#we were talking about America as a country not North America the continent

[cosmic-kiwi]

"A half century ago and more, scholars and essayists often traced the earliest hints of the American character to the arrival of settlers in Jamestown and Plymouth—a view that is less prevalent now. Yet American history had been unfolding for some time before 1607. The Spanish Empire penetrated deeply into the Americas during the long century that elapsed between the landfall of Columbus in 1492 and the first English settlements. The recent discovery of an old footprint in Mexico suggests that hominoids may have been here as long as 40,000 years ago—far longer than previously assumed. The New World is not always so new—what may be the oldest living thing on earth is a bristlecone pine tree named Methuselah, nearly 5,000 years old, in California. In other words, American history goes back very far—to what T. S. Eliot called “a time / Older than the time of chronometers.”"

'Where Does American History Begin?' by Ted Widmer

My favorite thing is that Europe is spooky because it’s old and America is spooky because it’s big

[what-even-is-thiss]

People who get mad about poc being included in medieval fiction and fantasy are not only racist but they also have a deep misunderstanding about how their own ideas of race and culture work.

Perhaps, yes. Most people living in Europe in the time period we call the Middle Ages would’ve been what we now consider to be white. But that doesn’t mean poc wouldn’t have been there at all and it doesn’t mean they understood identity in the same way we do.

“Outsiders” could be from within the same city or from a world away. A lot of peoples loyalties and who they saw as being from the same group as them had to do with religious conflicts, politics, and combinations of the two. Maybe just based on what neighborhood or village they lived in.

Historically before the era of colonialism Catholic countries like Portugal have sometimes given aid in various forms to Ethiopia because they’re both christian countries. People in the area we now call Italy would’ve killed neighbors less than a 20 minute walk away over papal politics.

People also traded frequently with people from other continents. Married people from other continents. Early into the so-called age of exploration Portuguese and Spanish explorers were known to sometimes marry women traders from west Africa for their wealth and trade connections. People from all over the Muslim world have also often been traders, enemies, allies, and mercenaries all over Europe and vice versa with Christian and Jewish traders, scholars, mercenaries, traders, crusaders, etc. traveling and living within the Muslim world as well.

Vikings got around. To Eastern Europe, the Mediterranean, North America. Many stayed where they went or made deals with the locals. Many brought prisoners, slaves, illegitimate children, and new wives back home.

Not only did the concept of whiteness and any other modern understanding of race not exist yet, people intermingled, intermarried, moved around, converted religions, traded across continents. Sometimes people made it all the way to North America even if that route and the colonies that came out of it faded out of memory eventually. The world was still interconnected even if it did move much slower.

Also when talking about fantasy and not historical fiction, it’s fantasy. There’s dragon. And wizard. Why are you worried about your racist ideas about “realism”? Besides the racism I mean.

[conkreetmonkey]

I have a weird, muddy opinion on how people on this site call The United States of America "USAmerica." Yeah, it works, and it removes any confusion about whether you're talking about the country or the landmass, but at the same time, it feels clunky? USAmerica just feels... idk, it's like you couldn't say it out loud without sounding goofy? You can say "the USA" out loud and it sounds good and makes sense, but at the same time the "the" makes it a bit awkward gramatically, and you can't just say "I'm from USA," but you can say, in text form, "I'm from USAmerica."

THEN there's the fact that people from that country are typically referred to as "Americans," and things from there as "American." When someone says "America," you don't think about the two connected continents the term could technically be referring to, you just think about the United States of America. It's an unusually "built" country within the region, made up of 51 smaller, unified nation-states that have combined into one very large, culturally and geographically disjointed country under one sprawling government, where every state, now functionally more of a province, retains the ability to have differing laws and economic policies, yet must answer to the grand government that controls them all as a whole, like if every country in Europe was ruled by one overseeing organization but were free to remain distinct as mini-nations rather than homogenized provinces. Two USAmerican states are far more different in legislation and culture than, say, two Canadian provinces are.

Given this, it makes sense for the country to simply be named "The United States of America." It's a bunch of states from America that are united into one big Voltron of a nation. Of course, though, you can't just say something like "this book is a great work of United States of America-ian literature," due to the way the English language works. Within the framework of English grammar, ideally, a country needs an adjective form of its name to concisely describe people and things from there, and while there are no hard rules as to how to go about that to my knowledge, there are a few different ways. You can apply a prefix to the country's name such as "ish" (British, Scottish, Turkish), "ian" (Brazillian, Russian, Indian), "ese" (Chinese, Japanese, Portuguese), "i" (Pakistani, Somali, Yemeni), or "an" (Guatemalan, German, Mexican), or if it sounds good you can just get funky with it and change a vowel or two (Norse, French, Dutch, Malagasy). And then there's Iceland with the "ic" (because they're special).

So BASICALLY, from THAT standpoint, using "American" as the USA's adjective makes sense. It flows well, does what it needs to. The problem, of course, is the overlap with the name of the landmasses. Technically, when one says "South American," they could be referring to either the continent of South America, or the south of the USA. Same with "North American." Now, nobody actually uses either of those terms to describe regions of the country, probably due to this overlap. A USAmerican could simply say "I'm from the north" or "I'm from a southern state," and you would understand given the context of them being a USAmerican. But then again, they couldn't just simply drop the country and compass-ional (whatever tf the term is) region in the same clause like people from any other country could without it sounding weird. "I'm from South France" makes sense as a sentence, as does "This plant grows in Northern Australia." "I was born in the South of the United States of America" is clunky and overly verbose, yet the lack of a proper country name without a "the" throws a wrench into that.

So what do we (typically) do? Just say "American" and let context do the work, clarifying if neccesary. "I'm from Southern America" obviously is not intended to apply to the continents, although it technically could. The reader, simply due to the context of knowing that South America is a continent and "America" usually refers to the USA unless otherwise stated, understands that the writer almost certainly means they're from a place like Texas or Louisiana, rather than Argentina or Chile. This way of writing/speaking is imprecise and requires unspoken context, but it gets the job done. America the country is a weird case in terms of its makeup, and that's reflected in its name. You're not referring to one country, you're referring to 51 micro-nations held together with one big fat federal government spread over them, like the thick plastic wrap holding a pallet of crates, boxes and sacks together as one shippable unit. And besides, nobody ever says "America" to refer to both continents, even though they technically could. They say "The Americas," because while technically one region, NA and SA are both very distinct and barely physically connected at all, held together by a single small landbridge (that has a canal though it now anyways, so you can't walk from one continent to the other without crossing water anymore).

So, in conclusion, idk, the term "USAmerica" removes the needless complexity of situational context, but it's somehow clunkier-feeling than the preexisting norm of just saying "America." I use and will continue to use the term USAmerica for brevity's sake since it's the norm on this site, but I'd certainly never use it anywhere else. America is an unusual country, and its name reflects that. A square peg in a language made of round holes, that can still fit if you turn it sideways a little. idk. I suppose the only real lesson here is that a) American exceptionalism is unintentionally portrayed in the language the country speaks, and b) English has a weird grammar system where things that are objectively correct within it sometimes don't "feel right" for no reason other than lacking succinctness.

[alpaca-clouds]

DnD's World Problem - It's a bit of a waste

Okay, let me talk about the main world of DnD: Toril. And about the thing that it mostly gets reduced to Faerûn - which is in fact a continent - and specifically the Sword Coast, so the western coast of Faerûn.

And that is exactly what I want to talk about: There is an entire world there - but DnD has barely done anything with it in 4th edition and nothing with it in 5th edition. And I absolutely understand why, but I also think that ignoring these parts of the world is not the best way to go about it.

A World filled with Clichés

Now, anyone who knows a bit about the worldbuilding of DnD, will be able to tell you that this worldbuilding is not exactly creatives in the regard of the different continents. We basically have the following:

Faerûn = Fantasy-Europe

Anchorome = Fantasy-North America

Maztika = Fantasy-Meso America

Katashaka = Fantasy-Africa

Zakhara = Fantasy-Arabia

Kara-Tur = Fantasy-Asia (let's face it: Mostly Fantasy-China and Fantasy-Japan)

Osse = Fantasy-Australia

Faerûn has a lot more worldbuilding to it than any of the other continents. More than that: Faerûn is the one continent that is not based mostly on (racist) clichés of some non-white culture. Duh. Because Faerûn is obviously the European part of the world, and the mostly white people constructing this world were able to imagine a "European world" with a lot more details than they were able to imagine any non-white fantasy world.

And let's make this pretty darn clear: These other continents are not only fairly loose in terms of worldbuilding - a lot of it really is just "this is Fantasy-China, so just... uhm, imagine China but as fantasy!!!" Anchorome and Osse are probably the parts of the world that are most underdeveloped, with nearly no information available that goes past "Oh, this is pre-columbian North America with tribes living on the land" and "Yeah, Australia, uhm, yeah, that's it!"

And yes, this is very much "these parts of the world as imagined by white people in the 90s", as the 80s and 90s were the time when most of this was being created. And yes, that means all the problematic stuff that you imagine now about it... Yeah, that's true.

Let me tell you...

Racist Stereotypes

Okay, fellow white person. When I say "Africa", what do you imagine? I will take a guess: Savana, animals like lions and elephants, people living in mud huts and dressing in like, animal pelts or something. The typical racist "Africa is a country" thing that we saw in a lot of media and still see today, even though recently it has gotten a bit better with some own voices getting to create this media.

Meanwhile Kara-Tur is basically the boiled down version of the China and Japan popularized in Western Kung Fu movies - with maybe a bit of the Jackie Chan stuff thrown into it. It is really just the kind of western stuff, that if you grew up with Marvel comics for example you can find there, too.

Like, Katashaka is basically that Africa that some of the older Black Panther stuff displayed. And Kara-Tur is the kind of Asia that once upon a time Dr. Strange travelled to - and that the Mandarin came from. Like, it really is that bad.

Which probably is why they have not used any of these settings outside of Faerûn since 2000 with very few exceptions. Because by now people actually interacting with this, would rightfully call them out for the racism in it.

So, basically what they are doing right now is, to just act as if those settings do not exist. But... I actually do think that is in a way a bad thing for several reasons.

First and foremost it is obviously a bit iffy that the world got now reduced onto only the "European" part of the world. And sure, Faerûn is supposed to be quite diverse ethnically diverse, but that does not change the fact that it is "medieval Europe, with some Rennaissance stuff thrown in" for the most part.

Because it basically also implies that any non-white cultures are... unimportant for the world.

WotC, take a page out of Marvel's book

Okay, so, what should WotC/Hasbro do, if they actually cared about the franchise (which they clearly do not do, but that's beside the point)?

Well, simple: Do, what Marvel at some point did.

There is a reason I took the Marvel stuff as a reference above, because Marvel at some point realized that what they had done in the way they depicted basically anything that was not mainstream western culture was not okay. So... They hired people from the respective cultures to write about these non-western cultures, do the art and so on.

With all the criticism I have on the MCU, this did show there as well. With Black Panther being the most obvious example of course. A movie that went ahead to actually honor and even celebrate different African cultures.

And... well, DnD could do the same thing. It could not only help to actually worldbuild the entire world of Toril some more, but it also would create super interesting campaign settings for it as well.

Because I could absolutely imagine some interesting campaigns that could take place within an Africa-inspired setting, or some Indigenous-American-inspired setting. That could be very, very fun to play in, if the cultures were created by people from the real-world equivalent of those cultures.

And yes, this brings us back to the issue of: "For fuck's sake, let's just do a bit more with the lore?! Please!"

*sighs* Of course I know that this will probably not happen under Hasbro, because Hasbro mostly thinks about how to implement micro transactions into DnD... Yeah...

[tododeku-or-bust]

I saw your post saying that certain people believe the only relevant Black people on this planet are in the US and Africa and it made me think back on an exchange I had with someone else. They told me that 'Black' is an exclusively American identity, and that I could not identify myself as such even though I'm dark skinned because I am in reality an 'Afro-latina' from South America

This makes sense to me because the context I was raised in differs from the one in North America, but as you said racism is a global issue and I certainly do feel its effects all around me daily. After that talk I stopped referring to myself as Black, personally, but that doesn't mean I'm NOT affected by antiblackness!

I think it's important that Black people in the US get to hold on to their identity as it's shaped by THEIR specific circumstances. However, it's even MORE important for racists to stop viewing every single instance of antiblackness as "US centric" because that shit affects ALL of us. They see us as different and lesser before sparing a second thought to how we identify ourselves anyway

I need to clarify myself then 😅 it's not that the only relevant Black people are in the US and Africa, it's that the ONLY Black people are in those places. As in, people seem to think we are nowhere else on the planet than those two spaces. And everywhere else is just... "Unaware".

I was frustrated with it bc like you said, we're EVERYWHERE! On every continent (except maybe Antarctica, idk). Antiblackness is not "US centric", the same way white supremacy isn't. the idea that anywhere on the planet "can't understand antiblackness" is ridiculous, bc they know Black people exist! If they went out of their way, they'd notice the Black people in their country. They'd certainly know those Black people weren't white when they came across them (cough cough Europeans!)

Idk who told you you couldn't I.D. as Black but that's silly imo. You're an Afro-Latina. 😐 If you're more comfortable referring to yourself as that, that's your choice, but I'd hate for you to think you just "can't". Bc... Trust and believe... Like you said, They're gonna call you Black before they pin down your full ethnicity.

I think the reason we're just so strong about it in the US is because "African-American" is vague ASF thanks to the ripping apart of our ethnic identities from slavery. I can't pinpoint where I'm from in the motherland, so... Black-American is what I prefer to go by. I had an Egyptian friend that once said "wouldn't that technically make me African American if I were born here but my parents were African" and I had to sit there like huh. Via wordplay, yes, but via U.S. sociological understanding, no. (Fun fact, SWANA people are considered white on the census!)

[coopigeoncoo]

Do all pigeons look the same? Do USA pigeons look the same as Aussie pigeons?

Pigeons are actually an incredibly diverse group of birds! They exist on every continent (minus Antarctica), so they have developed in some incredible ways based on their varied habitats.

So, let's talk about pigeons for a minute (or ten. Or forever. I just really like pigeons, y'all).

This is the Rock Pigeon or Rock Dove (Doves and Pigeons exist in the same family). this is the stereotypical bird people imagine when someone says 'pigeon'. But even these guys are incredibly diverse!

They come in all sorts of different patterns and even, thanks to a thousands of years of humans breeding pigeons as a hobby, different colors!

This is also a Rock Pigeon.

This guy is a part of the Rock Pigeon club, too!

So, does Australia have the same kind of pigeons as the US? Yes, and no.

The pigeon we have in common is...(drumroll please)

The Rock Pigeon!

But! It isn't a native bird to either of our countries. The Rock Pigeon was introduced to a great deal of the world by settlers from Europe. Pigeons were, at one point, a very popular livestock choice that was easy to transport in boats (and lets face it, a far more pleasant traveling companion to share a space with than a sheep or a pig). But bird are notorious for their ability to fly since they're, y'know, birds. So it was inevitable that some would escape captivity and establish themselves in the wilds of their new habitats. But Rock Pigeons, it would turn out, are very, very good at cohabitating with people. And, it's sort of a huge issue.

This map shows the natural habitat of the Rock Pigeon (Red) and the areas where they were introduced and successfully thrive (pink).

So why are they so good at living alongside humans?

Because Rock Pigeons are cliff dwellers!

They love to build nests on steep inclines and cliffsides.

So then humans come along and start building cities with all these sprawling rooftops and ledges, which just looks like perfect little birdie nesting spots.

But! Australia has it's own set of unique native pigeon species.

Like the Crested Pigeon

And the Superb Fruit Dove.

And the Common Bronzewing.

So, in summary, Australia has a wide variety of their own native species of pigeons not found in North America, but they also share a common link through the Rock Pigeon. Because pretty much everyone has the Rock Pigeon (thanks, European settlers).

[nachoaveragejoe234]

Since I had to block a bozo who defends the hate of Russian civilians, (redjaybathood), here is proof of anti-Russian sentiment towards civilians, it's not propaganda and you ain't a tankie for calling it out.

OK, so I have to respond. Firstly, my criticism doesn't mean "I think Putin's behaviour is the right thing."

Let me ask you something. Why don't you lame Chinese civilians for their government? Why don't you call them names? Their leader is also a communist who threatens other countries. Why aren't Chinese civilians considered tankies? Why don't North Korean civilians get treated like they're part of the problem? Cherry picking.

Next, you're literally doing what the OP and many other people are calling out. Hating the civilians for existing and living in a dictatorship.

And since you freaked that I didnt send the links even though you can look it up yourself (meaning you're lazy), fine. Here we go. Now let's see if you try to accuse me of lying. This is the sentiment that lead to the Japanese internment camps which everyone agrees were wrong, but I know people would cheer for Russian ones. There's a LOT of Russia-bashing, believe it or not.

And serious actual hate crimes and attacks. All called "propaganda" by bigots.

That's arson if you don't speak German.

If a foreign minister needs to call you out, it's not propaganda.

NOTE: Dubs being put on hiatus, Russian non politial products like snacks and drinks being removed or given WARNINGS in stores, none of that happens to other "evil" countries like China. Selective outrage? I'd say so. And literal paragraphs about hate from the Wiki page.

All of these are civilians who are being treated like shit on the ASSUMPTION that if you're Russian, you must hate peace. Dictators are not the people. People are brainwashed. You don't have the right to judge the peopleof a dictatorship because they aren't born evil, they're taught to obey the dictator. It happened with Hitler. It happened with Stalin. It happened with Mussolini. It happened with Pol Pot. It happened with Milosevic. It happened with Hirohito. It happens with Xi. It happens with Kim Jong Un. Why is it that when it happens with Putin, and ONLY with Putin, are the civilians suddenly just as problematic as the leader? You can't judge an entire nationality based on a select number of people you've seen who agree (or pretend to agree, as many may not actually agree but pretend. If all you view them as is cowards, but you don't hold the same values to other citizens of dictatorships, you are in fact, a BIGOT and it's not problematic or propaganda or false to say so. I made myself very clear. If you still disagree that's your problem and you are a toxic person. Jesus fucking Christ)

Tell me again how being Russian automatically makes you a bad person and how civilians aren't victims just because they are living in a corrupt country. You judge the entire population based on what fringe nationalists and some brainwashed people say. Blanket statements about an entire nationality or race are NOT okay. Peoplewho criticizes this aren't automatically pro-tyranny. Not that you care or believe that.

As a bonus, let's talk about how America and Canada (my country) used to HATE UKRAINE, and they had Ukrainian internment camps.

Your reaction to this should NOT be "I don't think Ukrainians deserve peace". BOTH RUSSIA AND UKRAINE DESERVE PEACE AND TO BE FREE FROM HATE. THE HATE GOES IN ALL DIRECTIONS. THAT'S THE REASON WAR IS A THING. PUTIN NEEDS TO STOP FIGHTING. PEOPLE NEED TO STOP JUDGING CITIZENS OF A DICTATORSHIP FOR BEING FROM A DICTATORSHIP. THE MORE RUSSIANS THAT CALL OUT PUTIN ANY WAY THEY CAN THE BETTER. ALL OF THESE STATEMENTS CAN AND SHOULD CO-EXIST AND I YOU DON'T THINK SO, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. "BUT THEIR LEADER!" "BUT I'M UKRAINIAN" "BUT LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY" "SHUT UP TANKIE" "ORC/RUZZIAN AREN'T SLURS THEY'RE TRUE". ARE NOT EXCUSES. The orcs and Ruzzians are Putin and his lackeys, not the people who live in said tyrant's cities. Obviously people should help Ukraine, that's absolutely fine. But people should not do or say anything the people above have said. It's pretty easy to find out of touch comments on Twitter and Quora that blanket the entire population as the same "evil commie tankie orc zombies". People calling out this stuff aren't trying to make a competition of "who has it worse" when in fact war harms EVERYONE.

That's all I can say. Don't like this? Then you should really think.

[nonsensical-pixels]

Dear Sims 2 Community, part 2

Forewarning: Long post again.

I would like, first and foremost, to apologise to @sicksadsim. We have both talked our situation out in DM's and agreed to delete our posts sniping at each other. I was wrong to jump to conclusions about them and I deeply regret it. The person who originally posted the comments we were arguing about has deleted their comments and we have all agreed to start afresh.

Secondly, I would like to thank @jessica-ebadi for enlightening me a bit more on how racism works in Western countries. It was interesting to have a conversation with someone from the opposite side of the world and get to understand each other better.

Thirdly, since I was mainly talking about South-East Asian names and misconceptions in my original post, I have decided to make one about other cultures, nationalities, and ethnicities, and backgrounds! So here are a few below that I see being perpetrated way too much. Some are my own, some are from other people who have offered me their opinions.

Not all Indian people are dark-skinned. My own ancestors came from North India and that's why many were mistaken as Europeans during World War Two. I am tired of seeing people act as if all Indians must be dark-skinned.

Africa is a continent, not a country. Oh my god I hate this idea. I see WAY too many people in this community acting like Africa is a country rather than a continent. There are so, so many diverse cultures in Africa, so many countries, so many peoples! PLEASE stop generalising African cultures.

Not all people from one country have to be the same race, look the same, and speak the same language. This is one of those misconceptions in The Sims community that REALLY makes me upset. Most sims I see representing other countries than America are pretty much just the stereotypical person from that country. Every country has its expats, its foreign immigrants, and IDK, maybe people whose ancestors have lived there for decades but aren't what you would 'normally 'think are people who would live there. There are also mixed-race people too!

Karen are an actual race, they are not just your average 'I-want-the-manager' person from the West. You can read about them here and their story is heartbreaking. It literally drives me up the wall to see people, especially on Reddit, dismissing the plight of the Karen people because they share a name with a stereotypical rude person. Which isn't even pronounced the same. I am now informally starting a petition to change the name we refer to rude entitled people to something else.

Yes, Goopy GilsCarbo is a real name. It's a mashup of Goopy Rossi and Gabe GilsCarbo, who both worked on TS2 together. While I find it funny too, it's rude to call it weird when an actual person could conceivably be called this name.

Plus, while the developers may have put this name in as a joke, it does not mean it's okay for you to ridicule it as a fake name.

Yes, people have different, unique, and wonderful facial features. I find it so sad that wide noses and faces are turned down and replaced with 'YouTuber' faces that all look the same. Hooked noses are beautiful in their own way. Big chins are beautiful in their own way.

Just because something does not match your concept of what 'beauty' is, does not mean it isn't beautiful.

For games released in the early 2000s, the early Sims series has been remarkably good at representing people of different lives. Think Amaury Plumard from The Urbz--how many games back then had wheelchairs? And though it aged poorly, how many games back in 2000 had same-sex relations enabled? I think it's important to keep up that trend of diversity and openness.

If there are any more misconceptions I have missed, feel free to comment them down below, but please keep in mind that representation does matter and we are trying to get rid of stereotypes in this community. People need to have the opportunity to leave input about how they are being represented. You can have your discussions, just please don't point fingers and call people things before you understand what they're saying :))

[catgirlforeskin]

I wanna hear about halo geopolitics so, lay it on me. Go as some might say "hog wild".

I’ll limit myself to just talking about earth to keep this relatively brief.

Starting in the Americas, the United States collapses and its “political remnants” merge with Canada and Mexico to form the United Republic of North America (URNA). We don’t know much, except for that the Commonwealth of Kentucky broke away from the United States, and then joined the URNA as an independent body, and it’s likely this happened for much of the US. The URNA doesn’t have much sway politically in the UN [also, there’s a distinction between the “former UN” and UN, we’ll just say UN for the new one for simplicity’s sake] and is mostly the site for a lot of military industrial production/recruitment.

We don’t have much information about the rest of Central and South America except that the Rainforest Wars were fought there in the mid 22nd century between the UN, communist rebels, and fascist paramilitaries that had been paid by corporations to put down the rebels but then broke off on their own. But we do know that Cuba becomes a world power after building a space elevator, so hey, there’s that.

Moving east to Europe, the European Union still exists and while we don’t know that all of the UK is part of it, or that the UK even still exists, we do know that London is part of the EU at least, and may be a city-state now as a result. The 2015 novel Halo: Saint's Testimony mentions the North Atlantic Protectorate forming and at least part of Scotland being in it, it seems this has replaced the United Kingdoms as a political body. Also not only does Czechoslovakia reform, but Halo: Nightfall mentions a character being born in the “Greater Czechoslovakian Authority” and we have basically nothing else lmao.

Hopping down to Africa, this is the continent we see the most of in-game, but politically is a bit muddled. We have a lot of information about what’s happening there at the time of the games, but not the history leading up to it, outside of Africa largely being wealthy and industrialized and having broken free of the economic imperialism that constricts it in the current day. We know from a Halo 2 map description that a number of African countries band together in what’s called the East African Protectorate, including Tanzania and Kenya, but both of these countries have dedicated paragraphs in the Halo Encyclopedia (2009 edition) and neither mentions this EAP, so it may have been abandoned as an idea for the setting. It’s also the same name Britain used for colonized Kenya so maybe it’s for the best they haven’t brought it up again.

Moving further east once again, we know that Korea, China, Japan, India, and Pakistan all hold a lot of sway in the UEG. Korea unifies and becomes a scientific/technological powerhouse, China maybe colonizes Vietnam (or maybe they just join up peacefully? doesn’t seem super likely given what we know about history between them) and becomes a major player, funding/launching much of the early colonization efforts into space.

Also because of the United Earth Government now, it seems that most countries don’t really exist as independent bodies anymore, and some sources call all nations defunct, it’s a bit unclear. It seems most like they exist as states/provinces now? I didn’t even mention all the megacorporations that seem to have more power than nations at this point, ok I’m gonna cut myself off here. Anyway if anyone actually read this far mwah mwah kissing you on the forehead sorry this was not brief at all lmao. Know that I could’ve said more!

[longlivetv]

I feel like atm it’s knee jerk reactions + the usual bad faith crew. Idk I’m in Aus and didn’t get tickets so I feel and get the fomo but at the same time I know Taylor is gonna bring the movie internationally later.

But honestly? I feel like Taylor has earned at the very least a little bit of trust that she isn’t going to not release internationally in the future. Even if she can’t secure theatres for every country/continent we are gonna get it on streaming.

I just don’t like how some fans will take disappointment and turn it into making it out like Taylor is doing this intentionally bc she ‘hates’ international fans.

And I specifically tagged that the international disappointment is valid. Because it is. It’s coming to you eventually I’m sure but knowing it’s here first is hard. But I agree with you that the constant assertions that she hates her international fans and intentionally slights them are frustrating when it just isn’t true. People were all up at arms ahead of the Mexico City shows claiming she hates the Mexican fans when the reality was she was SO excited to be there and had SUCH a blast finally getting to perform for them. And I’m sure that will be true for every upcoming date. Both that people will act like she hates those fans AND that she will make it abundantly clear that isn’t the case.

What I’m talking about are the people that are in North America and have access to tickets and bought them and are STILL mad about something. That makes me crazy because if you have all the things and you’re still mad do you actually still like her? I don’t know, I just don’t find it fun to complain about stuff just to find something to complain about. But, I guess I need to chill because I’m not out here to tell people how to blog. If they want to complain about *everything* on their own blog that’s their prerogative.

[pyrrhicraven]

A little story but its long 😆 listen i get hyperfixated on weird and not so weird things and have a wide array of odd little bits of information. History, history, history, history, history, history, history, pop culture, history, history, history, history, history, history, i suspect you get my meaning 😂

At work there are rows of shelves and you can hear conversation in another aisle kind of muffled but still clear enough if someone is talking and not whispering.

I minding my own business organizing overheard the most ridiculous thing come out of a young persons mouth.

They didn't believe in dinosaurs, because it was too convenient. They were under the impression dinosaurs were found in the 1800s in America first and only in specific countries afterwards.

This blew my mind because I love dinosaurs and know the fossils were found sooner such as in the case of Robert Plot in 1677 (he thought it was a giant human) we didn't get the word dinosaur until 1842, Sir Richard Owen named the family of fossils "Dinosauria," meaning "terrible lizard." 

The first American fossils to be found were in 1854 by Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayde.

So okay they were close about the first American discovery, but it wasn't the first found and for the whole its too convenient and only in certain places?

Well Dinosaur fossils have been found on every continent, including Antarctica but most of the dinosaur fossils have been found high in the deserts and badlands of North America, China and Argentina.

Desert environments keep fossils from being covered by plant matter, and without trees and soil, sand and rock are all that stand between an archaeologist and a 100 million year old pile of mineralized dinosaur. A good dinosaur fossil site requires an area of sedimentary rocks.

So... yeah. The other person he was speaking to asked him what he thought the bones were. Giant humans apparently 🤦 What is going on with people these days??

[kakkaryash2601]

Formula 1 and its basic information

Introduction:

Today in our new blog we will talk about the new topic which seems quite popular these days known as Formula 1. In Formula 1 we will learn more about what exactly Formula 1 is, where the Formula 1 race is done and How it works. So stay tuned with us on our journey to a deep understanding of Formula 1. We Digitally infos will uncover all the knowledge about Formula 1. So let's get started!

What is Formula 1?

Formula 1 is the highest-class international racing competition with single-seat racing cars. Also, Formula 1 is the world's most renowned motor racing competition. And there is no substitution for the F1 race.

Formula 1  includes team sports that require charging all 4 tyres on a car in under 2 seconds. In F1 race,racers are more like fighter pilots than sportspeople. Racers in Formula One face extreme G-forces and make harsh decisions in the blink of an eye when the speed of racing cars is at 370 km/h. To be the best racer, they push themselves to the very end and make use of incredibly innovative machines to their very limit.

Formula one drivers are competing for the F1 drivers championship while the other teams are fighting for the F1 constructor championship. The winner's prize money is based on the position at the end of the season.

In Formula 1, each race is also known as the Grand Prix. It is also known that the Grand Prix is held at incredible locations throughout the world. The prediction has been made that 2024 will break the Grand Prix record of 24 races that is set to take place this season.

How many drivers and teams have taken part in the F1 race?

With a total number of participants of 20 drivers and 10 teams, they all have taken part in the F1 race. 

As in this season, the driver has to experience competition from all-world champions in the F1 race including Lawis Hamilton, Max Verstappen and Fernando Alonso. And the racers who were in the second season such as Oscar Piastri and Logan Sargeant.

But when it comes to the team, there were few teams such as Ferrari that were in the F1 race since the early year (they had been continuously competing since the very first season in 1950). Also, newcomers like McLaren or Haas who have entered the sport since 2016.

Location of F1 race:

The location includes 21 countries across 5 continents in 2024 schedule. It includes classic tracks such as Silverstone, Spa-Francorchamps and Suzuka. Also, it includes the addition to the schedule such as Las Vegas, Maimi and Qartar.

It is seen that China has returned to the Formula 1 calendar for the first time since 2019 and will soon host the first F1 sprint in 2024.

This season they will be featuring seven rounds that will be spread out from May to September. Also, it will be staged in Europe except for the Indianapolis 500 in the United States where most F1 drivers sat out.

In the following decades, F1 developed has arrived at European events with amazing adventure. Also, adventure is now brought to South America, North America, Africa, Australia, and most recently to Middle East as well. Now, this is truly putting the world into World championship.

In the very first campaign, the F1 calendar will feature Monaco, Monza, Silverstone, and Spa. For F1 safety arrangements have been made since then with new modifications.

Working of F1 weekend:

Normally, Formula 1 weekend events usually take place in 3 days that are Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

On Friday, Formula 1 features free practice sessions (FP1 and FP2) for two 60-minute sessions. It is used to check whether racing cars are working properly, and if the car is not working properly, the changes can be done before the main race. So does the preparation will continue.

Onto Saturday, after the end of the final practice session (FP3), the drivers will be heading toward qualifying sessions. In qualifying sessions, the slowest five drivers with 18 minutes in the Q1 segment get eliminated. In the Q2 segment, five more will get eliminated in 15 minutes. Then the position will be set on the grid prior to that is 20-11 as per penalty. The final 12 minutes in the Q3 segment will decide the top 10 grid slots along with the fastest driver position.

The final race itself will be done on Sunday, where drivers will battle for scoring points. Also, drivers have to grab the spot on the podium where they have to take the chequered flag first to win.

Conclusion:

At the end of this session, we learned so much about Formula one including what is Formula 1, how many drivers have taken part in Formula 1, and how it works. So in the next session, we will go more deep into Formula 1 and provide you the information you require. So stay tuned with us on our next session.

[betty-bourgeoisie]

The basics are colonialism. Zionists in Europe decided they wanted to do colonisation like the western Europeans but specifically for Jewish Europeans who were zionists. Keep in mind, there were and are many Jews who reject zionism. So, the Jewish zionists talked to the Europeans with colonies and floated the idea, and Brits took it up and offered them their colonies in Africa, but the zionists decided on Palestine, when the Brits took it over from the ottoman empire. They drew up plans, made connections, had zionist chapters in each continent, and mostly in the US and Europe, with the aim of making a country in Palestine. The Brits were willing to give a small part of Palestine because they wanted to control Palestine, especially Jerusalem. This didn't go down well with the zionists. They started fighting the Brits for independence. The Palestinians had already been fighting for independence even under the ottoman empire. To mess up the Palestinians and zionists fighting them, the Brits lied to both about giving them the territory. The zionists called the Brits bluff, and they teamed up to take Palestine from Palestinians. The US entered the mix officially, and then there was a huge migration of Jewish Europeans into Palestine. All this contributed to the zionists becoming dominant in Palestine and having the upper hand, especially in international recognition. The UN, then only made up of mostly European countries and the US, officially created Israel and gave them their support. The entire operation was to ensure Europe and North America have somewhere to take their Jewish populations, at first. Somewhere along the way, a brand of American Christianity decided to make it about the second coming of Jesus. Regardless of that, the whole situation comes down to a bunch of Europeans decided to colonize Palestine.

I'm gonna start by saying I appreciate you writing this all out anon. I know it takes time and energy on your part and I am genuinely grateful that you were willing to educate me on this issue.

But honestly, the more geopolitical aspects of the Israeli-Palestine conflict are not really what I'm confused about. Like I said, I've taken time to try and educate myself on this issue and the facts surrounding things like military conflict, water rights, encroachments on Palestinian land, etc, are all fairly standardized and I have been able to find *mostly* unbiased and accurate sources on them.

The part where I always get lost is the religious aspects of the conflict. While my understanding is that theological differences are not at the root of the conflict between Israel and Palestine itself, theology does play a significant role in how the conflict is discussed within the U.S. political theater. As a U.S.-American I feel like it's important for me to understand the background and religious implications of how people within my country are talking about this issue so that I can do things like, you know, be an informed voter.

This comes back to my original post because like I said, I am not from an Abrahamic religion. I already have a fundamentally difficult time wrapping my head around things like monotheism or even basing your religious beliefs and practices on scripture because I was raised in a very devout Pagan animist household and that is simply not how we do things.

So as you might imagine, understanding the (usually fundamentalist Christian) religious rhetoric that regularly shows up in U.S. political discussions is hard for me in the simplest of situations. For something like the Israeli-Palestine conflict, which has never once been simple, it becomes downright impossible to decipher. And when I try to ask questions about it I always get a response like this one. Answers that recite the aspects of the geopolitical conflict that I already know, while completely brushing over the religious issues that I'm actually asking about with the assumption that I understand what is being said.

"Somewhere along the way, a brand of American Christianity decided to make it about the second coming of Jesus. Regardless of that-" do you see how this response is difficult for me? I don't understand how they could make it about the second coming of Jesus! Where does that come from? How does that even begin to relate? The responses I get to these questions are always so vague that they don't even give me keywords that I can easily google to help find an answer!

My admittedly muddled understanding is that the tying of the Israeli-Palestine conflict to the rapture is rooted in anti-semitism, and I would like to be active in pushing back against that, but that's kind of hard to do when you don't even understand what's happening!

I want to be clear that I am not frustrated with you in particular anon. As I said, I do genuinely appreciate you trying to take the time to educate me. But this is a persistent problem that I come across when trying to understand the Israeli-Palestine conflict from an American political perspective and it gets very frustrating.

Side Note: For any of my followers that have read this far, I just want to say, like, please do not take the majority of your information on the Israeli-Palestine conflict from Tumblr posts. I appreciate you reading all this, but if you're interested in getting a basic understanding of the geopolitical aspects of this conflict I recommend watching the Crash Course World History episode on it or something.

[gretasworld]

Alucard suspects about Greta's roots - "It must be nice to belong from somewhere, you could trace yourself back to Carthage. "

Greta answers - " My family DOESNOT belong from anywhere. We are all from here. I have lived here my whole life. "She confirms her home NOT to be Carthage but somewhere else her ancestors came from.

These are their dialogues in S4. NFCV. Watch S4 and hear for yourselves,fully.

Reason for this post is, we were asked in a DM if Greta is Carthaginian or Roma. Someone also called us racist for saying Greta is not black. Wtf ? Get out of here.

If you calculate history, the story of the show,time line, Greta's home, her appearance and location of village, the more sensible answer comes Szekely or Roma. No racism from us here.

Alucard's speculation " you could trace yourself back to Carthage " is NOT correct because Greta herself says ' no ' by correcting him in the show. Simple. Wikia Fandom DOESNOT explain things properly and so fans remain confused over this bit of information.

Let's talk of Carthage now. Historically speaking, Carthage was a colony of ancient Rome at one point. Rome is not Romania BTW. It could be possible that in the past the colonised people of Carthage traveled as far as Transylvania although records say otherwise.

Carthage is in North Africa. It has huge history. Ancient Carthaginians/Phoenicians are today's Tunisians, people's Republic of Tunisia. 🇹🇳 Their ancestors traveled to Spain. These people used snails of a sort to produce the color purple. Speaking of what Ancient Carthaginians looked like? Well, take a look at Tunisians in the picture below. A lot of them are and were a Semitic people. ( Arabs, Mediterranean or Hebrew looking ) They were neither Afro black nor European white. They are closer to Lebanese and Syrians. Its even better to say Carthage genes were diverse from ancient times, some dark skinned, some olive, some very fair. There were whites and afro blacks in the region too. It's best to say it held different types of people being such an important place in the ancient world.

You want to know about Carthage and north Africa ? Talk to a Tunisian who is a modern day Carthaginian. Not every African country in the diverse African continent is afro black unlike how Afrocentrism (stupid recent political movement started in U.S having nothing to do with Africa) likes to portray by erasing every other culture and people's contributions. Tunisians complain that the Afrocentrists are trying to claim carthage as fully black civilization and rob the Tunis off their tradition and heritage. Similarly, in Egypt, the afrocentrist criminals are trying to create false proof to claim all things ancient Egypt to be black and trying to snatch Egypt heritage from Egypt's own people. This is crime. The crime is growing rapidly.

A big example is Fuckflix Cleopatra. She was no where Afro black, every proof left behind says she was Macedonean of ptolemys and more accurately, an inbred 🙄.

Who gave Fuckflix, a corrupt corporation, and Jada, a lunatic, the right to rewrite history and manipulate other country's culture and heritage, disrespect other country's people ? The show calls itself a documentary trying to blackwash the whole world with lies ! How dare they disrespect age old civilizations that has existed thousands of years before birth of America ? Fuckflix is such a panderer to Afrocentrism crime. Wtf man, history is history.😒

We have said it before and we will say it again.

Fuckflix is a danger. It is a virus and insult to everyone. Netflix produces its own shows with certain purposes which is to mislead and lie, create false information as proof and fabricate facts on both fiction and non fiction. It is not entertainment or education. People should boycott watching it.

Present day Carthaginians/ Tunisians. Descendants of a type of ancient people called the Berbers/Phoenicians.

[blogadrianaleite-blog]

ABERTURAS INESQUECÍVEIS DE NOVELAS

Que a Globo é copiada mundialmente, isso não é segredo nenhum. Poucos foram os casos de plágio em que ela realmente se encrespou, como as inúmeras cópias do Você Decide que pipocaram pela Europa, sem o consentimento da Vênus Platinada.

Mas como aqui eu falo de aberturas de novelas, esse ícone brasileiro que há mais de 50 anos domina os lares do brasil, avisando, chamando os telespectadores de que a novela está começando e deixando na mente do povo, uma espécie de carimbo identitário da novela. Descobri recentemente que uma das mais belas aberturas de novelas foi descaradamente plagiada por uma grande rival da Globo : Televisa do México.

No mercado internacional de novelas, apesar dos recordes da Globo com um ou outro título, ela domina a Europa, principalmente o leste europeu e parte da Ásia, no maior mercado mundial consumidor de teledramaturgia, a América Latina e até as TVs latinas norteamericanas, quem domina é a Televisa.

Foram poucas as novelas brasileiras que obtiveram sucesso no mercado latino americano. Será isso uma das provas cabais de que o brasileiro não é um latino? Que somos uma ilha isolada em um continente que fala espanhol?

Pena que na história brasileira, nossos políticos e elite econômica, sempre fizeram grandes esforços para manter no país a pecha de "república das bananas".

UNFORGETTABLE NOVEL OPENINGS

That Globo is copied worldwide is no secret. There were few cases of plagiarism in which she really got upset, like the countless copies of Você Decide that popped up in Europe, without the consent of Vênus Platinada.

But since I'm talking about telenovela openings here, this Brazilian icon that for over 50 years has dominated homes in Brazil, warning, calling viewers that the telenovela is starting and leaving in the minds of the people, a kind of identity stamp of the telenovela . I recently found out that one of the most beautiful openings of soap operas was blatantly plagiarized by a great rival of Globo: Televisa from Mexico.

In the international telenovela market, despite Globo's records with one title or another, it dominates Europe, mainly Eastern Europe and part of Asia, in the world's largest consumer market for teledramaturgy, Latin America and even North American Latin TVs, which dominates is Televisa.

There were few Brazilian soap operas that were successful in the Latin American market. Is this one of the clear proofs that Brazilians are not Latinos? That we are an isolated island on a Spanish-speaking continent?

It is a pity that in Brazilian history, our politicians and economic elite have always made great efforts to maintain the label of the "banana republic" in the country.

BRILHANTE E SUA ABERTURA Com música composta por Tom Jobim especialmente pra novela. Ele, como o Brasil inteiro, ficou puto com o horroroso cabelo de Vera Fisher na novela, pois a música era inspirada nas madeixas loiras da atriz.

A CÓPIA DA TEVEVISA

Como a abertura é belíssima, difícil errar, né?

A primeira e única vez que conseguiram fazer da Vera Fisher, uma mulher feia.

[tottwriter]

You know, it’s always great to shit on other countries for stuff we don’t understand! I’m so glad that this literally never has any drawbacks and doesn’t contribute to negative stereotyping!

So. The thing people have to understand. America big. UK small.

This doesn’t sound like a major revelation, but in the context of nature/wildlife, it makes a huge difference. In North America, the population density is just so low that, until the industrial era, there really wasn’t any feasible way for human activity alone to impact these species in the same way. Any time humans wanted an area to be free of predators, they just...went somewhere else.

But where do you go when you’re on an island where the sea is literally never more than 72 miles away. And for the most part, it’s considerably less than that. In every direction, there is a coast with a town/village, or a major river where people want to settle. And over thousands of years, as these settlements formed, and people decided they didn’t want to get picked off by apex predators, those animals were pushed back, and back, and back.

There is evidence of Lynx living in the far north of the UK until as recently as about 1,500 years ago, but further south they had already lost their habitat to farmers. We’re talking BC/BCE here. Again, this wasn’t aristocrats, it was farmers. Trying to farm.

Our forests were cleared over centuries, as people laid out fields for crops, and raised livestock to graze on patches of grass. A lot more went during the tudor period, in the name of building ships, because the Tudors, weirdly enough, weren’t really focused on environmental protection, and like..these forests are huge, man! Who runs out of trees??

We lost bears around a thousand years ago, and wolves in the 1760s due to people, again, not wanting to get eaten while they were travelling. And seeing as they were our only large predators...that’s...pretty much how it happened. The varieties of sheep and cows that exist here have evolved to suit our landscape over time, and in areas where deer population get out of control, there are annual culls to stop them destroying all the woodland.

But, while there are absolutely ongoing efforts to reintroduce lost species to the UK, such as beavers and bison, birds of prey, and even boar,  large carnivores are a harder ask. There just isn’t a lot of space here that is suitable. Everywhere you look, there’s another village.

Does the UK have a history of aristocratic dickheads fucking things up for everyone? Well yeah, that’s pretty much what we’re known for. But is the UK a nation of nature-hating psychopaths who go around burning everything to the ground just for fun? No. Not at all. 

While the percentage of the UK which is designated a “National Nature Reserve” is absolutely tiny, it’s important to remember that most of our wild spaces aren’t designated that way. We have privately owned gardens that open to the public, and charitable organisations which protect and maintain large areas of wildlife. (Large by UK standards, at least. But remember, the UK is less than 100sq miles in TOTAL.)

No one is denying that the UK has been wholly shaped by human activity, and at this point, has lost every bit of “pristine” nature, along with many large animals. But this is less due to wanton destruction in the name of sport, and more about population pressures in a small, contained space. Island living is never going to work the same as it does on a vast continent, and efforts to bring back biodiversity have to adapt along those lines.

Likewise, the existence or absence of large, dangerous predators have to be understood along those lines as well. Humans aside, we just... have smaller predators these days. Foxes, badgers, weasels and stoats, even wild cats (In Scotland, and highly endangered, but they are native to the UK). We still have a lot of wildlife. It’s just, deer aside, most of it can easily hide when you walk by.

Actually your society is the freaks for shooting everything that moves and burning half your "nature reserves" every year so that upperclass dandies can eat leaded pheasant. North Americans are the well adjusted ones here, your country has become a desolate suburban lawn in island form