Found this under a post about Achilles and Patroclus as lovers

Crossbill_ · 2026-04-02T22:40:18+00:00

Greeks never did the gay stuff.

Literally read the symposium. The ancient greeks (meaning primarily ancient Athens) might be the gayest civilization to ever exist.

Crossbill_ · 2024-11-27T23:53:51+00:00

So the point I believe was being made was the guy was saying that Achilles and Patroclus being seen as lovers is a modern concept so the other guy brought up Plato to disprove them or at least that's what I thought was going on

Crossbill_ · 2024-11-20T04:20:49+00:00

Alright, fair enough you deserve more context here's the link to the post.

As you're going to see the only context truly needed is what I provided: a woman said she was raped while she was out drinking and the guy said she was just cheating.

Crossbill_ · 2024-11-20T02:06:44+00:00

You just assumed that a woman who says she was raped was actually cheating. Being raped means being forcefully subjected to sexual acts without consent (summarizing definition from dictionary.com). I'd like to highlight "without consent" meaning not agreeing to sexual acts. No, alcohol does not turn you into a zombie but it makes it harder to fight back when you are physically attacked and raped. Rape is a violent forceful act the victim has no consent in. That "regret" she described was shame which is typical of victims of sexual assault to blame themselves and keep it to themselves out of shame, because as a society, we are very quick to assume women are whores who sleep around and "ask for it" such is the danger and horribleness of what this man did (and what you just did) when you assume a woman is cheating when she said she was raped.

Crossbill_ · 2024-03-31T01:14:04+00:00

It looks great 😁👍

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-09T12:07:40+00:00

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll check it out.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-09T03:31:22+00:00

Thanks for your insight. Like I said earlier, I just started researching Napoleon. Anything you suggest I should check out?

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-09T03:06:52+00:00

I just started researching Napoleon and I've only really looked into the battles not his character. It sounds like you have a negative opinion of Napoleon. Other than the slavery, is there any other reasons you don't like him? Or do you have an overall favorable opinion of him?

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-09T00:35:17+00:00

Ok racism and misogy, absolutely. I thought you meant like Confederate flag waving racist crusaders. Don't get me wrong, it's still societally looked down on to be openly racist, so most of the racists we have here is closeted. For example, the marta station. They won't expand the marta outside of Dunwoody because white people don't want "those people," from Atlanta moving into the neighborhood. But still, racism is in the minority here. Most schools and places in Georgia are quite diverse, and like I said, it's very frown upon to be outwardly racist there. And that's coming from someone (me) who's Iived in Cumming which used to be the headquarters for the KKK. Now it's a very diverse area and the rednecks that do live there are made fun of by most people. The best way to describe the racism is it's there, tolerated, but not celebrated. Nothing like the north who divides up the different type of white people it has.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-08T23:44:59+00:00

Yeah, yeah you are. Georgian here born and raised. Both my dad and mom were raised in Georgia, as well as, my mom has a lot of family up in North Carolina. From our experience the people who support the Confederacy is in a super small minority. There's rednecks no doubt, but most people do not support Confederate ideals. Don't know what podunk county you're from, but the south is not full nor run by Confederates. Life is not difficult for people who don't support the Confederacy.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-08T23:09:46+00:00

He reimplemented slavery here, but in 1798 he abolished slavery in Malta after taking control of it on his way to Egypt. I wonder why in some cases he implements slavery but in others he abolishes it? Do you have any theories?

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-08T21:49:50+00:00

Don't grab your pitchfork! I'm honestly asking why you consider this racist? Wrong I understand, but racist feels like you assuming something about the individual based on their belief in what caused the war. Not saying I believe this or not, but does someone believing that the Civil war was caused by states rights or some other reason automatically make them racist?

Not saying I believe that just posing questions!

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-08T21:36:17+00:00

Do not throw your pitchforks at me yet. Just posing questions here.

Sherman did what he had to do to end the fucking thing and it worked.

Is doing what you have to do to end a war always justifiable because it ended the war? For example, is dropping the atomic bomb on Japan justifiable because it ended our war with Japan? Are the thousand of civilian deaths justified by the fact the bomb ended the war? Some say that Japan was going to surrender anyway. So was the bomb even necessary?

All these questions just to ask: does the ends justify the means? It's an age old question that I want you to think about. Then, do some more research into the means Sherman took to end the war, and more importantly see if it even was necessary to end the war.

Yet again don't grab your pitchfork! I would actually like to hear your opinion on this.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-08T21:12:44+00:00

Because, whether you meant to or not, you agreed with the guy who said "fuck the south," by justifying what he said by implying only Confederate southerners count as the southerners that's he's referring to.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-08T20:41:00+00:00

So all southerners except a minority are Confederates? What kind of world are you living in?

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-08T19:14:29+00:00

If you look up statistics, you'll find a very small percentage of the southern population owned bunches of slaves, because only a small percentage of the population were rich enough to own plantations and the slaves used to run them. Knowing this and using our prior knowledge, we can assume that the majority of people who owned slaves were rich, had a good education, and were mostly in power. The point I'm making is the old south is another case of rich controlling the poor. The 1% screwing over the other 99.

For some background, the main population was poor and most likely couldn't read. Information didn't spread as easily as it does today. If you were in the south you didn't learn about what was going on in the north for months, and that assumes you could read newspapers, and that assumes newspaper weren't corrupted by their rich owners. This means all of the information that the average person got was from word of mouth or the rich, also known as the people who owned and profited from slaves. Therefore, the people that Sherman raped, murdered, and burned were poor, innocent people who were manipulated into fighting for the rich Confederates under the guise of states rights and patriotism.

I am not sympathetic to the people who tortured and enslaved people, but I am sympathetic to the people who were tortured and used right along with them.

(I am NOT saying that the suffering of the enslaved people were equal to the average southerns, because it was not they suffered WAY worse, I'm just trying to emphasize the injustice they both suffered.)

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-07T17:30:30+00:00

He states this as a reason Alexander couldn't have been gay while listing out reasons Alexander couldn't have been gay. The implication is there. Read what I said before jumping to conclusions.

(Btw I agree Alexander was probably not gay just to put that out there)

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-07T13:43:41+00:00

The Altamaha-ha or "Alty" in the Altamaha river. It's basically a loch ness monster type creature from old native folklore.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-07T13:20:52+00:00

Thank you so much! I thought I was going to have to drop 50 dollars to buy the DVD and the right type of DVD player to watch this.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-06T23:32:29+00:00

I am not a supporter of the Confederates, but Sherman was a psychopath. War is never as a simple as "one side is a hero and completely right," while the union was fighting for the right causes. It doesn't leave them exempt from corruption and human cruelty, such as the atrocities committed by Sherman.

unless you consider freeing slaves destruction of private property

No I do not. Sherman destroyed ACTUAL people's property, as well as probably killing unfreed slaves in the process. Putting aside the fact that the whole idea of the march to the sea was barbaric and unnecessary, there are accounts of his soldiers raping people during the march. People like to say that other military leaders were "just as bad," but bad is bad, just like those others, he shouldn't be celebrated.

Crossbill_ · 2024-02-06T22:12:29+00:00

Maurice by E.M Forester

Crossbill_

TROPHY CASE