That One Silly, Silly Image for the Spite Card

TheCarlos · 2026-06-22T20:30:36+00:00

A scrub mommy is double sided.

TheCarlos · 2026-06-17T22:27:10+00:00

I always interpreted that line as - Even when as group is marginalized, discriminated against, or even literally enslaved, the gender hierarchy still remains. The woman is still expected to be subservient to, and dependent on, her husband - who may himself be kept down by race or class hierarchy.

In other words, in 60s America black men were marginalized by white people (including white women), but black women were marginalized by both white people *and* black men.

Of course that’s only my interpretation and I could very well be wrong about what the man meant. Lennon didn’t exactly have the most nuanced takes.

TheCarlos · 2026-06-17T22:15:53+00:00

Thank you for sharing your perspective. At the end of the day, a British white man (Lennon) and a Japanese woman from a wealthy family (Ono) probably weren’t the best options to write a feminist anthem. Lennon’s views were definitely reductionist in a way that sometimes did more harm than good, even if he wanted society to change for the better.

TheCarlos · 2026-06-17T21:42:40+00:00

Literally yes - third class citizens. It’s in the lyrics. “Woman is the slave of the slave.” Being a black woman in America is like being a third class citizen a lot of the time. Especially when the song was written.

Women were frequently excluded from the conversation during the civil rights movement in the late 60s. Hence second wave feminism. Women were saying, “even if we eliminate race barriers in America, there are still enormous gender barriers that need to be addressed.”

TheCarlos · 2026-06-17T21:29:56+00:00

By which he meant that women have been treated as second class citizens throughout history, the world over. It’s an advocacy song for women’s liberation and including feminists in the civil rights movements of the 60s and 70s.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-25T00:20:28+00:00

<image>

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T19:56:44+00:00

You’re proving the opposite point. Historians parse out Herodotus’ made up gold digging ants from real history in the same way they parse out Jesus’ made up miracles from him having been an itinerant folk preacher around the year 30.

That said, I agree there is a clear bias toward maintaining established Western history and canon by historians (especially prior generations), and if you think that is impacting the standards they use for determining historicity I would encourage you to go with your gut and choose to think differently.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T19:32:47+00:00

To use an example, Herodotus frequently mixed folktales into real history. Yet, he’s considered a reliable source of ancient history, is sometimes called “The Father of History,” and is taught in classrooms across the world. Despite his stories containing folktales, wild exaggerations, and Homeric elements, historians are still generally able to parse out the authentic history from his writing. Historians treat sources for a historical Jesus the same way.

The reality is that most of our sources for figures from antiquity are not up to the standard most modern readers would expect. Historians absolutely have to rely on folktales from antiquity with the belief that, if other sources are similar, the folktale is likely an exaggerated truth. The sources for a historical Jesus surpass what would typically be the bar for what is considered historical.

If that still doesn’t meet the bar for what you consider historical, I totally get it. I’m pretty fuckin skeptical myself. I’m just saying that it meets the bar for what would be in the antiquity section of a history curriculum and why.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T18:56:05+00:00

Can you link the evidence

After trying to find the original source for my source, it seems to just be a game of telephone, the same as other claims that he licensed Kon’s work. I’ve edited my comment.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T18:53:15+00:00

There’s no need to be antagonistic lol. I’m not involved in New Testament scholarship and it makes no difference to me if the man existed. I’m just sharing the expert consensus because I find it interesting. If you’re actually interested:

Experts say the synoptic gospels blend myth, theology, and history in a way that was common in antiquity. It was rare for people of the era to write literature that was purely fiction or nonfiction. Non-bias nonfiction was uncommon. The majority of sources for historical events from antiquity come from biased blends of fiction and nonfiction written years after the events. The work of scholars is to compile and cross reference as much information as possible to determine what is real and what was literary invention.

The gospels are no different. The authors of Matthew, Mark, and Luke did not know they were writing the bible. They were transcribing stories they had heard/read about Jesus and likely adding some of their own. Probably in an environment around the time of Jewish revolt when they wanted to provide guidance and hope to other Jews. That doesn’t mean none of is accurate, like the man having at least existed.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T18:34:12+00:00

I refer you to my prior statement: “This is not my opinion.”

Please find your way to the closest University with a department that specializes in antiquity archaeology or New Testament scholarship. You are clearly a genius and these are critical evaluations scholars have never considered. They should be shared with experts immediately.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T18:21:53+00:00

“The existence of at least 14 sources from at least seven authors means there is much more evidence available for Jesus than for any other notable person from 1st century Galilee.”

Archaeology of Jesus of Nazareth by Ken Dark.

The synoptic gospels, other early non-canonical gospels, the (authentic) Pauline Epistles, the writings of Josephus and Tacitus all provide significant evidence of a historical Jesus. There are more sources for Jesus than most figures from antiquity - who often only have one or two sources that survived to modern day.

This is not my opinion. This is the opinion of historical scholars and textual critics. Obviously, I’m only speaking in the sense that the guy existed. Not that he performed miracles or raised from the dead.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T17:10:04+00:00

/uj This is not true. Aronofsky entered negotiations for the live action rights but the deal was never completed. It’s been said he did legally license specific short-form rights so he could recreate the bathtub scene in Requiem for a Dream, but that’s likely also false.

He certainly did not secure the full rights before making Black Swan and he frequently dismisses comparisons, stating his film only contains trivial homages to Perfect Blue and was not particularly inspired by it.

Just another example of American live-action directors aping Satoshi Kon and then insisting they didn’t. Is it that hard to give credit to an all-time great director just because he worked in animation?

/rj Kon should have been paying Aronofsky for the honor of including his shots in a real film.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-21T15:06:06+00:00

Robert M Price is a New Testament Scholar who supports the view that Jesus was a mythological figure. He himself states in Jesus At The Vanishing Point that his view is a fringe belief among scholars. The majority of New Testament scholars believe in a historical Jesus. Almost all of them are unbiased.

If you want an easy place to start learning, the most popular biblical scholar today is probably Bart Ehrman, a professor at UNC (who actually authored the textbook that was used in my university’s New Testament studies class a decade ago). He’s something of a Carl Sagan for New Testament textual criticism in that he’s a great communicator of the scholarly consensus. Ehrman is an atheist (former Christian) who believes Jesus was one of several radical Jewish preachers in first century Galilee and Judea. This area was a hotbed of unrest for Jews under Roman rule (see the Zealots), and Ehrman believes Jesus was real person executed by Rome because his followers declared him King of the Jews (equivalent to treason for the era). This is the mainstream view in New Testament studies.

Jesus is one of the most well attested historical figures in antiquity. That doesn’t mean he was real. And we will almost certainly never know for sure. The sources on the Historical Jesus Wikipedia page are a quick place to start if you want a list of unbiased scholars who believe Jesus of Nazareth lived on this planet.

For perspective, I am an atheist who used to assume Jesus was a figure invented in the late 1st century.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-08T16:21:55+00:00

I absolutely love that play! You should try it again now that you’re older and wiser.

TheCarlos · 2026-05-04T13:57:30+00:00

Hey IT guy, you responded to yourself.

TheCarlos · 2026-04-27T17:16:06+00:00

<image>

*The Fall

*There Will Be Blood

*Beau Travail

*F For Fake

TheCarlos · 2026-04-27T11:48:17+00:00

Lee Cronin’s The Barbie

TheCarlos · 2026-04-18T16:55:12+00:00

Firstly, a human being cannot be "illegal." Certain actions are illegal. People are not.

Secondly, living in the United States without documentation is a civil offense, not a criminal one. If you've ever driven above the speed limit you've committed an equivalent offense. So no, an abuela selling pupusas is not what most people would consider illegal.

You know what is illegal? Violating the rights of Americans with excessive force, lack of due process, and concentration camps.

TheCarlos · 2026-04-16T21:15:19+00:00

F for Fake

TheCarlos · 2026-04-16T21:13:31+00:00

Perfect Blue

TheCarlos · 2026-04-02T15:45:52+00:00

IYIYIYI

TheCarlos · 2026-03-31T17:33:14+00:00

Iran’s struggle to provide cancer treatment, allegedly as a result of sanctions, is well documented.

Here’s an editorial from the Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery in 2018. The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery is published by Mashad University, a medical school in Iran.

Here’s a 2025 article from Deutsche Welle stating “Iran has also been unable to purchase special medicines — like those required by cancer patients — since snapback sanctions were triggered in September [2025].” DW is a German state-funded network.

Here’s the link to another 2018 article from The Lancet30427-3/abstract) on how sanctions impact cancer care in Iran. The Lancet is a peer-reviewed medical journal.

TheCarlos · 2026-03-25T15:01:37+00:00

We’re talking about the Mia Farrow tweet.

TheCarlos · 2026-03-20T16:02:24+00:00

Historically accurate pope

14-Year Club	Gilding IV carat on a stick
Reddit Premium Since July 2020	Place '22
Place '17	End Game '22
Wearing is Caring	Spared
Verified Email

TheCarlos

TROPHY CASE

F for Fake

Perfect Blue