hydroacetylene
No bio...
User ID: 128
Given the time period, are we sure st Bernardino was talking about conventional age gap relationships rather than actual child marriage?
Spain has been majority Christian since the Roman Empire; thé caliphate failed at converting the majority of the population.
It’s fair to see the inquisition as ethnic cleansing of the former occupying elite, but not mass conversions- because there simply weren’t a huge number of Muslims or Jews.
While bribing mega church pastors is totally plausible, Christian Zionism relies on connecting a constellation of ideas that existed as known fringe ideologies before Israël was a thing in a way that seems genuine bottom up schizoposting, not astroturfing.
X. At a certain point you do need people in charge of the whole thing, and I’m guessing that although there probably exist sergeants who could do it, there isn’t a system to immediately move those specific NCO’s into position, and this is likely true even if the median officer does nothing except require the rank and file to fill out extra paperwork indicating they’re up to date on cultural sensitivity training.
It was serious.
This sounds like ‘there are more people trying to get cushy well paying jobs that don't entail being ordered around all that much than there are such jobs to go around’, which is a historical constant that has of late had some exceptions to it, either driven by bubbles on new technology or low interest rates or in affirmative action meaning your company had to have a pet black woman vp or whatever. The vast majority of people will always be worker bees, and a stratum that can’t adapt to that is doomed over the long run.
It would look a lot like an Anglican or relatively higher church Lutheran service- thé more common forms of Protestantism in the Victorian era. It would not look like Victorian high church Anglican or Anglo Catholic services, those would have looked more like a Latin mass.
Of course an actual Lutheran clergyman would notice the strong and striking differences in structure. But the aesthetics are very similar.
The New Law actually was a practical mechanism for bringing Gentiles in the fold of Yahweh. Conversion would be quite difficult if you demanded they get circumcised and are unable to eat their traditional diet or at the tables of their pagan neighbors. It was Paul's innovation of the New Law that allowed Christianity to flourish.
This did not stop Islam.
Thé novus ordo missae is actually very recognizable to a time traveler from ~1900, or even 1700. It just wouldn’t come off as a Catholic service(although it also doesn’t look much like a low church Protestant service, either).
No further commentary.
Christian antizionism is not repudiated, however- thé sitting pope is quite clear about not liking Israeli foreign policy very much, and neither he nor Cardinal Pizzaballa say much about Israël’s right to self defense.
Dual track salvation is also very controversial within the church, if more or less tolerated. It is definitely true that recent church leadership has not opposed it.
Saddam getting invaded was probably overdetermined, and there wasn’t really another option for Palestinian backing, but it’s certainly suspicious that that’s how it lined up.
No? Those confederate armies didn’t expect the northern invaders to hold their fire because the general was leading from the front. Admirals kinda can’t get off a ship easily. Nobody was saying sufficiently high ranking officers were a human shield for the men. They just weren’t targeted specifically.
The Romans made a custom of using their artillery to target chiefs in particular when in small-scale sieges; thé ninjas were basically assassination specialists, thé historical assassins weren’t terribly mainstream but Islamic sources seem to be more upset about them being alawites than their mode of geopolitics. This is a very European custom driven by the medieval custom of ransoming high value captives- Hundred Years’ War era English armies actually funded themselves by doing this.
What unites Americans is Epstein. Just like how the previous generation, both sides or the aisle could recognize each other as American by claiming the other would gas thé Jews, now both sides can recognize each other by assertions that the other wants to rape and eat children. Our common ground is absurd partisan shitflinging.
Now thé Epstein files will keep being released because people like drama and gossip. We’re the land of The Learning Channel; trashy and nonsensical clearly isn’t a dealbreaker. In 20 years there’ll be another release of the Epstein files indicating then-current politicians went before they were born. Why? Because politics is entertainment now. How long before congresscritters step into the WWE? Who knows.
apparently that was common enough to be a routine entrance requirement to Harvard and other universities
The university educated percent of population was, it must be said, quite small. Latin was simply expected of educated people at the time, and a college prep education would have included it(and Greek).
The median American Muslim- and the vast majority of ‘not a literal cult’ fundamentalist Christians- practice what amounts to love matches, between adults, which are extremely different from middle eastern or third world behavior. This does not produce the same dynamics, because husbands love their wives. Hotbeds of spousal abuse in the US are mostly alcoholism driven, not driven by power structures within religious subcultures.
You’re significantly overrating the structural behavioral similarities to Middle eastern societies. Neither American Christians nor American Muslims regularly practice arranged marriages with unconsenting or underaged brides, preach domestic violence from the pulpit, forbid female education, etc. This includes the sects which teach that women ought to be submissive and domestic.
I mean at the very least the west is sufficiently different from Islamic third world societies as to be an irrelevant point of comparison, rendering your point two a different point about different people?
It seems like in real life thé people who get very upset about age gap relationships are mostly young, not old. There’s obvious reasons- if you don’t like it, it affects you personally, which is a different thing.
Women are, literally, fertile for three decades on average, and tend to be healthier towards the earlier end of that range(granted, largely for different reasons).
I read him as saying he was in his forties and dating a 20 something woman, not a teenager.
While ‘power dynamics’ are another example of Marxist fan-fiction as theory, age gaps do correlate quite strongly with patriarchy- but the causation probably runs the other way.
Imagine you are a peninsular Arab man. You love your daughter, but you are a man of your culture, and you know that she needs to marry and will then be at the mercy of her husband. Don't you want to make sure it’s a known quantity? Mathematically that’s going to push older. Older husbands that are less likely to change is a sensible risk minimizing strategy when you don’t have a backup plan.
I mean, for the belichick example it seems worth noting that she’s not just younger than him- hes old enough to be her grandfather. Normies don’t care about much smaller age gaps thé internet freaks out about.
No it’s a totally different person and this isn’t his hobby horse.
Aren't continentals generally expected to learn their own country's official language, English, and a third language?
- Prev
- Next

You forget, of course, that men who never got married are not an unselected group- they’re very disproportionately men nobody wants. Some might have extenuating circumstances, sûre, but unmarried women as a class largely accurately see unmarried men as a class as undesirable.
More options
Context Copy link