with other clans when needed. Naniandi is the closest Jagged-Tooth is to any of his family, maybe having to do w/ how much like his mother she is, even though she is a century or so younger than him. She’s basically all around respected by everyone in Cousin’s family, as well as their overall clan

It’s Naniandi’s influence and hard work that made it possible for Cousin and the remainder of the Yautja faction to return to Homeworld after they’d disgraced themselves to go fight alongside Shepard. She ultimately convinced the elders to reinstate honor and title to her father.

Yautja joke (but only a little) about wishing to birth armies. Compared to others his age, Cousin only has a moderate amount of offspring, but those that survived into his old age came out fierce, capable, and loyal to their family. It’s thanks to them he could be with Shepard.


                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        feniczoroark:

solaredarisen:

cockyroaches:

firelxdykatara:

an-ace-up-your-sleeve:

chrisflemingslegs:

mythosphere:


Victor Frankenstein: I’ve created life but I refuse to put any effort into helping that life develop. I won’t teach him, love him, or defend him even though I forced him into existence with a fully operational adult brain lol. Peace, bitch.
The Monster: Am Eloquent Baby
Boomers: He’S NOt thE ViCtIM, HE’s tHe MOnsTEr



An ironic parallel considering the idea of “tough love” parenting that plenty of boomers like to use. If they buy into the idea that their kids just have to toughen up and face the real world without guidance or emotional support, I’m sure it does scare them to read a story where someone who wasn’t given any support began to resent their creator and turn on them. 

it’s like that post that’s like ‘knowledge is knowing that frankenstein is the doctor; wisdom is knowing that frankenstein is the monster’. like the whole point of the post is that frankenstein’s monster is a victim of viktor frankenstein’s own monstrosity.
mary shelley did not lose her virginity on her mother’s grave just for people to misunderstand her best known work over a century later.




Her dad is the person who started Anarchy so..


Also consider that “The Sun” is a newspaper that is famous for blaming disaster on the victims/lying. See: Hillsborough disaster: feniczoroark:

solaredarisen:

cockyroaches:

firelxdykatara:

an-ace-up-your-sleeve:

chrisflemingslegs:

mythosphere:


Victor Frankenstein: I’ve created life but I refuse to put any effort into helping that life develop. I won’t teach him, love him, or defend him even though I forced him into existence with a fully operational adult brain lol. Peace, bitch.
The Monster: Am Eloquent Baby
Boomers: He’S NOt thE ViCtIM, HE’s tHe MOnsTEr



An ironic parallel considering the idea of “tough love” parenting that plenty of boomers like to use. If they buy into the idea that their kids just have to toughen up and face the real world without guidance or emotional support, I’m sure it does scare them to read a story where someone who wasn’t given any support began to resent their creator and turn on them. 

it’s like that post that’s like ‘knowledge is knowing that frankenstein is the doctor; wisdom is knowing that frankenstein is the monster’. like the whole point of the post is that frankenstein’s monster is a victim of viktor frankenstein’s own monstrosity.
mary shelley did not lose her virginity on her mother’s grave just for people to misunderstand her best known work over a century later.




Her dad is the person who started Anarchy so..


Also consider that “The Sun” is a newspaper that is famous for blaming disaster on the victims/lying. See: Hillsborough disaster
        

            
            

                
                
                    feniczoroark:

solaredarisen:

cockyroaches:

firelxdykatara:

an-ace-up-your-sleeve:

chrisflemingslegs:

mythosphere:


Victor Frankenstein: I’ve created life but I refuse to put any effort into helping that life develop. I won’t teach him, love him, or defend him even though I forced him into existence with a fully operational adult brain lol. Peace, bitch.
The Monster: Am Eloquent Baby
Boomers: He’S NOt thE ViCtIM, HE’s tHe MOnsTEr



An ironic parallel considering the idea of “tough love” parenting that plenty of boomers like to use. If they buy into the idea that their kids just have to toughen up and face the real world without guidance or emotional support, I’m sure it does scare them to read a story where someone who wasn’t given any support began to resent their creator and turn on them. 

it’s like that post that’s like ‘knowledge is knowing that frankenstein is the doctor; wisdom is knowing that frankenstein is the monster’. like the whole point of the post is that frankenstein’s monster is a victim of viktor frankenstein’s own monstrosity.
mary shelley did not lose her virginity on her mother’s grave just for people to misunderstand her best known work over a century later.




Her dad is the person who started Anarchy so..


Also consider that “The Sun” is a newspaper that is famous for blaming disaster on the victims/lying. See: Hillsborough disaster: feniczoroark:

solaredarisen:

cockyroaches:

firelxdykatara:

an-ace-up-your-sleeve:

chrisflemingslegs:

mythosphere:


Victor Frankenstein: I’ve created life but I refuse to put any effort into helping that life develop. I won’t teach him, love him, or defend him even though I forced him into existence with a fully operational adult brain lol. Peace, bitch.
The Monster: Am Eloquent Baby
Boomers: He’S NOt thE ViCtIM, HE’s tHe MOnsTEr



An ironic parallel considering the idea of “tough love” parenting that plenty of boomers like to use. If they buy into the idea that their kids just have to toughen up and face the real world without guidance or emotional support, I’m sure it does scare them to read a story where someone who wasn’t given any support began to resent their creator and turn on them. 

it’s like that post that’s like ‘knowledge is knowing that frankenstein is the doctor; wisdom is knowing that frankenstein is the monster’. like the whole point of the post is that frankenstein’s monster is a victim of viktor frankenstein’s own monstrosity.
mary shelley did not lose her virginity on her mother’s grave just for people to misunderstand her best known work over a century later.




Her dad is the person who started Anarchy so..


Also consider that “The Sun” is a newspaper that is famous for blaming disaster on the victims/lying. See: Hillsborough disaster
                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        priscilladyke:

witchesversuspatriarchy:
Thought this could fit in well here


Ok I don’t mean to be doing this too often but I literally just wrote a paper about this so I thought I would comment! The English translation is The Cursed Woman but the original French is La Femme Damnée. “Femmes Damnées” was the title of a Baudelaire poem from his acclaimed 1857 book Fleurs du mal, which was known, among other things, to be a collection that famously dealt with the subject of lesbians. The poem tells the story of the desires and passionate love between two lesbians:  Delphine and Hippolyte. As a result of this poem and of the book as a whole, the terms “fleurs du mal” and “femme damnée” became lesbian monikers of the turn of the century. Though some have deemed the term “damned women” to be accusatory of some moral dissonance, the poem it is derived from is actually quite sympathetic to the condition of lesbian love as it is a love which is unable to fully flourish in that time. Regardless, the translated title of Tassaert’s painting is misleading, as the original French is less accusatory and more identifying. The title is more accurately “the lesbian.” 
: priscilladyke:

witchesversuspatriarchy:
Thought this could fit in well here


Ok I don’t mean to be doing this too often but I literally just wrote a paper about this so I thought I would comment! The English translation is The Cursed Woman but the original French is La Femme Damnée. “Femmes Damnées” was the title of a Baudelaire poem from his acclaimed 1857 book Fleurs du mal, which was known, among other things, to be a collection that famously dealt with the subject of lesbians. The poem tells the story of the desires and passionate love between two lesbians:  Delphine and Hippolyte. As a result of this poem and of the book as a whole, the terms “fleurs du mal” and “femme damnée” became lesbian monikers of the turn of the century. Though some have deemed the term “damned women” to be accusatory of some moral dissonance, the poem it is derived from is actually quite sympathetic to the condition of lesbian love as it is a love which is unable to fully flourish in that time. Regardless, the translated title of Tassaert’s painting is misleading, as the original French is less accusatory and more identifying. The title is more accurately “the lesbian.” 

        

            
            

                
                
                    priscilladyke:

witchesversuspatriarchy:
Thought this could fit in well here


Ok I don’t mean to be doing this too often but I literally just wrote a paper about this so I thought I would comment! The English translation is The Cursed Woman but the original French is La Femme Damnée. “Femmes Damnées” was the title of a Baudelaire poem from his acclaimed 1857 book Fleurs du mal, which was known, among other things, to be a collection that famously dealt with the subject of lesbians. The poem tells the story of the desires and passionate love between two lesbians:  Delphine and Hippolyte. As a result of this poem and of the book as a whole, the terms “fleurs du mal” and “femme damnée” became lesbian monikers of the turn of the century. Though some have deemed the term “damned women” to be accusatory of some moral dissonance, the poem it is derived from is actually quite sympathetic to the condition of lesbian love as it is a love which is unable to fully flourish in that time. Regardless, the translated title of Tassaert’s painting is misleading, as the original French is less accusatory and more identifying. The title is more accurately “the lesbian.” 
: priscilladyke:

witchesversuspatriarchy:
Thought this could fit in well here


Ok I don’t mean to be doing this too often but I literally just wrote a paper about this so I thought I would comment! The English translation is The Cursed Woman but the original French is La Femme Damnée. “Femmes Damnées” was the title of a Baudelaire poem from his acclaimed 1857 book Fleurs du mal, which was known, among other things, to be a collection that famously dealt with the subject of lesbians. The poem tells the story of the desires and passionate love between two lesbians:  Delphine and Hippolyte. As a result of this poem and of the book as a whole, the terms “fleurs du mal” and “femme damnée” became lesbian monikers of the turn of the century. Though some have deemed the term “damned women” to be accusatory of some moral dissonance, the poem it is derived from is actually quite sympathetic to the condition of lesbian love as it is a love which is unable to fully flourish in that time. Regardless, the translated title of Tassaert’s painting is misleading, as the original French is less accusatory and more identifying. The title is more accurately “the lesbian.” 

                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        prismatic-bell:
the-invisible-self:

pulmonary-poultry:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


mandalorianreynolds:

kuriquinn:

prismatic-bell:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


prismatic-bell:


broken-bits-of-dreams:

prismatic-bell:


aiko-mori-hates-pedos:

artbymoga:
Throwback to all these Jesus comics I drew in 2012…

Good post OP


Good post, OP, and if you ever decide to do another may I please suggest “NOT IN HEBREW IT DOESN’T” as a punchline? So much of the Old Testament is HORRIFICALLY translated from the Tanakh, it drives me batty.


WAIT WAIT WHAT DOES IT SAY?????? I NEED TO LIKE,, DESTROY MI MUM FOR BEING REALLY HOMOPHOBIC

Okay, so, strictly speaking, the infamous Leviticus 18:22 does say “forbidden.” Here’s the thing: 

1) The word translated as “forbidden” is “toevah.” While that translation isn’t … wrong, it’s sort of like saying “McMansion” means “really big house.” There are a lot of connotations in that word. The specific issue with toevah is that we … sort of … don’t know anymore exactly what it meant. Based on context, it seems likely that the word referred to something ritually forbidden. This part of Torah was written not only as a guide for future generations, but also to say “so, look around, see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT.“ Thus, if we interpret “toevah” to mean something that’s forbidden to do as a ritual before G-d, then the verse says nothing whatsoever about Adam and Steve and their two kids and their dog–it’s saying you shouldn’t have sex with another man in the Temple as a sacrifice.

2) Following the same “this is ritually forbidden” logic of toevah, this verse may also be interpreted as “don’t do sex magic,” which was a thing in. Like. A lot of fucking cultures at the time.

3) Hebrew is a highly gendered language, and the grammatical gender in this verse is really really weird. One of the “men” in this verse is given female grammar. Why? Who fucking knows, man, this isn’t the only grammatical oddity in Torah. (There are also places where G-d is referred to as plural, and also as female.) One suggestion is that this is a way of creating a diminutive–that is, that the verse should be read as “a man should not lie with a boy.” Now, it’s worth noting that modern secular scholarship has concluded the written Torah was written down around the 6th century BCE, and most non-Orthodox Jewish scholars are like “yeah, all things considered, that sounds pretty legit.” 

Do you know what else was happening around the 6th century BCE? What laypeople tend to mean when they say “ancient Greece” was happening. 

Do you know what happened a lot in that time period in Greece? Dudes forming relationships with younger boys, like ages 10-15, and using them for sex in exchange for financial gifts, mentorship, etc. While we don’t know just how young some of these younger boys may have been, we do know some were prepubescent. In light of this, and also something I mentioned under the first point–”see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT,” if this verse is interpreted to say “a man should not lie with a boy,” then it’s pretty clearly “my dudes, my fellows, my lads, don’t be fucking pedophiles.” 

4) Because of the grammar I mentioned in #3, it’s also possible that “should not lie with a man as with a woman” is actually referring to a place, not an abstract personhood: a man shouldn’t have sex with another man in a woman’s bed. In the time period, a woman’s bed was sort of like–that was her place, her safe sanctuary. It was also a ritually holy place where babies were made. By having sex in her bed, you’re violating her safe space (and also introducing a man who may not be a male relative, thus forcing her into breaking the laws of modesty). If this verse is read this way, then it should be taken to mean “don’t sexually violate a woman’s safety and modesty.”5) And as an offshoot of #4, this may be a second verse relating to infidelity. Which woman’s bed is any random dude in 600 BCE most likely to have access to? His wife’s. But laws were administered differently based on whether the person they pertained to was slave or free, male or female, and so on–thus, a man committing adultery with a woman would be treated differently than man committing adultery with a man (especially because the latter would carry no chance of an illegitimate pregnancy).


So you’ll note, there are a lot of ways to read this verse, and only a one-to-one translation with no cultural awareness produces “being gay is wrong, all of the time”.(You’ll also notice the word “abomination” is nowhere to be found. That’s like … a straight-up fiction created for who only knows what reason.)


Apparently tumblr mobile doesn’t want to show @prismatic-bell ’s long and in-depth essay, so here’s the screenshots, because it still shows up on mobile browsers:








Much appreciated.


I love when scholarship and history debunks bullshit



…I sadly have more bullshit to report.

“removed for violating guidelines”, EVERY screenshot.



…goddamnit







Let’s try this again



I am horrified that @prismatic-bell keeps getting censored + this info is gold. 

Many thanks, @pulmonary-poultry. This isn’t the only Jewish post of mine that’s mysteriously stopped showing up in searches and/or vanished from my blog entirely, but it is the one I get the most requests to repost, so this saves me from having to rewrite the whole damned essay. @the-invisible-self, thanks for bringing it to my attention that someone was able to preserve the post!
: prismatic-bell:
the-invisible-self:

pulmonary-poultry:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


mandalorianreynolds:

kuriquinn:

prismatic-bell:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


prismatic-bell:


broken-bits-of-dreams:

prismatic-bell:


aiko-mori-hates-pedos:

artbymoga:
Throwback to all these Jesus comics I drew in 2012…

Good post OP


Good post, OP, and if you ever decide to do another may I please suggest “NOT IN HEBREW IT DOESN’T” as a punchline? So much of the Old Testament is HORRIFICALLY translated from the Tanakh, it drives me batty.


WAIT WAIT WHAT DOES IT SAY?????? I NEED TO LIKE,, DESTROY MI MUM FOR BEING REALLY HOMOPHOBIC

Okay, so, strictly speaking, the infamous Leviticus 18:22 does say “forbidden.” Here’s the thing: 

1) The word translated as “forbidden” is “toevah.” While that translation isn’t … wrong, it’s sort of like saying “McMansion” means “really big house.” There are a lot of connotations in that word. The specific issue with toevah is that we … sort of … don’t know anymore exactly what it meant. Based on context, it seems likely that the word referred to something ritually forbidden. This part of Torah was written not only as a guide for future generations, but also to say “so, look around, see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT.“ Thus, if we interpret “toevah” to mean something that’s forbidden to do as a ritual before G-d, then the verse says nothing whatsoever about Adam and Steve and their two kids and their dog–it’s saying you shouldn’t have sex with another man in the Temple as a sacrifice.

2) Following the same “this is ritually forbidden” logic of toevah, this verse may also be interpreted as “don’t do sex magic,” which was a thing in. Like. A lot of fucking cultures at the time.

3) Hebrew is a highly gendered language, and the grammatical gender in this verse is really really weird. One of the “men” in this verse is given female grammar. Why? Who fucking knows, man, this isn’t the only grammatical oddity in Torah. (There are also places where G-d is referred to as plural, and also as female.) One suggestion is that this is a way of creating a diminutive–that is, that the verse should be read as “a man should not lie with a boy.” Now, it’s worth noting that modern secular scholarship has concluded the written Torah was written down around the 6th century BCE, and most non-Orthodox Jewish scholars are like “yeah, all things considered, that sounds pretty legit.” 

Do you know what else was happening around the 6th century BCE? What laypeople tend to mean when they say “ancient Greece” was happening. 

Do you know what happened a lot in that time period in Greece? Dudes forming relationships with younger boys, like ages 10-15, and using them for sex in exchange for financial gifts, mentorship, etc. While we don’t know just how young some of these younger boys may have been, we do know some were prepubescent. In light of this, and also something I mentioned under the first point–”see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT,” if this verse is interpreted to say “a man should not lie with a boy,” then it’s pretty clearly “my dudes, my fellows, my lads, don’t be fucking pedophiles.” 

4) Because of the grammar I mentioned in #3, it’s also possible that “should not lie with a man as with a woman” is actually referring to a place, not an abstract personhood: a man shouldn’t have sex with another man in a woman’s bed. In the time period, a woman’s bed was sort of like–that was her place, her safe sanctuary. It was also a ritually holy place where babies were made. By having sex in her bed, you’re violating her safe space (and also introducing a man who may not be a male relative, thus forcing her into breaking the laws of modesty). If this verse is read this way, then it should be taken to mean “don’t sexually violate a woman’s safety and modesty.”5) And as an offshoot of #4, this may be a second verse relating to infidelity. Which woman’s bed is any random dude in 600 BCE most likely to have access to? His wife’s. But laws were administered differently based on whether the person they pertained to was slave or free, male or female, and so on–thus, a man committing adultery with a woman would be treated differently than man committing adultery with a man (especially because the latter would carry no chance of an illegitimate pregnancy).


So you’ll note, there are a lot of ways to read this verse, and only a one-to-one translation with no cultural awareness produces “being gay is wrong, all of the time”.(You’ll also notice the word “abomination” is nowhere to be found. That’s like … a straight-up fiction created for who only knows what reason.)


Apparently tumblr mobile doesn’t want to show @prismatic-bell ’s long and in-depth essay, so here’s the screenshots, because it still shows up on mobile browsers:








Much appreciated.


I love when scholarship and history debunks bullshit



…I sadly have more bullshit to report.

“removed for violating guidelines”, EVERY screenshot.



…goddamnit







Let’s try this again



I am horrified that @prismatic-bell keeps getting censored + this info is gold. 

Many thanks, @pulmonary-poultry. This isn’t the only Jewish post of mine that’s mysteriously stopped showing up in searches and/or vanished from my blog entirely, but it is the one I get the most requests to repost, so this saves me from having to rewrite the whole damned essay. @the-invisible-self, thanks for bringing it to my attention that someone was able to preserve the post!

        

            
            

                
                
                    prismatic-bell:
the-invisible-self:

pulmonary-poultry:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


mandalorianreynolds:

kuriquinn:

prismatic-bell:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


prismatic-bell:


broken-bits-of-dreams:

prismatic-bell:


aiko-mori-hates-pedos:

artbymoga:
Throwback to all these Jesus comics I drew in 2012…

Good post OP


Good post, OP, and if you ever decide to do another may I please suggest “NOT IN HEBREW IT DOESN’T” as a punchline? So much of the Old Testament is HORRIFICALLY translated from the Tanakh, it drives me batty.


WAIT WAIT WHAT DOES IT SAY?????? I NEED TO LIKE,, DESTROY MI MUM FOR BEING REALLY HOMOPHOBIC

Okay, so, strictly speaking, the infamous Leviticus 18:22 does say “forbidden.” Here’s the thing: 

1) The word translated as “forbidden” is “toevah.” While that translation isn’t … wrong, it’s sort of like saying “McMansion” means “really big house.” There are a lot of connotations in that word. The specific issue with toevah is that we … sort of … don’t know anymore exactly what it meant. Based on context, it seems likely that the word referred to something ritually forbidden. This part of Torah was written not only as a guide for future generations, but also to say “so, look around, see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT.“ Thus, if we interpret “toevah” to mean something that’s forbidden to do as a ritual before G-d, then the verse says nothing whatsoever about Adam and Steve and their two kids and their dog–it’s saying you shouldn’t have sex with another man in the Temple as a sacrifice.

2) Following the same “this is ritually forbidden” logic of toevah, this verse may also be interpreted as “don’t do sex magic,” which was a thing in. Like. A lot of fucking cultures at the time.

3) Hebrew is a highly gendered language, and the grammatical gender in this verse is really really weird. One of the “men” in this verse is given female grammar. Why? Who fucking knows, man, this isn’t the only grammatical oddity in Torah. (There are also places where G-d is referred to as plural, and also as female.) One suggestion is that this is a way of creating a diminutive–that is, that the verse should be read as “a man should not lie with a boy.” Now, it’s worth noting that modern secular scholarship has concluded the written Torah was written down around the 6th century BCE, and most non-Orthodox Jewish scholars are like “yeah, all things considered, that sounds pretty legit.” 

Do you know what else was happening around the 6th century BCE? What laypeople tend to mean when they say “ancient Greece” was happening. 

Do you know what happened a lot in that time period in Greece? Dudes forming relationships with younger boys, like ages 10-15, and using them for sex in exchange for financial gifts, mentorship, etc. While we don’t know just how young some of these younger boys may have been, we do know some were prepubescent. In light of this, and also something I mentioned under the first point–”see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT,” if this verse is interpreted to say “a man should not lie with a boy,” then it’s pretty clearly “my dudes, my fellows, my lads, don’t be fucking pedophiles.” 

4) Because of the grammar I mentioned in #3, it’s also possible that “should not lie with a man as with a woman” is actually referring to a place, not an abstract personhood: a man shouldn’t have sex with another man in a woman’s bed. In the time period, a woman’s bed was sort of like–that was her place, her safe sanctuary. It was also a ritually holy place where babies were made. By having sex in her bed, you’re violating her safe space (and also introducing a man who may not be a male relative, thus forcing her into breaking the laws of modesty). If this verse is read this way, then it should be taken to mean “don’t sexually violate a woman’s safety and modesty.”5) And as an offshoot of #4, this may be a second verse relating to infidelity. Which woman’s bed is any random dude in 600 BCE most likely to have access to? His wife’s. But laws were administered differently based on whether the person they pertained to was slave or free, male or female, and so on–thus, a man committing adultery with a woman would be treated differently than man committing adultery with a man (especially because the latter would carry no chance of an illegitimate pregnancy).


So you’ll note, there are a lot of ways to read this verse, and only a one-to-one translation with no cultural awareness produces “being gay is wrong, all of the time”.(You’ll also notice the word “abomination” is nowhere to be found. That’s like … a straight-up fiction created for who only knows what reason.)


Apparently tumblr mobile doesn’t want to show @prismatic-bell ’s long and in-depth essay, so here’s the screenshots, because it still shows up on mobile browsers:








Much appreciated.


I love when scholarship and history debunks bullshit



…I sadly have more bullshit to report.

“removed for violating guidelines”, EVERY screenshot.



…goddamnit







Let’s try this again



I am horrified that @prismatic-bell keeps getting censored + this info is gold. 

Many thanks, @pulmonary-poultry. This isn’t the only Jewish post of mine that’s mysteriously stopped showing up in searches and/or vanished from my blog entirely, but it is the one I get the most requests to repost, so this saves me from having to rewrite the whole damned essay. @the-invisible-self, thanks for bringing it to my attention that someone was able to preserve the post!
: prismatic-bell:
the-invisible-self:

pulmonary-poultry:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


mandalorianreynolds:

kuriquinn:

prismatic-bell:

the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99:


prismatic-bell:


broken-bits-of-dreams:

prismatic-bell:


aiko-mori-hates-pedos:

artbymoga:
Throwback to all these Jesus comics I drew in 2012…

Good post OP


Good post, OP, and if you ever decide to do another may I please suggest “NOT IN HEBREW IT DOESN’T” as a punchline? So much of the Old Testament is HORRIFICALLY translated from the Tanakh, it drives me batty.


WAIT WAIT WHAT DOES IT SAY?????? I NEED TO LIKE,, DESTROY MI MUM FOR BEING REALLY HOMOPHOBIC

Okay, so, strictly speaking, the infamous Leviticus 18:22 does say “forbidden.” Here’s the thing: 

1) The word translated as “forbidden” is “toevah.” While that translation isn’t … wrong, it’s sort of like saying “McMansion” means “really big house.” There are a lot of connotations in that word. The specific issue with toevah is that we … sort of … don’t know anymore exactly what it meant. Based on context, it seems likely that the word referred to something ritually forbidden. This part of Torah was written not only as a guide for future generations, but also to say “so, look around, see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT.“ Thus, if we interpret “toevah” to mean something that’s forbidden to do as a ritual before G-d, then the verse says nothing whatsoever about Adam and Steve and their two kids and their dog–it’s saying you shouldn’t have sex with another man in the Temple as a sacrifice.

2) Following the same “this is ritually forbidden” logic of toevah, this verse may also be interpreted as “don’t do sex magic,” which was a thing in. Like. A lot of fucking cultures at the time.

3) Hebrew is a highly gendered language, and the grammatical gender in this verse is really really weird. One of the “men” in this verse is given female grammar. Why? Who fucking knows, man, this isn’t the only grammatical oddity in Torah. (There are also places where G-d is referred to as plural, and also as female.) One suggestion is that this is a way of creating a diminutive–that is, that the verse should be read as “a man should not lie with a boy.” Now, it’s worth noting that modern secular scholarship has concluded the written Torah was written down around the 6th century BCE, and most non-Orthodox Jewish scholars are like “yeah, all things considered, that sounds pretty legit.” 

Do you know what else was happening around the 6th century BCE? What laypeople tend to mean when they say “ancient Greece” was happening. 

Do you know what happened a lot in that time period in Greece? Dudes forming relationships with younger boys, like ages 10-15, and using them for sex in exchange for financial gifts, mentorship, etc. While we don’t know just how young some of these younger boys may have been, we do know some were prepubescent. In light of this, and also something I mentioned under the first point–”see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT,” if this verse is interpreted to say “a man should not lie with a boy,” then it’s pretty clearly “my dudes, my fellows, my lads, don’t be fucking pedophiles.” 

4) Because of the grammar I mentioned in #3, it’s also possible that “should not lie with a man as with a woman” is actually referring to a place, not an abstract personhood: a man shouldn’t have sex with another man in a woman’s bed. In the time period, a woman’s bed was sort of like–that was her place, her safe sanctuary. It was also a ritually holy place where babies were made. By having sex in her bed, you’re violating her safe space (and also introducing a man who may not be a male relative, thus forcing her into breaking the laws of modesty). If this verse is read this way, then it should be taken to mean “don’t sexually violate a woman’s safety and modesty.”5) And as an offshoot of #4, this may be a second verse relating to infidelity. Which woman’s bed is any random dude in 600 BCE most likely to have access to? His wife’s. But laws were administered differently based on whether the person they pertained to was slave or free, male or female, and so on–thus, a man committing adultery with a woman would be treated differently than man committing adultery with a man (especially because the latter would carry no chance of an illegitimate pregnancy).


So you’ll note, there are a lot of ways to read this verse, and only a one-to-one translation with no cultural awareness produces “being gay is wrong, all of the time”.(You’ll also notice the word “abomination” is nowhere to be found. That’s like … a straight-up fiction created for who only knows what reason.)


Apparently tumblr mobile doesn’t want to show @prismatic-bell ’s long and in-depth essay, so here’s the screenshots, because it still shows up on mobile browsers:








Much appreciated.


I love when scholarship and history debunks bullshit



…I sadly have more bullshit to report.

“removed for violating guidelines”, EVERY screenshot.



…goddamnit







Let’s try this again



I am horrified that @prismatic-bell keeps getting censored + this info is gold. 

Many thanks, @pulmonary-poultry. This isn’t the only Jewish post of mine that’s mysteriously stopped showing up in searches and/or vanished from my blog entirely, but it is the one I get the most requests to repost, so this saves me from having to rewrite the whole damned essay. @the-invisible-self, thanks for bringing it to my attention that someone was able to preserve the post!

                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        derryderrydown:
thecringeandwincefactory:

meowren:

malchay:

So, I looked in the comments, expecting to see discourse or historical background etc, but I found none. Therefore, I decided to learn more and add background. Apparently this machine was used because of polio because polio paralyzes your lungs. According to the wiki article on this bad boy, patients would spend two weeks in there sometimes. They still have these machines, though much, much more modern but they’re barely used at all anymore: “In 1959, there were 1,200 people using tank respirators in the United States, but by 2004 there were only 39. By 2014, there were only 10 people left with an iron lung.” (x)

I’ve read about one man who still lives in an iron lung. He taught himself how to breathe again by gulping down air, but it’s quite laborious because of the paralysis. His name is Paul Alexander, and he’s a lawyer. He’s 71 years old and has spent 65 years in an iron lung. Wild, right? He’s been working on a memoir that he was inspired to write by the recent resurgence of cases of polio caused by anti-vaccers.
Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4414081 (can’t hyperlink because I’m on mobile, apologies)

It’s amazing to me to recognize that we only defeated polio in this past century - that my mother’s father had it (he got lucky, it only deformed his feet and thereby kept him out of a couple wars); my mother got the big vaccination that left her upper arm scarred; and by the time I was vaccinated, polio basically didn’t exist. My grandfather must have been born like around 1900, so - in the space of less than 75 years, this was no longer something that parents dreaded the possibility of every summer.

In the 1950s, my mother would go to the corner shop. The owners had a daughter a few years older than my mum. She lived in an iron lung in the back of the shop.Vaccinate your fucking kids.
: derryderrydown:
thecringeandwincefactory:

meowren:

malchay:

So, I looked in the comments, expecting to see discourse or historical background etc, but I found none. Therefore, I decided to learn more and add background. Apparently this machine was used because of polio because polio paralyzes your lungs. According to the wiki article on this bad boy, patients would spend two weeks in there sometimes. They still have these machines, though much, much more modern but they’re barely used at all anymore: “In 1959, there were 1,200 people using tank respirators in the United States, but by 2004 there were only 39. By 2014, there were only 10 people left with an iron lung.” (x)

I’ve read about one man who still lives in an iron lung. He taught himself how to breathe again by gulping down air, but it’s quite laborious because of the paralysis. His name is Paul Alexander, and he’s a lawyer. He’s 71 years old and has spent 65 years in an iron lung. Wild, right? He’s been working on a memoir that he was inspired to write by the recent resurgence of cases of polio caused by anti-vaccers.
Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4414081 (can’t hyperlink because I’m on mobile, apologies)

It’s amazing to me to recognize that we only defeated polio in this past century - that my mother’s father had it (he got lucky, it only deformed his feet and thereby kept him out of a couple wars); my mother got the big vaccination that left her upper arm scarred; and by the time I was vaccinated, polio basically didn’t exist. My grandfather must have been born like around 1900, so - in the space of less than 75 years, this was no longer something that parents dreaded the possibility of every summer.

In the 1950s, my mother would go to the corner shop. The owners had a daughter a few years older than my mum. She lived in an iron lung in the back of the shop.Vaccinate your fucking kids.

        

            
            

                
                
                    derryderrydown:
thecringeandwincefactory:

meowren:

malchay:

So, I looked in the comments, expecting to see discourse or historical background etc, but I found none. Therefore, I decided to learn more and add background. Apparently this machine was used because of polio because polio paralyzes your lungs. According to the wiki article on this bad boy, patients would spend two weeks in there sometimes. They still have these machines, though much, much more modern but they’re barely used at all anymore: “In 1959, there were 1,200 people using tank respirators in the United States, but by 2004 there were only 39. By 2014, there were only 10 people left with an iron lung.” (x)

I’ve read about one man who still lives in an iron lung. He taught himself how to breathe again by gulping down air, but it’s quite laborious because of the paralysis. His name is Paul Alexander, and he’s a lawyer. He’s 71 years old and has spent 65 years in an iron lung. Wild, right? He’s been working on a memoir that he was inspired to write by the recent resurgence of cases of polio caused by anti-vaccers.
Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4414081 (can’t hyperlink because I’m on mobile, apologies)

It’s amazing to me to recognize that we only defeated polio in this past century - that my mother’s father had it (he got lucky, it only deformed his feet and thereby kept him out of a couple wars); my mother got the big vaccination that left her upper arm scarred; and by the time I was vaccinated, polio basically didn’t exist. My grandfather must have been born like around 1900, so - in the space of less than 75 years, this was no longer something that parents dreaded the possibility of every summer.

In the 1950s, my mother would go to the corner shop. The owners had a daughter a few years older than my mum. She lived in an iron lung in the back of the shop.Vaccinate your fucking kids.
: derryderrydown:
thecringeandwincefactory:

meowren:

malchay:

So, I looked in the comments, expecting to see discourse or historical background etc, but I found none. Therefore, I decided to learn more and add background. Apparently this machine was used because of polio because polio paralyzes your lungs. According to the wiki article on this bad boy, patients would spend two weeks in there sometimes. They still have these machines, though much, much more modern but they’re barely used at all anymore: “In 1959, there were 1,200 people using tank respirators in the United States, but by 2004 there were only 39. By 2014, there were only 10 people left with an iron lung.” (x)

I’ve read about one man who still lives in an iron lung. He taught himself how to breathe again by gulping down air, but it’s quite laborious because of the paralysis. His name is Paul Alexander, and he’s a lawyer. He’s 71 years old and has spent 65 years in an iron lung. Wild, right? He’s been working on a memoir that he was inspired to write by the recent resurgence of cases of polio caused by anti-vaccers.
Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4414081 (can’t hyperlink because I’m on mobile, apologies)

It’s amazing to me to recognize that we only defeated polio in this past century - that my mother’s father had it (he got lucky, it only deformed his feet and thereby kept him out of a couple wars); my mother got the big vaccination that left her upper arm scarred; and by the time I was vaccinated, polio basically didn’t exist. My grandfather must have been born like around 1900, so - in the space of less than 75 years, this was no longer something that parents dreaded the possibility of every summer.

In the 1950s, my mother would go to the corner shop. The owners had a daughter a few years older than my mum. She lived in an iron lung in the back of the shop.Vaccinate your fucking kids.

                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        libertarirynn:
scribblesteph:

semituring:

meganphntmgrl:

spontaneous-purple-giraffe:


fakefurby:
hottest take

Would someone please tell me which war crimes she committed? I don’t think anyone has ever mentioned them to me before and I’d really like to know. 


Oh, that’s what makes this a TRULY piping hot take. It’s that she, as commander, placed a civilian into combat, which is classified as a war crime because of press ganging and child soldiers, along with the whole general thing about exposing civilians to harm. Like, yeah, generally speaking, inflicting that on someone is a war crime.
The trouble is, the civilian she placed in combat? Herself. 
This guy (and Human Pet Guy) are calling her a war criminal because they’re doing mental somersaults to consider her both a commander and a civilian. At the same time. 
Yeah.

so we’re just stealing our discourse from fifteenth century france huh


This blog is pro-Joan of Arc and any antis will be promptly blocked


I’m just distracted by the idea of Joan of arc being a “waifu”
: libertarirynn:
scribblesteph:

semituring:

meganphntmgrl:

spontaneous-purple-giraffe:


fakefurby:
hottest take

Would someone please tell me which war crimes she committed? I don’t think anyone has ever mentioned them to me before and I’d really like to know. 


Oh, that’s what makes this a TRULY piping hot take. It’s that she, as commander, placed a civilian into combat, which is classified as a war crime because of press ganging and child soldiers, along with the whole general thing about exposing civilians to harm. Like, yeah, generally speaking, inflicting that on someone is a war crime.
The trouble is, the civilian she placed in combat? Herself. 
This guy (and Human Pet Guy) are calling her a war criminal because they’re doing mental somersaults to consider her both a commander and a civilian. At the same time. 
Yeah.

so we’re just stealing our discourse from fifteenth century france huh


This blog is pro-Joan of Arc and any antis will be promptly blocked


I’m just distracted by the idea of Joan of arc being a “waifu”

        

            
            

                
                
                    libertarirynn:
scribblesteph:

semituring:

meganphntmgrl:

spontaneous-purple-giraffe:


fakefurby:
hottest take

Would someone please tell me which war crimes she committed? I don’t think anyone has ever mentioned them to me before and I’d really like to know. 


Oh, that’s what makes this a TRULY piping hot take. It’s that she, as commander, placed a civilian into combat, which is classified as a war crime because of press ganging and child soldiers, along with the whole general thing about exposing civilians to harm. Like, yeah, generally speaking, inflicting that on someone is a war crime.
The trouble is, the civilian she placed in combat? Herself. 
This guy (and Human Pet Guy) are calling her a war criminal because they’re doing mental somersaults to consider her both a commander and a civilian. At the same time. 
Yeah.

so we’re just stealing our discourse from fifteenth century france huh


This blog is pro-Joan of Arc and any antis will be promptly blocked


I’m just distracted by the idea of Joan of arc being a “waifu”
: libertarirynn:
scribblesteph:

semituring:

meganphntmgrl:

spontaneous-purple-giraffe:


fakefurby:
hottest take

Would someone please tell me which war crimes she committed? I don’t think anyone has ever mentioned them to me before and I’d really like to know. 


Oh, that’s what makes this a TRULY piping hot take. It’s that she, as commander, placed a civilian into combat, which is classified as a war crime because of press ganging and child soldiers, along with the whole general thing about exposing civilians to harm. Like, yeah, generally speaking, inflicting that on someone is a war crime.
The trouble is, the civilian she placed in combat? Herself. 
This guy (and Human Pet Guy) are calling her a war criminal because they’re doing mental somersaults to consider her both a commander and a civilian. At the same time. 
Yeah.

so we’re just stealing our discourse from fifteenth century france huh


This blog is pro-Joan of Arc and any antis will be promptly blocked


I’m just distracted by the idea of Joan of arc being a “waifu”

                    
                
            

            
                
                
libertarirynn:
scribblesteph:

semituring:

meganphntmgrl:

spontaneous-purple-giraffe:


fakefurby:
hottest take

Would someone please t...

                
            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        blackwitchmagicwoman:
auroraluciferi:

askmace:

scholarlyapproach:

DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!
Listen in the past the poor have had to improvise cheap food the rich never wanted as a means to survive. And over the many years of innovation made the food taste good until eventually the rich where like: “Oh hay you actually like that garbage? Why on earth would you like it?” Then they try it, love it, start buying it, and then drive the price up so much it becomes a luxury good.
They do this and its devastating, the food typically never becomes affordable again. It don’t matter how cheap the foo dis to produce, it doesn’t matter if there is almost no meat on the bone or its super difficult to eat and messy. Once the poor discover how to make some bit of cheap food taste good, the rich take it away via driving the price of it up.
THEY DID THIS TO RIBS.
Ribs were garage meat. Just look at them, there is hardly any meat on the bone, you have to eat them by hand usually, and they are messy. They where an undesirable cheap source of junk meat. But the poor being the poor made them taste good. (Because they don’t have much to choose from.) The rich discovered the meals the poor made with them and decided they liked ribs too. People discovered they could sell a few ribs to rich people and make way more money then selling lots of ribs to poor people and the price was driven up.
DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!

They did the same to brisket.  You used to be able to get brisket for less than a dollar a pound, which meant you could get a twenty pound brisket fairly cheaply.  And then you smoked it, sliced it, and had meat for weeks if not a full month.  And it was tasty.  I grew up eating brisket at least once a month because my family could afford it.
It was a cheap meat because no rich person looks at the dangly part of the neck of a cow and goes ‘ooh, that looks tasty!’.
But then Food Network started showcasing things like barbecued brisket.  Rich people started showing up at places that weren’t just Rib Crib to get their barbeque.  And the price of brisket went up.  A lot.
I regularly see it for over five dollars a pound in stores now.  And while yeah, that might not seem like a lot when you’re talking only a pound or two of meat, brisket is normally sold in ten to twenty pound sizes.  It’s become completely unaffordable to the people that made it delicious.
Sushi used to be really cheap, too, until it became ‘trendy’.  Guess why you’re now paying twelve dollars for your order of California rolls?  Because rich people discovered something that poor people had been eating for ages.
Noticed the prices of fajita meat, chicken thighs, or ham hocks has gone up recently?  You guessed it.  Rich people are taking our food and now we’re scrambling to afford the things that we grew up eating.

Lobster is a perfect example of this phenomenon. For hundreds of years, lobster was regarded as a sort of insect larvae from the depth of the sea. It had zero appeal as a “luxury food” until people living in NY and Boston developed a taste for it. Before the 19th century, it was considered a “poverty food” or used as fertilizer and bait - some household servants specified in employment agreements that they would not eat lobster more than twice a week.It was also commonly served at prisons, which tells you something about prison food.
Only by cleverly marketing lobster as an indulgence for the privileged made it cost so much. It became a vehicle for enormous profit spawning a multi-billion dollar global industry in the process. This mythical affection for lobster flesh - not its practical value in terms of taste, nutrition, or any other reasonable consideration - drives its value. 



LMAO. Wait. 
: blackwitchmagicwoman:
auroraluciferi:

askmace:

scholarlyapproach:

DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!
Listen in the past the poor have had to improvise cheap food the rich never wanted as a means to survive. And over the many years of innovation made the food taste good until eventually the rich where like: “Oh hay you actually like that garbage? Why on earth would you like it?” Then they try it, love it, start buying it, and then drive the price up so much it becomes a luxury good.
They do this and its devastating, the food typically never becomes affordable again. It don’t matter how cheap the foo dis to produce, it doesn’t matter if there is almost no meat on the bone or its super difficult to eat and messy. Once the poor discover how to make some bit of cheap food taste good, the rich take it away via driving the price of it up.
THEY DID THIS TO RIBS.
Ribs were garage meat. Just look at them, there is hardly any meat on the bone, you have to eat them by hand usually, and they are messy. They where an undesirable cheap source of junk meat. But the poor being the poor made them taste good. (Because they don’t have much to choose from.) The rich discovered the meals the poor made with them and decided they liked ribs too. People discovered they could sell a few ribs to rich people and make way more money then selling lots of ribs to poor people and the price was driven up.
DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!

They did the same to brisket.  You used to be able to get brisket for less than a dollar a pound, which meant you could get a twenty pound brisket fairly cheaply.  And then you smoked it, sliced it, and had meat for weeks if not a full month.  And it was tasty.  I grew up eating brisket at least once a month because my family could afford it.
It was a cheap meat because no rich person looks at the dangly part of the neck of a cow and goes ‘ooh, that looks tasty!’.
But then Food Network started showcasing things like barbecued brisket.  Rich people started showing up at places that weren’t just Rib Crib to get their barbeque.  And the price of brisket went up.  A lot.
I regularly see it for over five dollars a pound in stores now.  And while yeah, that might not seem like a lot when you’re talking only a pound or two of meat, brisket is normally sold in ten to twenty pound sizes.  It’s become completely unaffordable to the people that made it delicious.
Sushi used to be really cheap, too, until it became ‘trendy’.  Guess why you’re now paying twelve dollars for your order of California rolls?  Because rich people discovered something that poor people had been eating for ages.
Noticed the prices of fajita meat, chicken thighs, or ham hocks has gone up recently?  You guessed it.  Rich people are taking our food and now we’re scrambling to afford the things that we grew up eating.

Lobster is a perfect example of this phenomenon. For hundreds of years, lobster was regarded as a sort of insect larvae from the depth of the sea. It had zero appeal as a “luxury food” until people living in NY and Boston developed a taste for it. Before the 19th century, it was considered a “poverty food” or used as fertilizer and bait - some household servants specified in employment agreements that they would not eat lobster more than twice a week.It was also commonly served at prisons, which tells you something about prison food.
Only by cleverly marketing lobster as an indulgence for the privileged made it cost so much. It became a vehicle for enormous profit spawning a multi-billion dollar global industry in the process. This mythical affection for lobster flesh - not its practical value in terms of taste, nutrition, or any other reasonable consideration - drives its value. 



LMAO. Wait. 

        

            
            

                
                
                    blackwitchmagicwoman:
auroraluciferi:

askmace:

scholarlyapproach:

DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!
Listen in the past the poor have had to improvise cheap food the rich never wanted as a means to survive. And over the many years of innovation made the food taste good until eventually the rich where like: “Oh hay you actually like that garbage? Why on earth would you like it?” Then they try it, love it, start buying it, and then drive the price up so much it becomes a luxury good.
They do this and its devastating, the food typically never becomes affordable again. It don’t matter how cheap the foo dis to produce, it doesn’t matter if there is almost no meat on the bone or its super difficult to eat and messy. Once the poor discover how to make some bit of cheap food taste good, the rich take it away via driving the price of it up.
THEY DID THIS TO RIBS.
Ribs were garage meat. Just look at them, there is hardly any meat on the bone, you have to eat them by hand usually, and they are messy. They where an undesirable cheap source of junk meat. But the poor being the poor made them taste good. (Because they don’t have much to choose from.) The rich discovered the meals the poor made with them and decided they liked ribs too. People discovered they could sell a few ribs to rich people and make way more money then selling lots of ribs to poor people and the price was driven up.
DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!

They did the same to brisket.  You used to be able to get brisket for less than a dollar a pound, which meant you could get a twenty pound brisket fairly cheaply.  And then you smoked it, sliced it, and had meat for weeks if not a full month.  And it was tasty.  I grew up eating brisket at least once a month because my family could afford it.
It was a cheap meat because no rich person looks at the dangly part of the neck of a cow and goes ‘ooh, that looks tasty!’.
But then Food Network started showcasing things like barbecued brisket.  Rich people started showing up at places that weren’t just Rib Crib to get their barbeque.  And the price of brisket went up.  A lot.
I regularly see it for over five dollars a pound in stores now.  And while yeah, that might not seem like a lot when you’re talking only a pound or two of meat, brisket is normally sold in ten to twenty pound sizes.  It’s become completely unaffordable to the people that made it delicious.
Sushi used to be really cheap, too, until it became ‘trendy’.  Guess why you’re now paying twelve dollars for your order of California rolls?  Because rich people discovered something that poor people had been eating for ages.
Noticed the prices of fajita meat, chicken thighs, or ham hocks has gone up recently?  You guessed it.  Rich people are taking our food and now we’re scrambling to afford the things that we grew up eating.

Lobster is a perfect example of this phenomenon. For hundreds of years, lobster was regarded as a sort of insect larvae from the depth of the sea. It had zero appeal as a “luxury food” until people living in NY and Boston developed a taste for it. Before the 19th century, it was considered a “poverty food” or used as fertilizer and bait - some household servants specified in employment agreements that they would not eat lobster more than twice a week.It was also commonly served at prisons, which tells you something about prison food.
Only by cleverly marketing lobster as an indulgence for the privileged made it cost so much. It became a vehicle for enormous profit spawning a multi-billion dollar global industry in the process. This mythical affection for lobster flesh - not its practical value in terms of taste, nutrition, or any other reasonable consideration - drives its value. 



LMAO. Wait. 
: blackwitchmagicwoman:
auroraluciferi:

askmace:

scholarlyapproach:

DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!
Listen in the past the poor have had to improvise cheap food the rich never wanted as a means to survive. And over the many years of innovation made the food taste good until eventually the rich where like: “Oh hay you actually like that garbage? Why on earth would you like it?” Then they try it, love it, start buying it, and then drive the price up so much it becomes a luxury good.
They do this and its devastating, the food typically never becomes affordable again. It don’t matter how cheap the foo dis to produce, it doesn’t matter if there is almost no meat on the bone or its super difficult to eat and messy. Once the poor discover how to make some bit of cheap food taste good, the rich take it away via driving the price of it up.
THEY DID THIS TO RIBS.
Ribs were garage meat. Just look at them, there is hardly any meat on the bone, you have to eat them by hand usually, and they are messy. They where an undesirable cheap source of junk meat. But the poor being the poor made them taste good. (Because they don’t have much to choose from.) The rich discovered the meals the poor made with them and decided they liked ribs too. People discovered they could sell a few ribs to rich people and make way more money then selling lots of ribs to poor people and the price was driven up.
DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!

They did the same to brisket.  You used to be able to get brisket for less than a dollar a pound, which meant you could get a twenty pound brisket fairly cheaply.  And then you smoked it, sliced it, and had meat for weeks if not a full month.  And it was tasty.  I grew up eating brisket at least once a month because my family could afford it.
It was a cheap meat because no rich person looks at the dangly part of the neck of a cow and goes ‘ooh, that looks tasty!’.
But then Food Network started showcasing things like barbecued brisket.  Rich people started showing up at places that weren’t just Rib Crib to get their barbeque.  And the price of brisket went up.  A lot.
I regularly see it for over five dollars a pound in stores now.  And while yeah, that might not seem like a lot when you’re talking only a pound or two of meat, brisket is normally sold in ten to twenty pound sizes.  It’s become completely unaffordable to the people that made it delicious.
Sushi used to be really cheap, too, until it became ‘trendy’.  Guess why you’re now paying twelve dollars for your order of California rolls?  Because rich people discovered something that poor people had been eating for ages.
Noticed the prices of fajita meat, chicken thighs, or ham hocks has gone up recently?  You guessed it.  Rich people are taking our food and now we’re scrambling to afford the things that we grew up eating.

Lobster is a perfect example of this phenomenon. For hundreds of years, lobster was regarded as a sort of insect larvae from the depth of the sea. It had zero appeal as a “luxury food” until people living in NY and Boston developed a taste for it. Before the 19th century, it was considered a “poverty food” or used as fertilizer and bait - some household servants specified in employment agreements that they would not eat lobster more than twice a week.It was also commonly served at prisons, which tells you something about prison food.
Only by cleverly marketing lobster as an indulgence for the privileged made it cost so much. It became a vehicle for enormous profit spawning a multi-billion dollar global industry in the process. This mythical affection for lobster flesh - not its practical value in terms of taste, nutrition, or any other reasonable consideration - drives its value. 



LMAO. Wait. 

                    
                
            

            
                
                
blackwitchmagicwoman:
auroraluciferi:

askmace:

scholarlyapproach:

DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!!
Listen in the past the poor have...

                
            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        feniczoroark:

injuries-in-dust:

sewickedthread:

coredesignixandnekonee:
the-real-numbers:

ilfaitdusoleil:

bigwordsandsharpedges:


Ball lightning is a rare electrical phenomenon. Scientists aren’t certain what creates it, and once disputed that ball lighning existed at all. Some argued that it was simply the electromagnetic field of an electrical storm causing visual hallucinations by exciting neurons in the brain, an effect called transcranial magnetic stimulation. 
However, recent high-definition video proved that at least some instances must be a real physical effect. Spectrograpic analysis of this images suggests that ball lightning is made of vaporized silicon contained within a self-contained electromagnetic bubble, effectively making a naturally occurring electric arc lamp. 
Laboratory experiments successfully replicated the glowing ball of plasma, which hovered for several seconds. 
Unfortunately, other lab experiments create similar visual effects using wildly different methods, including electrically-excited nanoparticles, water shocked by capacitors to simulate lightning, and a bubble of ionized gas fuelled for many seconds by a vast atmospheric energy field. 
The varying size of that energy-pumping field would conveniently explain the unpredictable size, duration, and electrical power levels observed in ball lightning.
So we’re still not sure what that thing in the video really is, but it may be possible to create something like that in a dozen different ways. 



I would lose my mind like a 15th century peasant if I saw this walking down the street 



Me crossing the street



Willow wisps?

Joe Baldwin, is that you?


Some historical instances of seeing g angels are now believed to have been ancient people encountering ball lighting.


Don’t move, don’t shoot it, stay against the wall


Artjom don’t move. : TikTok
 danojok86

 JTikTok
 @snejok86
feniczoroark:

injuries-in-dust:

sewickedthread:

coredesignixandnekonee:
the-real-numbers:

ilfaitdusoleil:

bigwordsandsharpedges:


Ball lightning is a rare electrical phenomenon. Scientists aren’t certain what creates it, and once disputed that ball lighning existed at all. Some argued that it was simply the electromagnetic field of an electrical storm causing visual hallucinations by exciting neurons in the brain, an effect called transcranial magnetic stimulation. 
However, recent high-definition video proved that at least some instances must be a real physical effect. Spectrograpic analysis of this images suggests that ball lightning is made of vaporized silicon contained within a self-contained electromagnetic bubble, effectively making a naturally occurring electric arc lamp. 
Laboratory experiments successfully replicated the glowing ball of plasma, which hovered for several seconds. 
Unfortunately, other lab experiments create similar visual effects using wildly different methods, including electrically-excited nanoparticles, water shocked by capacitors to simulate lightning, and a bubble of ionized gas fuelled for many seconds by a vast atmospheric energy field. 
The varying size of that energy-pumping field would conveniently explain the unpredictable size, duration, and electrical power levels observed in ball lightning.
So we’re still not sure what that thing in the video really is, but it may be possible to create something like that in a dozen different ways. 



I would lose my mind like a 15th century peasant if I saw this walking down the street 



Me crossing the street



Willow wisps?

Joe Baldwin, is that you?


Some historical instances of seeing g angels are now believed to have been ancient people encountering ball lighting.


Don’t move, don’t shoot it, stay against the wall


Artjom don’t move. 
        

            
            

                
                
                    feniczoroark:

injuries-in-dust:

sewickedthread:

coredesignixandnekonee:
the-real-numbers:

ilfaitdusoleil:

bigwordsandsharpedges:


Ball lightning is a rare electrical phenomenon. Scientists aren’t certain what creates it, and once disputed that ball lighning existed at all. Some argued that it was simply the electromagnetic field of an electrical storm causing visual hallucinations by exciting neurons in the brain, an effect called transcranial magnetic stimulation. 
However, recent high-definition video proved that at least some instances must be a real physical effect. Spectrograpic analysis of this images suggests that ball lightning is made of vaporized silicon contained within a self-contained electromagnetic bubble, effectively making a naturally occurring electric arc lamp. 
Laboratory experiments successfully replicated the glowing ball of plasma, which hovered for several seconds. 
Unfortunately, other lab experiments create similar visual effects using wildly different methods, including electrically-excited nanoparticles, water shocked by capacitors to simulate lightning, and a bubble of ionized gas fuelled for many seconds by a vast atmospheric energy field. 
The varying size of that energy-pumping field would conveniently explain the unpredictable size, duration, and electrical power levels observed in ball lightning.
So we’re still not sure what that thing in the video really is, but it may be possible to create something like that in a dozen different ways. 



I would lose my mind like a 15th century peasant if I saw this walking down the street 



Me crossing the street



Willow wisps?

Joe Baldwin, is that you?


Some historical instances of seeing g angels are now believed to have been ancient people encountering ball lighting.


Don’t move, don’t shoot it, stay against the wall


Artjom don’t move. : TikTok
 danojok86

 JTikTok
 @snejok86
feniczoroark:

injuries-in-dust:

sewickedthread:

coredesignixandnekonee:
the-real-numbers:

ilfaitdusoleil:

bigwordsandsharpedges:


Ball lightning is a rare electrical phenomenon. Scientists aren’t certain what creates it, and once disputed that ball lighning existed at all. Some argued that it was simply the electromagnetic field of an electrical storm causing visual hallucinations by exciting neurons in the brain, an effect called transcranial magnetic stimulation. 
However, recent high-definition video proved that at least some instances must be a real physical effect. Spectrograpic analysis of this images suggests that ball lightning is made of vaporized silicon contained within a self-contained electromagnetic bubble, effectively making a naturally occurring electric arc lamp. 
Laboratory experiments successfully replicated the glowing ball of plasma, which hovered for several seconds. 
Unfortunately, other lab experiments create similar visual effects using wildly different methods, including electrically-excited nanoparticles, water shocked by capacitors to simulate lightning, and a bubble of ionized gas fuelled for many seconds by a vast atmospheric energy field. 
The varying size of that energy-pumping field would conveniently explain the unpredictable size, duration, and electrical power levels observed in ball lightning.
So we’re still not sure what that thing in the video really is, but it may be possible to create something like that in a dozen different ways. 



I would lose my mind like a 15th century peasant if I saw this walking down the street 



Me crossing the street



Willow wisps?

Joe Baldwin, is that you?


Some historical instances of seeing g angels are now believed to have been ancient people encountering ball lighting.


Don’t move, don’t shoot it, stay against the wall


Artjom don’t move. 
                    
                    

                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        how programming languages got their names: y @TheStrangeRoots
 How programming languages got their names
 Bash
 Clojure
 The creator wanted to include the letter 'c' (C#), 'I
 (Lisp) and 'j' (Java) and liked that it was a pun on
 'closure! The word 'closure, the act of closing, comes
 from the Latin 'clausūra' stemming from' clauděre'
 which means 'to shut or close!
 Bash is an acronym for Bourne-again Shell, a pun
 on the Bourne Shell - named after creator Stephen
 Bourne - being "born again". 'Bash' is also a verb
 meaning 'to strike with a heavy blow', possibly from
 the Danish 'baske' meaning 'to beat, strike!
 Quite simply C got its name because it was
 preceded by a programming language called B.C
 spawned its own children including C++ and C#.It
 is the third letter in the English alphabet and was
 originally identical to the Greek letter 'Gamma',
 Java
 Go
 Elixir
 The name Java was the result of a highly-
 caffeinated brainstorming session. Java, or 'Jawa'
 in Indonesian, is the name of a large island in
 Indonesia that produces strong, dark and sweet
 coffee. It has been a slang term for coffee in the
 United States since the 1800s.
 One of the Google developers said the name Go,
 sometime referred to as Golang, was chosen
 because it was 'short and easy to type'
 The word 'go, meaning 'to travel or go somewhere'
 stems from the Old High German 'gan' (to go).
 The word 'elixir', meaning a potion or essence that
 prolongs life or preserves something, stems from
 the Arabic 'al-ikst' via the late Greek 'xerion', a
 powder for drying wounds. Appeared in Middle
 English from the 14th century.
 Java
 JavaScript
 Kotlin
 Perl
 Originally named Mocha, a type of fine quality
 coffee, it was later renamed JavaScript, combining
 Java, US slang for coffee, + 'Script, 'something that
 is written' from the Latin 'scriptum, 'a set of
 written words or writing.
 Inspired by Java, it was named after Kotlin Island
 in Russia. Originally called Kettusaari by the Finns
 ('fox island') and Ketlingen by the Swedes, (maybe
 stemming from 'kettel' meaning 'cauldron'). After
 Russia won control of the island in 1703 it was
 Initially named Pearl, the alternative spelling was
 adopted as the name was already taken. It comes
 from the Middle French 'perle 'meaning 'bead' or
 'something valuable' and the Latin 'perna' meaning
 'leg, also a mollusc shaped like a leg of mutton.
 JS
 renamed 'Kotling' then 'Kotlin.
 PHP
 Python
 Ris named partly after the first names of the first
 two R authors (Ross Ihaka and Robert Gentleman)
 and partly as a play on the name of S, itss parent
 langauge. It is the 18th letter in the alphabet and
 derives from the Greek letter 'Rho'
 php
 Originally known as Personal Home Page
 Construction Kit, this was later shortened to just
 PHP (an acronym for Personal Home Page). It is
 now accepted as the initials for PHP: Hypertext
 Preprocessor.
 Creator Guido van Rossum named Python after TV
 comedy Monty Python's Flying Circus. The word
 'python' comes from the ancient Greek 'Puthón,
 the name of a huge serpent killed by the god
 Apollo. Later adopted as a generic term for non-
 poisonous snakes that constrict their prey.
 Ruby
 Scala
 Rust
 Influenced by Perl, the developer chose a
 colleague's birthstone which followed it in the
 monthly sequence (June is Pearl, Ruby is July).
 Ruby comes from the Old French 'rubi', a 'reddish
 precious stone', and the Latin 'rubeus, 'red'.
 Rust's name comes from a fungus that is robust,
 distributed, and parallel. It is also a substring of
 robust. Rust, also the reddish coating formed on
 oxidized metal, stems from the German 'rost' and
 possibly the Indo-European base of 'red.
 Scala is a combination of the first letters of
 'scalable' and 'language! It is also the Italian word
 for 'stairway', as it helps users to ascend to a
 better language. The logo is also an abstraction of
 a staircase or steps.
 SQL
 Swift
 TypeScript
 SQL
 Originating from the shortcomings of JavaScript,
 hence the similarility of the name. Its name
 combines 'Type', meaning a kind or class (from the
 Greek 'tuptein' 'to strike'), with 'Script, 'something
 that is written' from the Latin 'scriptum'.
 First called "Structured English Query Language"
 (SEQUEL), pronounced "sequel", it was a pun that it
 was the sequel to QUEL. It was later shortened to
 SQL. The word 'sequel' stems from the Latin
 'sequela' from 'sequr' meaning 'to follow.
 The word 'swift' means 'moving with great speed or
 velocity' and can be traced back to the prehistoric
 'swipt' meaning to 'move in a sweeping manner'. The
 swallow-like bird became known as a swift from the
 17th century and is used as the language's logo.
 TS
how programming languages got their names
        

            
            

                
                
                    how programming languages got their names: y @TheStrangeRoots
 How programming languages got their names
 Bash
 Clojure
 The creator wanted to include the letter 'c' (C#), 'I
 (Lisp) and 'j' (Java) and liked that it was a pun on
 'closure! The word 'closure, the act of closing, comes
 from the Latin 'clausūra' stemming from' clauděre'
 which means 'to shut or close!
 Bash is an acronym for Bourne-again Shell, a pun
 on the Bourne Shell - named after creator Stephen
 Bourne - being "born again". 'Bash' is also a verb
 meaning 'to strike with a heavy blow', possibly from
 the Danish 'baske' meaning 'to beat, strike!
 Quite simply C got its name because it was
 preceded by a programming language called B.C
 spawned its own children including C++ and C#.It
 is the third letter in the English alphabet and was
 originally identical to the Greek letter 'Gamma',
 Java
 Go
 Elixir
 The name Java was the result of a highly-
 caffeinated brainstorming session. Java, or 'Jawa'
 in Indonesian, is the name of a large island in
 Indonesia that produces strong, dark and sweet
 coffee. It has been a slang term for coffee in the
 United States since the 1800s.
 One of the Google developers said the name Go,
 sometime referred to as Golang, was chosen
 because it was 'short and easy to type'
 The word 'go, meaning 'to travel or go somewhere'
 stems from the Old High German 'gan' (to go).
 The word 'elixir', meaning a potion or essence that
 prolongs life or preserves something, stems from
 the Arabic 'al-ikst' via the late Greek 'xerion', a
 powder for drying wounds. Appeared in Middle
 English from the 14th century.
 Java
 JavaScript
 Kotlin
 Perl
 Originally named Mocha, a type of fine quality
 coffee, it was later renamed JavaScript, combining
 Java, US slang for coffee, + 'Script, 'something that
 is written' from the Latin 'scriptum, 'a set of
 written words or writing.
 Inspired by Java, it was named after Kotlin Island
 in Russia. Originally called Kettusaari by the Finns
 ('fox island') and Ketlingen by the Swedes, (maybe
 stemming from 'kettel' meaning 'cauldron'). After
 Russia won control of the island in 1703 it was
 Initially named Pearl, the alternative spelling was
 adopted as the name was already taken. It comes
 from the Middle French 'perle 'meaning 'bead' or
 'something valuable' and the Latin 'perna' meaning
 'leg, also a mollusc shaped like a leg of mutton.
 JS
 renamed 'Kotling' then 'Kotlin.
 PHP
 Python
 Ris named partly after the first names of the first
 two R authors (Ross Ihaka and Robert Gentleman)
 and partly as a play on the name of S, itss parent
 langauge. It is the 18th letter in the alphabet and
 derives from the Greek letter 'Rho'
 php
 Originally known as Personal Home Page
 Construction Kit, this was later shortened to just
 PHP (an acronym for Personal Home Page). It is
 now accepted as the initials for PHP: Hypertext
 Preprocessor.
 Creator Guido van Rossum named Python after TV
 comedy Monty Python's Flying Circus. The word
 'python' comes from the ancient Greek 'Puthón,
 the name of a huge serpent killed by the god
 Apollo. Later adopted as a generic term for non-
 poisonous snakes that constrict their prey.
 Ruby
 Scala
 Rust
 Influenced by Perl, the developer chose a
 colleague's birthstone which followed it in the
 monthly sequence (June is Pearl, Ruby is July).
 Ruby comes from the Old French 'rubi', a 'reddish
 precious stone', and the Latin 'rubeus, 'red'.
 Rust's name comes from a fungus that is robust,
 distributed, and parallel. It is also a substring of
 robust. Rust, also the reddish coating formed on
 oxidized metal, stems from the German 'rost' and
 possibly the Indo-European base of 'red.
 Scala is a combination of the first letters of
 'scalable' and 'language! It is also the Italian word
 for 'stairway', as it helps users to ascend to a
 better language. The logo is also an abstraction of
 a staircase or steps.
 SQL
 Swift
 TypeScript
 SQL
 Originating from the shortcomings of JavaScript,
 hence the similarility of the name. Its name
 combines 'Type', meaning a kind or class (from the
 Greek 'tuptein' 'to strike'), with 'Script, 'something
 that is written' from the Latin 'scriptum'.
 First called "Structured English Query Language"
 (SEQUEL), pronounced "sequel", it was a pun that it
 was the sequel to QUEL. It was later shortened to
 SQL. The word 'sequel' stems from the Latin
 'sequela' from 'sequr' meaning 'to follow.
 The word 'swift' means 'moving with great speed or
 velocity' and can be traced back to the prehistoric
 'swipt' meaning to 'move in a sweeping manner'. The
 swallow-like bird became known as a swift from the
 17th century and is used as the language's logo.
 TS
how programming languages got their names
                    
                
            

            
                
                
how programming languages got their names

                
            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            








        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        skitpost:

final project for my jewish studies class ! the assignment was to answer the question, “WHAT IS JEWISH ART?” after spending the semester studying jewish artists from the 20th century, so here are my thoughts on the intersection of art and identity.
goyim can interact w this post but don’t clown in the comments thx
: WHAT IS
 JEWISH ART?
 El
 DOES THAT MAKE ALL OF
 My ART "JE WISH ART"?
 I AM AN
 ARTIST.
 I AM A
 JEW.
 | HOPE NOT.
 I K NOW THAT THESÉ ARE
 NOT "JE WISH ART"; EVEN
 THOUGH I, A JEWISH
 ARTIST, MADE THEM.
 Bur i STILL DbONT
 kNow WHAT MAKES
 "JE WISH ART "
 JEWISH.
 64:ME
 B4i ME
 00
 BY:ME

 BUT WHAT IF
 ITs
 NOT!
 RECOGNIZABLE
 I CAN MAKE My ART
 JEWISH ON PURPOSE,
 To My VIEWERS?
 B4: ME
 WHAT IF ONLY
 I SEE IT AS
 JEWISH ART,
 AND NO BOby
 ELSE DOES?
 IS IT
 STILL
 JEWISH
 ART?
 AND WHEN I MAKE my ART
 JEWISH ON PURPOSE,
 WHAT IS IT THATI DO
 TO MAKE IT
 JEWISH?
 WHAT'S JEWISH
 ABOUT JEWISH ART!

 A GROUPS CULTURE IS VERY
 DEPENDANT ON ITS LOCATION
 OF ORIGIN, So WHAT
 UNIFIES A GROUP WHOSE
 ORIGINS
 HAVE
 BEEN
 LERASED
 WHEN YOU SPEND YOUR WHOTE HISTDRY RUNNING,
 WHERE DO YOU COME FROM?
 SURVIVAL REQUIRES
 ADAPTATION, AND
 you NEVER KNOW
 *WHEN BEING
 IPENTIFIABLY JEWISH
 IS DANGEROUS, so
 JEWISH ART IS
 CLOAKED IN THE
 I THINK
 THE COMMON
 THREAD IN
 JEWISH ART
 IS THAT THERE
 ISNT ONE.
 WORLD IN WHICH
 IT WAS CREATED

 THE ONLY TRADITION TO
 JEWISH ART IS THAT
 THERE IS NONE.
 IF AN ART PIECE ISNT IMMEDIATELY EXPUCITLY JEWISH,
 ITS JEWISHNESS IS UNIQUE TO
 EVERY VIEWER.
 АД
 AND SO JEWISH ART IS DEFINED BY
 ITS INA BILITY TO BE DEFINED, A
 PAR ADOX THAT RAISES MORE
 QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS.
 BUT THAT SOUNDS
 PRETTY JEWISH
 TO ME.
 SO IF AN ART PIELE
 MAKES You ASK,
 0"IS THIS JEWISHART?
 1IT SURE AS HELL
 MIGHT BE.
 THE MOST JEWISH
 ANSWER TO A QUESTION
 IS ANOTHER QUESTION.
 BUT IF IT
 MAKES YOu ASK
 "WHAT MAKES
 JE WISH ART
 JEWISH?"
 WHAT
 ENISH ART?
 WHAT'S JEWISH
 ABDUT JEWISH ARTS
 T.ALMOŞT
 CERTAINLY IS
 JEWISH?
 NOT.
skitpost:

final project for my jewish studies class ! the assignment was to answer the question, “WHAT IS JEWISH ART?” after spending the semester studying jewish artists from the 20th century, so here are my thoughts on the intersection of art and identity.
goyim can interact w this post but don’t clown in the comments thx

        

            
            

                
                
                    skitpost:

final project for my jewish studies class ! the assignment was to answer the question, “WHAT IS JEWISH ART?” after spending the semester studying jewish artists from the 20th century, so here are my thoughts on the intersection of art and identity.
goyim can interact w this post but don’t clown in the comments thx
: WHAT IS
 JEWISH ART?
 El
 DOES THAT MAKE ALL OF
 My ART "JE WISH ART"?
 I AM AN
 ARTIST.
 I AM A
 JEW.
 | HOPE NOT.
 I K NOW THAT THESÉ ARE
 NOT "JE WISH ART"; EVEN
 THOUGH I, A JEWISH
 ARTIST, MADE THEM.
 Bur i STILL DbONT
 kNow WHAT MAKES
 "JE WISH ART "
 JEWISH.
 64:ME
 B4i ME
 00
 BY:ME

 BUT WHAT IF
 ITs
 NOT!
 RECOGNIZABLE
 I CAN MAKE My ART
 JEWISH ON PURPOSE,
 To My VIEWERS?
 B4: ME
 WHAT IF ONLY
 I SEE IT AS
 JEWISH ART,
 AND NO BOby
 ELSE DOES?
 IS IT
 STILL
 JEWISH
 ART?
 AND WHEN I MAKE my ART
 JEWISH ON PURPOSE,
 WHAT IS IT THATI DO
 TO MAKE IT
 JEWISH?
 WHAT'S JEWISH
 ABOUT JEWISH ART!

 A GROUPS CULTURE IS VERY
 DEPENDANT ON ITS LOCATION
 OF ORIGIN, So WHAT
 UNIFIES A GROUP WHOSE
 ORIGINS
 HAVE
 BEEN
 LERASED
 WHEN YOU SPEND YOUR WHOTE HISTDRY RUNNING,
 WHERE DO YOU COME FROM?
 SURVIVAL REQUIRES
 ADAPTATION, AND
 you NEVER KNOW
 *WHEN BEING
 IPENTIFIABLY JEWISH
 IS DANGEROUS, so
 JEWISH ART IS
 CLOAKED IN THE
 I THINK
 THE COMMON
 THREAD IN
 JEWISH ART
 IS THAT THERE
 ISNT ONE.
 WORLD IN WHICH
 IT WAS CREATED

 THE ONLY TRADITION TO
 JEWISH ART IS THAT
 THERE IS NONE.
 IF AN ART PIECE ISNT IMMEDIATELY EXPUCITLY JEWISH,
 ITS JEWISHNESS IS UNIQUE TO
 EVERY VIEWER.
 АД
 AND SO JEWISH ART IS DEFINED BY
 ITS INA BILITY TO BE DEFINED, A
 PAR ADOX THAT RAISES MORE
 QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS.
 BUT THAT SOUNDS
 PRETTY JEWISH
 TO ME.
 SO IF AN ART PIELE
 MAKES You ASK,
 0"IS THIS JEWISHART?
 1IT SURE AS HELL
 MIGHT BE.
 THE MOST JEWISH
 ANSWER TO A QUESTION
 IS ANOTHER QUESTION.
 BUT IF IT
 MAKES YOu ASK
 "WHAT MAKES
 JE WISH ART
 JEWISH?"
 WHAT
 ENISH ART?
 WHAT'S JEWISH
 ABDUT JEWISH ARTS
 T.ALMOŞT
 CERTAINLY IS
 JEWISH?
 NOT.
skitpost:

final project for my jewish studies class ! the assignment was to answer the question, “WHAT IS JEWISH ART?” after spending the semester studying jewish artists from the 20th century, so here are my thoughts on the intersection of art and identity.
goyim can interact w this post but don’t clown in the comments thx

                    
                
            

            
                
                
skitpost:

final project for my jewish studies class ! the assignment was to answer the question, “WHAT IS JEWISH ART?” after spending th...

                
            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        ao3tagoftheday:

ao3tagoftheday:

[Image Description: Tag reading “a blend between a religious vision and a sex dream I guess”]

The AO3 Tag of the Day is: This is a callout post for every single medieval mystic, but especially for Catherine of Siena, who had a vision of Jesus giving her his foreskin as a wedding ring


[Image Description: Ask reading “Jesus’ WHAT now as WHAT”]Here, my friend, is an excerpt from a letter written by Catherine of Siena, a real, actual saint whose visions are considered by the real, actual Catholic Church to be really, actually divinely inspired:You see very well that you are a bride and that [Jesus] has espoused you … and not with a ring of silver but with a ring of his own flesh. Look at the tender little child who on the eighth day, when he was circumcised, gave up just so much flesh as to make a tiny circlet of a ring!For the record, this woman contributed to the development of a major schism in the 14th century, one which radically changed the geopolitics of Europe and created the conditions that led to the Reformation. Never doubt your ability to change the world, friends. Literally anyone can.: a blend between a religious vision
 and a sex dream
 guess,
 ...... ............."
ao3tagoftheday:

ao3tagoftheday:

[Image Description: Tag reading “a blend between a religious vision and a sex dream I guess”]

The AO3 Tag of the Day is: This is a callout post for every single medieval mystic, but especially for Catherine of Siena, who had a vision of Jesus giving her his foreskin as a wedding ring


[Image Description: Ask reading “Jesus’ WHAT now as WHAT”]Here, my friend, is an excerpt from a letter written by Catherine of Siena, a real, actual saint whose visions are considered by the real, actual Catholic Church to be really, actually divinely inspired:You see very well that you are a bride and that [Jesus] has espoused you … and not with a ring of silver but with a ring of his own flesh. Look at the tender little child who on the eighth day, when he was circumcised, gave up just so much flesh as to make a tiny circlet of a ring!For the record, this woman contributed to the development of a major schism in the 14th century, one which radically changed the geopolitics of Europe and created the conditions that led to the Reformation. Never doubt your ability to change the world, friends. Literally anyone can.
        

            
            

                
                
                    ao3tagoftheday:

ao3tagoftheday:

[Image Description: Tag reading “a blend between a religious vision and a sex dream I guess”]

The AO3 Tag of the Day is: This is a callout post for every single medieval mystic, but especially for Catherine of Siena, who had a vision of Jesus giving her his foreskin as a wedding ring


[Image Description: Ask reading “Jesus’ WHAT now as WHAT”]Here, my friend, is an excerpt from a letter written by Catherine of Siena, a real, actual saint whose visions are considered by the real, actual Catholic Church to be really, actually divinely inspired:You see very well that you are a bride and that [Jesus] has espoused you … and not with a ring of silver but with a ring of his own flesh. Look at the tender little child who on the eighth day, when he was circumcised, gave up just so much flesh as to make a tiny circlet of a ring!For the record, this woman contributed to the development of a major schism in the 14th century, one which radically changed the geopolitics of Europe and created the conditions that led to the Reformation. Never doubt your ability to change the world, friends. Literally anyone can.: a blend between a religious vision
 and a sex dream
 guess,
 ...... ............."
ao3tagoftheday:

ao3tagoftheday:

[Image Description: Tag reading “a blend between a religious vision and a sex dream I guess”]

The AO3 Tag of the Day is: This is a callout post for every single medieval mystic, but especially for Catherine of Siena, who had a vision of Jesus giving her his foreskin as a wedding ring


[Image Description: Ask reading “Jesus’ WHAT now as WHAT”]Here, my friend, is an excerpt from a letter written by Catherine of Siena, a real, actual saint whose visions are considered by the real, actual Catholic Church to be really, actually divinely inspired:You see very well that you are a bride and that [Jesus] has espoused you … and not with a ring of silver but with a ring of his own flesh. Look at the tender little child who on the eighth day, when he was circumcised, gave up just so much flesh as to make a tiny circlet of a ring!For the record, this woman contributed to the development of a major schism in the 14th century, one which radically changed the geopolitics of Europe and created the conditions that led to the Reformation. Never doubt your ability to change the world, friends. Literally anyone can.
                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            









    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        averypottermormon:
solitics:

tielan:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

redsuns-n-orangemoons:

kwamenace:

bleck-excellence:

pharoah-tahan:

alwaysbewoke:

History books always seem to leave this out.

Don’t let them tell you that slaves are our only history.

When black people ruled the world

History repeats itself

And who said moors weren’t black?

These are fantastic who painted these???GOOGLE HALP
EDIT: ludwig deutsch <3


yaaay


Look at those fucking details!!! Look how he makes the light bounce off of the skin, the eyes not pure white but reflecting the colors. Each and every FUCKING CHAIN is painted and highlighted.The folding of the fabric aaaaaaaaaaa

I’ve reblogged this before.I DON’T CARE.

they look like photographs


i thought they were
: Naeem
 +2
 @naeem_V
 19th century oil paintings of North
 African medieval Muslims (Moors)
 who conquered Spain, France,
 and Sicily.

 Nww.youhuaua com
averypottermormon:
solitics:

tielan:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

redsuns-n-orangemoons:

kwamenace:

bleck-excellence:

pharoah-tahan:

alwaysbewoke:

History books always seem to leave this out.

Don’t let them tell you that slaves are our only history.

When black people ruled the world

History repeats itself

And who said moors weren’t black?

These are fantastic who painted these???GOOGLE HALP
EDIT: ludwig deutsch <3


yaaay


Look at those fucking details!!! Look how he makes the light bounce off of the skin, the eyes not pure white but reflecting the colors. Each and every FUCKING CHAIN is painted and highlighted.The folding of the fabric aaaaaaaaaaa

I’ve reblogged this before.I DON’T CARE.

they look like photographs


i thought they were

        

            
            

                
                
                    averypottermormon:
solitics:

tielan:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

redsuns-n-orangemoons:

kwamenace:

bleck-excellence:

pharoah-tahan:

alwaysbewoke:

History books always seem to leave this out.

Don’t let them tell you that slaves are our only history.

When black people ruled the world

History repeats itself

And who said moors weren’t black?

These are fantastic who painted these???GOOGLE HALP
EDIT: ludwig deutsch <3


yaaay


Look at those fucking details!!! Look how he makes the light bounce off of the skin, the eyes not pure white but reflecting the colors. Each and every FUCKING CHAIN is painted and highlighted.The folding of the fabric aaaaaaaaaaa

I’ve reblogged this before.I DON’T CARE.

they look like photographs


i thought they were
: Naeem
 +2
 @naeem_V
 19th century oil paintings of North
 African medieval Muslims (Moors)
 who conquered Spain, France,
 and Sicily.

 Nww.youhuaua com
averypottermormon:
solitics:

tielan:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

monsterpeanut:

redsuns-n-orangemoons:

kwamenace:

bleck-excellence:

pharoah-tahan:

alwaysbewoke:

History books always seem to leave this out.

Don’t let them tell you that slaves are our only history.

When black people ruled the world

History repeats itself

And who said moors weren’t black?

These are fantastic who painted these???GOOGLE HALP
EDIT: ludwig deutsch <3


yaaay


Look at those fucking details!!! Look how he makes the light bounce off of the skin, the eyes not pure white but reflecting the colors. Each and every FUCKING CHAIN is painted and highlighted.The folding of the fabric aaaaaaaaaaa

I’ve reblogged this before.I DON’T CARE.

they look like photographs


i thought they were

                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    


    
	

        
	

    




                    

                

                

                    




    

        
        

            
            

              
            

        

        
        
        

            

            
            
                
                    
                        

                            

                                
                            

                            
                            

                                
                                    Rohit Sharma memes: Funniest Twitter reactions on Rohit Sharma's first century as opener vs ...
                                
                            

                            
                        

                    
                
            
                
                    
                        

                            

                                
                                
                                
                            

                            
                            

                                
                                    You can thank this mid-century cat photographer for your favorite cat memes
                                
                            

                            
                        

                    
                
            
                
                    
                        

                            

                                
                            

                            
                            

                                
                                    Gun control: The stark reality of the 21st century