Christian dating standard

How do I (31F) explain to my bf (29M) I feel like I'm settling?

2020.10.27 07:43 throwaway890065463 How do I (31F) explain to my bf (29M) I feel like I'm settling?

Never thought I’d be asking complete strangers for help, but I’m just drunk and unhappy enough to do it.
I think it’s probably best to start at the beginning. I grew up in a very religious Christian household. Imagine uncomfortable wooden pews for breakfast on Sunday, the Ten Commandments for brunch, and a potluck following the service for lunch. We’d be back for more in the evening during second service. Mom and dad were (and are) very strict. They grew up in the same environment, and challenging their viewpoints was difficult at best. We didn’t have much, growing up on the south side of [a major US city], but they believed in sending me and my sister to Christian schools, at their expense, for grade school and high school instead of public school – their choice, which I don’t necessarily regret, but I was pretty sheltered. I guess I still am.
I broke out of the mold after high school. I decided to go to a major public university and chase my dreams. I was one of two in my graduating class to go to a public university – the rest went to one of four Christian colleges. While at said major public university, I became involved in a “sorority” of sorts, which became my major. My studies were secondary. We had a male equivalent, a “fraternity” that spent a lot of time along side of us. This was all very new for me, as you can probably imagine, and small town girl met a big time man. We’ll call him James.
James was one of those men that Heart and Janet Jackson sang about. I can’t begin to describe him, other than he had “that way,” and for whatever reason, James liked me.
At first, I didn’t want anything to do with James. He represented the very things I’d been taught against my whole life. Yet, he intrigued me. He represented everything I didn’t know about, but wanted to explore. He pursued me hard, to the point where my “sisters” said “you’d better get after that.” Not wanting to disappoint, and in the boldest move I’ve ever made in my life, I did just that.
But I never could quit it. I couldn’t. He was like a magnet, always drawing me back in. I tried to break things off, knowing full well he was “bad” for me, but never could. He always found a way back in. We dated for two years.
Sex was always taboo in my little world growing up. I was never told why, other than the Bible said “don’t do it before you’re married, or else.” That leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion, especially for something that felt so amazing.
He claimed I was his first. At the time I of course believed him, but looking back now I know that wasn’t true. I was simply naïve, and that’s fine. I accept that. As time went on, we enjoyed each other’s company, and at one point he even told me he loved me. I never reciprocated, but I knew in my heart I did.
Over the course of our two year “relationship,” he gave me several meaningful gifts that I took with me everywhere I went after graduation. I was a few years older, and when I graduated I had the opportunity to pursue my career and travel the world. With a bright future ahead of me, I broke up with him and left him behind. I told myself it was the right thing to do and that it didn’t mean anything. I packed my proverbial “stuff” and left.
Fast forward 8 years later. I was 29 years old and moved literally twice every year since I began my career, chasing success all over the globe. I had dated many men, and slept with many more. None of them ever phased me, and I never loved any of them. I was absolutely terrible to them, and I regret it deeply, but James always stuck. We didn’t contact each other in those 8 years, but I took every gift he gave with me and always had them displayed in the places I lived. He was as much a part of my life after our relationship as he was when we were together, but I never admitted it.
By society’s standards, I was successful. Big house, fancy car, corner office with a view, and a good paying job – I’d broken the glass ceiling, but I was lonely. All that success didn’t mean a thing because I didn’t have anyone to share it with, and I was never in one place long enough to build relationships meaningful enough to share those things with. In 6 to 8 months, I’d be long gone.
It was in that year that I met up with an old colleague from the “sorority.” We talked about the good old times. She had settled down and married one of the “brothers” and was living her best life. For the first time in 8 years I reminisced about James, and in my drunken state I told her I’d always hoped he would somehow find his way back to me.
My sister told me I needed to see him, for my sake, and offered to pay for the flight out to [another state far away] to see him. Unbeknownst to me, James and she had become close after I left, and they stayed in contact. I of course knew none of this, but agreed to take her up on the offer.
So I saw him. Met him at his apartment, shared a meal, laughed like old times, and we cried together on his couch. We were both different people now. He had moved on long ago, and frankly never saw me as someone he intended to be with for the rest of his life. I was actually the only girl that ever broke up with him, and I never believed he’d make it following his dreams even though he always supported mine. He shared with me that I was “his girl” for that specific point in time, but not for the rest of time. In my small town mind, I could never comprehend that. Where I came from it was ride-or-die before it was cool. It was one of the hardest conversations I’ve ever had in my life. I got on the plane that Sunday feeling elated, but I fell back down from cloud 9 pretty quickly.
Yesterday was two years ago since I got back on that plane for small town, USA. I’ve now settled down back home, and am in a relationship with a good man, we’ll call him “Dan,” who loves me dearly and we have a good life, but I don’t feel that same spark. I don’t love Dan like I loved James, and I feel like I’m settling. I’m not unhappy, but I don’t feel like I did with James.
Dan is everything my parents and my upbringing told me I wanted in a significant other – a good Christian man who will make a good husband and father, but I feel like I’m settling. Something is still missing, and not a day goes by that I don’t think about James, or wish that when I come home at night he’s somehow sitting in my living room, waiting to surprise me, instead of Dan.
I feel guilty. Dan doesn’t deserve this, but he’s happy with what I’m offering him so far. I know it isn’t right, but how on earth do I explain to him I’m still hung up on a man that I left long ago and is never coming back? How do you tell someone you care about (because I legitimately do care for Dan) that you feel like you’re settling and you aren’t happy?
Is there a way out of this mess? James isn’t coming back and I can’t go to James. Can I learn to be content with Dan? Can I learn to love him like I loved James? Will I ever forget James and stop comparing every relationship, especially the one I have with Dan, to James? Why is James the standard in the first place?
I decided about two weeks ago to see a counselor, who has helped me, but of course it’s a slow and expensive process. I’m just trying to rip the band-aid off and move forward. Thanks for taking the time to read in the first place.
submitted by throwaway890065463 to relationship_advice [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 00:38 TitanicYeetLobster 25 [M4F] USA - Men literally just want one thing and its to play Kirby superstar ultra

Despicable, I know. But for real, my idea of a perfect date is sharing a pizza and playing some vidya, then maybe cuddling and watching a movie 🙂 It would be super cool to bond over some co-op games! Im mostly a PC gamer but at this point Im just looking for excuses to buy a switch too. Other than that Im really looking for someone who has a lot in common with me, which is a tall order given how odd I am. We dont have to be identical but its nice to have stuff in common! Im open to long distance if you're in the US.
About me:
-Non denominational Christian. So no hookups + I'm waiting untill marriage, yo.
-Into the standard nerd stuff; anime, video games, and D&D
-Music: Really into heavy metal and hard rock, anything from Metallica and Led Zeppelin to Children of Bodom and Gojira. Send me some band recommendations!
-INTJ, a bit of a homebody
-Conservative values (politically libertarian)
-5'8" and a bit slender
-Full time Engineer, aspiring firearm designer.
-Personality like a burnt marshmallow (I'm a softie on the inside once you get past the outside!)
-Dark but clean sense of humor, definitely a goof
-I don't smoke or do drugs and hardly ever drink. Drugs are a big deal breaker for me...
Its me, ya boi
So if you somehow have a lot in common with me, send a DM or chat! Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
submitted by TitanicYeetLobster to r4r [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 00:38 TitanicYeetLobster 25 [M4F] [Relationship] USA - Men literally just want one thing and its to play Kirby superstar ultra

Despicable, I know. But for real, my idea of a perfect date is sharing a pizza and playing some vidya, then maybe cuddling and watching a movie 🙂 It would be super cool to bond over some co-op games! Im mostly a PC gamer but at this point Im just looking for excuses to buy a switch too. Other than that Im really looking for someone who has a lot in common with me, which is a tall order given how odd I am. We dont have to be identical but its nice to have stuff in common! Im open to long distance if you're in the US.
About me:
-Non denominational Christian. So no hookups + I'm waiting untill marriage, yo.
-Into the standard nerd stuff; anime, video games, and D&D
-Music: Really into heavy metal and hard rock, anything from Metallica and Led Zeppelin to Children of Bodom and Gojira. Send me some band recommendations!
-INTJ, a bit of a homebody
-Conservative values (politically libertarian)
-5'8" and a bit slender
-Full time Engineer, aspiring firearm designer.
-Personality like a burnt marshmallow (I'm a softie on the inside once you get past the outside!)
-Dark but clean sense of humor, definitely a goof
-I don't smoke or do drugs and hardly ever drink. Drugs are a big deal breaker for me...
Its me, ya boi
So if you somehow have a lot in common with me, send a DM or chat! Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
submitted by TitanicYeetLobster to MeetPeople [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 18:53 ariesv123 (18F) Is the dating scene just this bad or are my standards somehow too high? TW: Rape mention

I’m 18F and recently entered the ONL dating scene in like September. Of course, I just started college and people my age aren’t really looking for relationships and along with that there’s a myriad of reasons why finding someone to share my romantic affection with (at the least) is a bit difficult.
For background, I’m a black female going to a predominantly white institution. When it comes to dating apps, the guys that tend to match with me are mostly white and asian with all kinds of different aesthetics though I don’t have a type and I just swipe if i think he’s attractive and we have something we could possibly talk about.
My rule of thumb is no one looking for hookups, no one that screams of bitterness on their profile, no blank bios, no smokers, which rules out a LOT of people. Nicotine addiction amongst people in my age group is a real and very common problem, and of course no one older than like 23. I have no “height requirement” or even a preference. I talk to a guy for at least a week or two before meeting up and it has to be an actual date, no “hanging out”. I always ask what they’re looking for before meeting up as well and make sure that we can actually hold conversation so this usually leaves only 20 year olds. So far almost every guy from ONL dating that has been interested in going on a date with me has had some sort of red flag later down the line.
The first guy I went on a date(s) with was 22, asian, and lowkey a catfish but who am I to judge. First time in a while I talked to a guy significantly bigger than me. He’s like 5’10 and pushing 200lbs. I’m 5’4 and 110lbs. We had the same ‘edgy’ sense of humor and clicked automatically over the phone. We met up and lied to me about him regularly using puff bars and having somewhat of a dependency on weed. Also somewhat of a tsundere type thing towards me but I didn’t mind it. Alright well, I was already there so let’s continue the date plus I thought I could get over the smoking thing, but I really just can’t. Anyways, he was automatically very affectionate with me which personally I didn’t mind because that’s my love language, but in hindsight that was a red flag too. We’re in a boba tea shop and he smacks my butt, finds ways to try to touch my breast and everytime I tell him he’s making me uncomfortable he “jokingly” complains that I’m being hot and cold and that women don’t know what they want. Alright. We went on like three dates and no change. Never took ANY of my no’s seriously (don’t worry, we didn’t do anything sexual) and the only time he did was when he cornered me in his room and admittedly I had to work up a heavy sob before he backed off. I’m talking mascara running and ‘not being able to catch my breath’. Lowkey hysterics. Pretty humiliating but it probably saved me from getting raped that night. I just end things there by blocking him on everything because he didn’t take me seriously otherwise.
Second guy is white latino(only other 18 year old), very nice and thoughtful but has really bad depression and anxiety. I understand those things can be hard but I recognize that I’m not equipped for that. I didn’t realize how bad it was until later. On the first date, he asks to sleep over (I don’t have a roommate and there’s a second bed because the room is a double). I let him sleep over because the date ended up running to like 11:30 at night but I didn’t sleep at all for safety reasons. In the morning he cries to me about his struggle with porn addiction and erectile dysfunction. No tears ever came out of his eyes, but to give benefit of the doubt that could just be his SSRI’s. Didn’t want to leave my side for a second, even if we both had classes. This was all after ONE DATE and he’s already being emotionally dependent on me. Eventually he does go back to his own dorm and then calls me two days later that he’s outside of my dorm building at 3am and that he missed me so he wanted to sleep over again. I ended things right then and there. Ever since he’s been posting about how he’s in pain and lonely on his tiktok along with pro-communist and anti-theist content (which is ironic because I’m pretty Christian so maybe he posts the anti-theist stuff knowing that I’ll see it? Idk, I don’t have a problem with atheism).
Third guy just recently graduated and he’s filipino, 23 years old. Planning on moving out to LA for his business startup, which is cool. I appreciate the work ethic. Healthy family connection too which is a plus for me. We actually click super well and it seemed too good to be true but then I notice that he still has lots of pictures up with him and his ex and she still has those pictures up too. I didn’t know that she was an ex at the time and I really didn’t want to find out I was getting involved with a guy that was already in a relationship. We talked about it and he explained. Okay, I believe him but i’m somewhat weary. We talk more and red flags start to slowly pop up. He talks about how him and his friends have “gone through women like clothes” but it’s different because he’s a guy and he’s older. I keep my calm composure but in my head i’m like “UM??”. He talks about his past relationship and how he wanted an open relationship and they had one but she was ‘loyal to a fault’ so she never took up the opportunity and would get texts and phone calls all the time from people about how they think her bf was cheating on her. Practically admitting to openly embarrassing your girlfriend at the time while doing something she wasn’t comfortable with and acting like it was her fault. Haha yea no, that was enough for me. I let him down gently over text and he immediately calls me to talk about it. He’s calm the whole time but he’s making faces and every few seconds he changes up what he says he’s hoping for between us and tries seeing loopholes so we can get atleast sexual, lowkey gaslighting. So a womanizer AND manipulative. Cool. Of course I ended things there.
Fourth guy, actually relatively great, 21 years old again. He’s from Japan and wrestles for our D-1 school which is interesting. We go to a restaurant and have pretty casual conversation. Nothing too deep. We talk about common interests and whatnot and it’s nice that he doesn’t think mine are weird or anything. We actually have a similar sense of style and we accidentally ended up matching, which I thought was cute. He compliments my style and he doesn’t pull out his phone at all. He offers me a sip of his drink (which is alcoholic) but I decline because i don’t know him well enough. Eventually the topic of past relationships comes up (I know, that’s like the #1 thing that’s not supposed to happen) and they literally broke up a week before. Great /s. He talks about her anxiety and how he just wants to be there for her all the time and by the sounds of it he’s still trying to get back with her by buying her gifts and texting her constantly. Awesome, so he’s wasting my time. We split the bill (which in hindsight, he might’ve taken as an insult due to cultural differences). After we eat we go on a walk because I truly want to get to know him more. Still more casual conversation about family and the languages we speak. Of course he talks more about his ex and it lowkey sounds like he’s been through a lot of emotional abuse with her, so I sort of understand. The whole time I’m wondering why this guy was even interested in going on a date with me. The date ends and I tell him to text me so I know he gets home safe. Doesn’t text me until like three hours later even though he only lives a 15 minute walk away. Every text I send, he just leaves on open and then replies like an hour later, so I take it as a sign he’s not interested at all. I asked but he left that on delivered lolol.
I won’t lie, I’m quite proud that I’m able to avoid succumbing to subtle manipulation as a young girl but emotionally I’m pretty beat. Now I fully understand why so many people hate dating. OBVIOUSLY there’s something I’m doing wrong here. Is it just a numbers thing? What advice can you give me in spotting not so obvious red flags earlier on? Maybe the age thing is also a red flag? I don’t match with guys my age because of no hookups and no smokers, maybe I should just get over my smoking dealbreaker?
TLDR; The only guys that match with me are older and show some sort of major red flag whether it be that they’re looking to sexually assault me, a womanizer, or emotionally unstable/unavailable. What am I doing wrong? I of course do the usual vetting process before meeting in person and have regular standards and deal breakers. How do I spot not so obvious red flags earlier on so I can avoid wasting time and emotional energy?
submitted by ariesv123 to dating_advice [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 14:58 UsagiVino Frustrated with situation

Hi all, new to this subreddit, this might be long but I'll try to keep it as brief as possible.

I (32F) have been with my husband (38M) since I was 18 and he was 22. We have a four year old child now. We met through mutual friends and dated for two years before getting married when I was 20. I had only a couple of sexual experiences with boyfriends at this point- I had sex numerous times, but only with like three people ever. I also knew I was openly bisexual and had dated a few girls but I had never had sex with another woman before. Our entire relationship, my husband has been supportive of my bisexuality and has never been bothered by my interest in other women. He has always said that he was ok with me having a sexual or even committed relationship with another woman, as long as it didn't take priority over my relationship with him. It was always clear that he would like to be involved but that it wasn't a requirement for him. Meaning if a girl liked just me, that was ok, but if she liked both of us, obviously that would be ideal. Maybe I have high standards or something but throughout the past decade I have never had a threesome or w/w sex despite being very interested in other women. It seemed like most girls I was strongly attracted to either were straight, already in committed relationships, or just not interested in being with someone who had a male partner at home. I've always just sort of been like, well, thems the breaks I guess. Occasionally I'll rejoin tinder or something to see if I happen to meet a girl but for the most part it just hasn't happened. And its not like I'm not cute, I get hit on all the time LOL. Anyway the point is that its always been understood that this is ok and doesn't bother my spouse. I have never felt jealous at the thought of having a threesome or even having another woman who was a "girlfriend" to both of us if that ever became a possibility with the right woman.

Cut to 2019 when I've noticed that my husband has an affinity for trans women. He watches a lot of porn with trans women, and told me that he just really finds the combination of genders and anatomy to basically be incredibly appealing. His ideal is a beautiful woman who happens to have a dick. He enjoys receiving anal sex, and I have never been open to receiving it, despite him wanting to. At first I was mildly unsure about this because I felt insecure. But he also came out that he thinks he might be polysexual, meaning he thinks he has an attraction to pretty much all genders, non-binary etc. That the only type he isn't implicitly attracted to is trans men, because he just isn't turned on by that. Now, I am bisexual but I just have a very hardwired binary attraction scale. I can't help it. I love & support trans people but trans women just (typically, I won't say never) get my motor running. So I told him that if he wanted to explore that side of himself, as long as he was safe, careful, and respectful that I was comfortable with him pursuing a trans woman or bisexual/gay man for a personal sexual relationship on his own. He travels often to neighboring states for work (I used to travel nearby for live music shows a lot) and we agreed that he would be able to pursue something if the opportunity occurred when he was away from home. Most of that rule just stems from the fact that we have very little free time or expendable income to just go out on dates with other people here at home while the other person sits at home with our kid. For example going out on a nice date night would be our whole "eating out" budget that paycheck so it seems like something that should be spent on *US* and not on one of us going out with someone else. We also don't get much personal time because of our schedules and our kid so it just seemed to make the most sense. On top of that, I think although we are both open to threesomes, we are a little weirded out by the thought of one of us just coming home fresh off getting fucked by someone else. Keeping it an out of town thing just seems the best way to handle it. He has downloaded tinder & we have both used Feel'd at this point, so far nothing has happened for him either. He has depression, anxiety and high stress levels combined with not being very outgoing (where as I am a ball of energy who will just go up and start talking to a cute girl etc). So I understand that a lot of this is set at his own pace. He's also experimenting more with his gender identity, wanting to wear skirts, gender neutral clothing, getting really into learning about make up, etc. So its been a bit of a drastic change but he just said the other night that he thinks he is happier now as a more "openly queer" person that he has ever felt before (raised in a strict conservative Christian household). I think I've been very understanding about everything although sometimes I have failed but I'm trying. He is also in therapy and on anti-depressant meds which have helped him a lot.

Ok. So, if you're still reading, here is the crux of my issue: Although we have discussed non-monogamy within strict parameters, the rules have been very set forward: For me, I am allowed to be with other women and thats it- the only male partner I could have would be a bisexual man in a threesome with both me and my spouse. Because I "have him" as "my male partner". He is allowed to have trans women and cis gay/bi men as his partners. Essentially because I don't have what they have and I want him to be able to explore his interest in those catagories. But let me emphasis here- THESE ARE *HIS* RULES. Its always been implied that neither one of us were permitted to take cis-straight-women (for him) or cis-straight-men (for me) as partners. I never set this rule down, he did. When I asked him how can he handle it if he's talking to a non-binary woman that he's attracted to who has a vagina if he would stop talking to her when he found out she is has a vagina. He basically said yes because thats "against the rules". I was skeptical because I said I feel like thats stupid. We are already saying sex with these people would not ruin or be a detriment to our private relationship. That they aren't a replacement for either of us for the other. So if its perfectly fine to have sex with a trans woman with a penis, why would having sex with a non binary person with a vagina be off limits? That doesn't make sense to me. Its still external marital sex regardless. If we are fucking other people, why does there need to be rules about what kind of genitals the other person can have?

It all boils down to this I think at the end of the day........he doesn't want ME to have sex with any other straight cis men. If we have a threesome with a bisexual man, thats something we are sharing together. But he doesn't want me to have sex with any men on my own without him. This feels incredibly frustrating for me. I just want to fuck hot people. Period. Men or women. I want to know that I can flirt with someone without having to go "Wait, are you bi? Do you think my husband is cute? ok we can flirt then." or "Do you have a vagina? Ok cool yeah we can fuck, if you had a penis we couldn't though". Now I do know that a lot of this stems from insecurity and the fact that *ELEVEN* years ago, the first year we were married, I got stationed overseas away from him for several months and I did cheat on him with a guy there. I confessed almost immediately and its been something that even *Last Year* he was still bringing up in hurt. We finally talked about it in depth about a year ago (I was depressed, scared, it was a whole mess, I was letting myself drink way too much, etc. I was 21. It was eleven freaking years ago. I have never cheated on him since then. The drama, pain, hurt of it etc would just never be worth the momentary pleasure). But I think it all stems from him feeling like he isn't "enough" for me. He wants to be the only man that I want to be with, and I think he's very much afraid that another man will be better in bed than him (our sex life is moderate). I don't think he thinks I will leave him for another guy. I think he just doesn't want me out hooking up with hot guys who are better in bed than him.

In conclusion, I feel very frustrated with the current situation. I think we should both be allowed to sleep with whomever we feel attracted to within the right settings of our perameters (for example next year if I'm out of town overnight at a show and meet someone there, or if he is out of town on a job site etc). I don't know how to explain to him that I feel like he has all the freedom he wants (because frankly, he doesn't *want* another cis straight woman partner- and the odds of us having a bisexual threesome with another woman are a lot higher than finding a bi male) he gets to have me, his wife, and any trans or queer person he may fall into attraction with. I feel like I'm the one being limited. I feel like I can't even say "Theres a cute boy at work" without him taking it the wrong way, even though he can go on about how hot a woman is because he knows I would think she was hot too. But if I thought a guy was cute its like, but are they bi? If not then oh well into the off limits box they go. This feels frustrating to me because I don't want to leave my husband. We have a family, a house, a child, a life together. I don't want to replace him any more than he wants to replace me. But I don't know how to get him to understand that I think its ok for us both to have any partner we desire when he is adamant that we are not allowed to have cis-straight-opposite-gender partners. I feel like I don't know how to make him see that I would just be enjoying the variety versus looking for something "better" than him.
I know this was incredibly long, I'm so sorry. I'm just looking for some guidance from others who have been in this situation before. Thanks so much for any advice and please be kind.
(Added for clarity- he is also attracted to cis men, but its a very limited scope of attraction and seems to have no rhyme or reason. Like one out of 100 guys he might go "yeah I think that one guy is hot" but that one guy could be completely different from the next guy has says he is attracted to, so its not even like a can gauge if he would like a guy or not because he seems to have no "type")
One last edit- although I genuinely do understand how it’s different, I also feel like it’s kind of insulting and hypocritical to basically view trans women as “different” from having sex with another woman just because of their genitals. Like if he was talking to a trans woman with a vagina, he would view that as the same as trying to sleep with a cis woman, but a trans woman with a penis falls into the “queer relationship” category. It feels like splitting hairs.
submitted by UsagiVino to nonmonogamy [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 05:54 Orpherischt Know Halloween

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween
Halloween or Hallowe'en (a contraction of Hallows' Even or Hallows' Evening), also known as Allhalloween, All Hallows' Eve, or All Saints' Eve, is a celebration observed in many countries on 31 October, the eve of the Western Christian feast of All Hallows' Day.
... the...
Know the ...
It begins the observance of Allhallowtide, the time in the liturgical year dedicated to remembering the dead, including saints (hallows), martyrs, and all the faithful departed.
One theory holds that many Halloween traditions originated from ancient Celtic harvest festivals, particularly the Gaelic festival Samhain, which may have had pagan roots and that Samhain itself was Christianized as Halloween by the early Church
The speed of sound is 343 meters-per-second, which is 1234.8 km/h
Halloween... trick, or treat?
  • "Scary Eve" = 333 primes
  • .. ( "The Number" = 333 primes )
  • "The Witch Sabbath" = 1337 jewish-latin-agrippa 2407 square 1,247 eng-ext
  • ... ( "Magic School" = 1337 squares )
Date numerologies: ( Halloween, Oct 31 2020 )
October 31 is the 304th day of the year (305th in leap years) in the Gregorian calendar. 61 days remain until the end of the year.
  • (10) + (31) + (20) + (20) = 81 ( ie. "Wizard" = "Ritual" = 81 alphabetic )
  • (10) + (31) + 2+0+2+0 = 45 ( ie. "Geometry" = 45 reduced )
  • 1+0 + 3+1 + 2+0+2+0 = 9 ( ie. 'witch' and 'broom' )
  • (10) + (31) + (20) = 61 ( ie. matching days left in the year on Oct 31 )
ie. number 9 is a major one, all the above , except for 61, reduce to 9.
Multi-cipher matching.
Here we see how a news agency (ABC News, or an Alphabet Agency) can generate thematic topics for the day of Halloween, using dictionary listings, and results from my custom lexicon files.
Matching the search phrase, 'Halloween', across multiple ciphers simultaneously. Common nouns in italics, proper nouns in standard font (I separate them in those sections with a high number of matches, but they remain mixed together further down). I have bolded some items that catch my eye on first glance, particularly those that match the 'scary' thematic of the day. The list might be further reduced to a manageable set by filtering these results down to those spells whose numbers match the date numerologies of the actual 2020 Halloween (as seen above). At the bottom of the list are primes cipher matches, which arguably might rank above those with multiple matches in other ciphers.
10 matches
No common nouns found.
Proper nouns (only one found):
  • Pondoland ( ie. the ultimate place to have your Witch's Sabbath, numerologically)
8 matches
  • illegally (ie, witch meetings)
Proper nouns:
  • Congolese
  • Kweiyang
  • Malaysian
  • Neverland
Lexicon file matches:
  • Alligator ( ie. dragon )
  • Auslander
  • Human farm
  • Law of Noah
  • Like a Swan
  • Oddworld
  • Shoemaker ( ah! one of my new favourite songs )
7 matches
  • advisably ( ie. it's illegal, but advisable... )
  • ancillary
  • anopheles
  • broadloom ( ie. loom --> weave )
  • climbdown
  • diglossia
  • dollarise
  • execrably
  • laryngeal ( ie. throat, speech, human voice )
  • razorback
  • screwball
Proper nouns (7 matches):
  • Baltimore
  • Ethelbert
  • European
  • Excalibur
  • Lippmann
  • Lithuania
  • Olympiad
  • Rembrandt
  • Vietcong
  • Welshman ( red dragon standard )
  • Zaragoza
Lexicon file matches (unsorted, 7 matches):
  • Pentagram ( ie. doubtless )
  • of one Mind ( ie. dance and sing together )
  • Carnation
  • I am the hop
6 matches
  • alligator ( ie. dragon )
  • axiomatic ( ie. cores of the system )
  • brainwash ( ie. initiation ritual )
  • brainwave ( ie. how you do it )
  • catchword ( ie. how you do it )
  • crookneck ( ... and don't forget the flail )
  • decompose ( remember the dead, remember )
  • devilry ( self-explanator )
  • fastening ( ie. bindings, enchantments, loosen and unloosen the Fates )
  • flashings ( ie. will 'o wisps )
  • gangplow
  • housemaid ( ie. a witch )
  • humankind
  • kilocycle
  • lodgement
  • marshaler
  • mineshaft ( ie. darkness, mystery, treasure )
  • monomania ( ie. 'One Thing' = 'The Coven' )
  • objectify
  • ochlocrat
  • papilloma
  • shoemaker
  • toothache ( ie. too much sugary treats )
  • valuables ( ie. treats )
  • vandalism ( ie. tricks, chaos )
Proper nouns ( 6 matches )
  • Almighty
  • Babylonian
  • Berkshire
  • Bhutanese
  • Cainozoic
  • Calcuttan
  • Cowpens [ ie. alpha bet @ ox house @ cattle pen ]
  • Crimplene
  • Deepfreeze [ it was a dark and stormy night ]
  • Ethernet [ ie. ether @ magic medium ]
  • Geometric [ ie. indeed ]
  • Honduran
  • Horlicks
  • Illinoian
  • Jessamine
  • Johnson
  • Kalamazoo
  • Kimberly
  • Kurilian
  • Lafayette
  • Margrethe
  • Neolithic [ new stone ]
  • Popsicle [ ie. deepfreeze ]
  • Reuther
  • Reverence
  • Scorpio
  • Slavonic
  • Thurman
  • Whiggism
Lexicon file matches (unsorted, 6 matches):
  • Summit ( ie. a mountaintop meeting )
  • Summ it
  • Fortuna ( O )
  • alligator
  • Robust
  • the blocks
  • Qualcomm
  • The tithe
  • The Signal ( can you hear it, or see it, or hear and see it? )
  • Anamensis
  • Ziltoid
  • brainwash
  • Who am eye
  • human farm
  • dragon oil ( ie. annointing )
  • The shift
  • call forth
  • Thunberg
  • book door
  • Kirinyaga
  • marryable
  • Landerneau
  • Oros man
  • close home
  • Explore
  • neverland
  • Infection
  • The Plague
  • The Ark Eve ( archive, ark hive )
  • hold down
  • weak bones
  • Neolithic
  • Make it real ( ie. magic )
  • Promise
  • Laundry
  • Nintendo
  • End World
  • devilry ( ie. obviously )
  • the insane
  • gentlemen
  • Ilmarinen
  • Good note ( @ Good tone )
  • Epic enter ( @ Epicenter )
  • the signal
  • drink meat
  • Moon boat ( ie. that's no moon, but gather under it anyway )
5 matches
  • alienator ( ie. initiate alone )
  • alignment ( ie. ritual )
  • allegory ( ie. mystery )
  • amenities
  • artisanal
  • autogenic
  • ayatollah
  • binocular ( ie. stereo vision, Hunter's moon )
  • blitheful
  • bombsight
  • bungalow
  • callipers
  • campesino
  • carnation ( ie. coronavirus, carnival nation )
  • cartwheel ( ie. dance! )
  • chipmunk
  • cocooning ( ie. and Mothra steps out )
  • commensal
  • curtained ( ie. veiled )
  • deduction ( ie. figure it out )
  • demotion
  • depressed
  • desirably
  • detection ( ie. Witch-finder Pulsifer )
  • dictation ( ie. 'spell-caster' = 'the orator' = 'great language' = 474 )
  • doohickey
  • doorframe ( ie. portals )
  • effusion
  • emergency
  • emphasise
  • empower ( ie. magic spells ; empower @ empire )
  • empyreal
  • esoterica
  • ethically
  • explicate
  • feelingly
  • flexibly
  • fraternal ( ie. the coven )
  • greyscale
  • heartfelt
  • hereabout
  • hippiedom
  • immigrate ( ie. to fairy land )
  • inclement
  • kitchenet
  • longtime
  • mangrove ( ie. Druid's grove )
  • menfolks
  • millpond
  • moulding ( ie. shape it, shape them )
  • oesophagi ( ie. throat, voice )
  • olfaction
  • omikron
  • palomino
  • parrakeet
  • pentagram ( ie. duh )
  • penumbrae ( ie. shadow )
  • percolate ( ie. bubble, bubble, toil and trouble )
  • phwoor
  • practised ( ie. ritual )
  • printhead
  • ramblings ( ie. toil and trouble )
  • rationale ( ie. it's Halloween )
  • renounce
  • requite
  • respected ( ie. the Master of Ceremonies, Pan )
  • rockery
  • rounder ( ie. dance around the bonfire )
  • sagacious ( ie. the Druids )
  • scaleless ( ie. weightless )
  • sceptered ( ie. empowered )
  • scheduler ( do it on Halloween )
  • scowler ( ie. the disapproving )
  • scratcher ( ie. claws )
  • graffitis
  • skimobile
  • subdivide ( ie. a social distance )
  • unguarded ( ie. because everyone fears you )
  • wandering ( ie. into the woods )
  • wanness
  • writeable ( ie. it is )
  • zenithal ( ie. fly to the moon )
Proper nouns ( 5 matches )
  • Anglophobe
  • Asquith
  • Botswana
  • Bukovina
  • Cozumel
  • Dardanelles
  • Debussy
  • Dumfries
  • Einstein
  • Everett
  • Falstaffian
  • Gomorrah
  • Humboldt
  • Hussein
  • Huxley ( ie. Brave New World )
  • Jacobinism
  • Leninism
  • Lesseps
  • Luoyang
  • Morton
  • Mysore
  • Neptune
  • Paestum
  • Philippi
  • Rosario
  • Sakharov
  • Stygian ( ie. The Netherworld )
  • Suzann
  • Teuton
  • Thimphu
  • Torres
  • Tuesday
  • Ulster
  • Utrecht
  • Waspish
  • Wessex
  • Winton
  • Wroclaw
  • Xerxes
Lexicon file matches ( unsorted, 5 matches ):
  • It is done ( ie. Make it real )
  • The Legion ( ie. of the Underworld )
  • Troupe
  • Brew of God ( ie. in the Cauldron )
  • Tuesday
  • The plans
  • Of the King
  • The King of
  • sagacious
  • no freedom
  • go around
  • the revel
  • A male witch
  • My Birth
  • Notre Dame
  • man grove
  • Flying-V
  • airplanes
  • To make baby
  • emergency
  • lift veil ( of the mystery )
  • Whisky
  • Aeronaut
  • great dune
  • Southbee
  • a wealthy
  • Mongols
  • The Impact
  • Process ( ie. ritual )
  • The Action
  • Glabrous
  • Of One Mind
  • Red Planet
  • the Hawks
  • The Vaper
  • It is Death ( ie. 'scary' )
  • One Church ( ie. Coven )
  • Tongass
  • Plato Cave ( ie. shadow puppets )
  • the flight ( ie. the broom )
  • the winged ( ie. the bats )
  • Mustang
  • The sense ( of mystery )
  • plugged in
  • Man work
  • did not see
  • The enemy
  • Abandon hope
  • Xenobot
  • Xerxes
  • walk cycle
  • the Vats
  • Oropher
  • Botswana
  • Uberlord ( ie. Witch-King )
  • new skin ( snake shed )
  • depressed ( Goth )
  • seize land
  • ear rumble
  • blue is red
  • coronated
  • No Corona
  • Corona On
  • the impact
  • A Covenant
  • wash mask
  • Law of Fire
  • The Embers
  • horn toad
  • the charms
  • no freedom
  • eye in hell
  • Glee Curse
  • red sludge
  • nice treat
  • more folk
  • Sorry
  • Firm Facts
  • Fly six
  • the dewing
  • cowlicks
  • Knight God
  • High Elves ( ie. fairies )
  • More Mold
  • I, Godzilla
  • The Dewing
  • Aye captain
  • Qing Blood
  • dispell me
  • Need Water
  • to blend in
  • The agony
  • allegory
  • burqa bans
  • the comics
  • online god
  • lake woman
  • blood cure
  • long time
  • The Belter
4 matches
  • agonising
  • agronomic
  • alikeness
  • almighty
  • anemically
  • believably
  • bellyful
  • bigmouth
  • blossom
  • brushoff
  • buckteeth
  • casework ( cases of coronavirus )
  • columbaria
  • congeries
  • craftsman
  • criterial
  • criticise
  • crocheter
  • crossbeam
  • crowfeet
  • dangling
  • darkroom
  • deepfreeze
  • delimiter
  • demitasse
  • depiction
  • deskbound
  • detumesce
  • devious
  • dimorphic
  • directive
  • disallow
  • discerner
  • draperies ( curtain, veil, storied hangings )
  • dustpan
  • edibility
  • edifice
  • enactment ( ie. ritual )
  • enzymic
  • epicenter ( ie. the spell-focus )
  • epicentre
  • epileptic
  • epithetic
  • erosion
  • erythema
  • establish ( the coven )
  • etiologic
  • evenings ( the night cometh )
  • explore ( the darkness )
  • extender
  • fanaticism
  • fashioner
  • fatherly
  • flavour
  • flounder
  • foretold ( you are reading it )
  • fragilely
  • furnish
  • geometric
  • grassland
  • heirloom ( ie. altar goods )
  • henhouse ( ie. the Coven )
  • herbarium ( ie. for the brews )
  • hierarchy ( ie. who will lead the ritual? )
  • hipster
  • illusory ( ie. tricks and treats )
  • imperfect ( ie. hence the perfecting )
  • imposer
  • impulse ( ie. spellpower )
  • infection
  • insult
  • interbred ( ie. by Bene Gesserits )
  • intoner ( ie. chant / cant )
  • jessamine
  • kiddingly
  • knuckler
  • lactation
  • lankness
  • laundry ( ie. money magic )
  • leakiness
  • lethally
  • lifebuoy
  • limelight
  • lingering ( .. magic )
  • liveware
  • mainliner
  • mandibular
  • martyr ( ie. remember them )
  • Masters
  • meagerly
  • meagrely
  • medallist
  • methylic
  • mildness
  • milksop
  • mindless ( ie. after the brainwashing )
  • misplay
  • mollusc
  • mutism
  • neolithic
  • neoplasm
  • nightmare
  • noumenal
  • nurser
  • oafishly
  • obsolesce
  • odometer
  • ornery
  • overreach
  • passably
  • pitting
  • pivotal ( ie. aciomatic )
  • pleading
  • pleonasm
  • plethora
  • podiatric
  • politick
  • poolside
  • popery
  • pregnant ( with meaning )
  • premium
  • prescribe ( ie. fore-writ, foretold )
  • preterm
  • promise
  • prudish ( ie. not on Halloween... )
  • pylori
  • recognise
  • recovered ( ie. Celtic cauldron )
  • refashion
  • refection
  • reminisce ( ie. remember them )
  • remodeler
  • repairman
  • retailing
  • retrainee
  • reverence ( ie. remember them, remember it )
  • robust
  • scattered
  • scours
  • semipro
  • shoetree
  • shriven
  • shuffler
  • sixpence
  • skullcap
  • skydive
  • skyline
  • slipper
  • smirky
  • speedily
  • spinner
  • staircase ( ie. Harry Potter )
  • standup
  • steadfast
  • subjacent
  • subvocal ( ie. secret whispers )
  • summit ( ie. climb it, add it up )
  • sunlit ( ie. cast light of it )
  • surging
  • swinger ( ie. Bacchic rites )
  • terracing
  • throbbing ( ie. Drumbeat )
  • tradesman
  • trembly
  • unfearing ( ie. steadfast )
  • unscathed
  • uvular
  • vibraharp
  • villus
  • wetware
  • willful
  • wishbone ( good luck )
Proper nouns ( 4 matches )
  • Attucks
  • Beaujolais
  • Beerbohm
  • Bristol
  • Crockett
  • Dictaphone
  • Docetist
  • Gregory ( ie. GRG @ ChRCh @ Church @ Coven @ Watchers )
  • Guatemalan
  • Hydrus ( ie. the sea and it's serpent )
  • Labradorian
  • Linnaeus ( ie. naming things, categorizing )
  • Lisburn
  • Lushun
  • Machiavelli
  • Islamism
  • Manichaeism
  • Masters
  • Mogadiscio
  • Oshkosh
  • Prairies
  • Sirius
  • Surinam
  • Yvonne
3 matches
  • acclimatise
  • acquainted
  • actually
  • adjacently
  • aeronaut
  • aliquot
  • armoured
  • attempt
  • becoming
  • bespectacled
  • birdshot
  • boorish
  • brindled
  • bullring
  • canoeing
  • Canopus
  • capitalise
  • ceiling
  • cephalopod
  • Champagne
  • champagne
  • chanciness
  • chatoyance
  • chenille
  • choirboy
  • chuckwalla
  • classism
  • clearout
  • clinger
  • coevally
  • coexist
  • confiscate
  • conflux
  • cooktop
  • Cornish
  • cotyledon
  • coupledom
  • crenellate
  • currant
  • cynicism
  • deathwatch
  • dependency
  • designee
  • despiser
  • direness
  • disarray
  • discolor
  • discover
  • dismally
  • disperse
  • document
  • doneness
  • dourly
  • draftily
  • dreaded
  • dressing
  • drywall
  • dysgenic
  • egotist
  • Eminence
  • eminence
  • empress
  • endanger
  • endorsable
  • enhancer
  • enuretic
  • euphoric
  • excuser
  • extinct
  • feminist
  • firewood
  • flaccidness
  • flatfoot
  • flatiron
  • flummery
  • foothold
  • foretop
  • frugalness
  • fusileer
  • gaolbird
  • garbage
  • gathered
  • geodetic
  • gesture
  • glabrous
  • glaring
  • gleaming
  • glosser
  • grammarian
  • grampus
  • gruffly
  • gurgling
  • headphones
  • headwind
  • heatstroke
  • Hellenic
  • highball
  • hockshop
  • holistic
  • hootenanny
  • Horatio
  • humidify
  • illumine
  • inaccurate
  • incalculable
  • inculpable
  • infidel
  • infield
  • inflator
  • injector
  • injurer
  • instill
  • jollily
  • jotting
  • joyride
  • Kemerovo
  • keynote
  • kitschy
  • knucklehead
  • labiodental
  • lacunary
  • legalize
  • leisured
  • leptonic
  • libretti
  • liquefy
  • lorikeet
  • luster
  • lustre
  • matzot
  • meddlesome
  • meddling
  • melanomata
  • misfeasance
  • mismatched
  • moisten
  • monaural
  • monocot
  • morosely
  • mustang
  • mwethya
  • myosin
  • nephrite
  • nettlerash
  • nightly
  • nineties
  • nitrite
  • nitwit
  • nonsalable
  • nonsecular
  • nucleus
  • nuthatch
  • nymphlike
  • obesity
  • obliger
  • olivine
  • omelette
  • ooziness
  • organize
  • osculant
  • overlie
  • paraquat
  • parkway
  • paucity
  • pegboard
  • pfennig
  • phylum
  • plighter
  • polarise
  • ponderer
  • poofter
  • popsock
  • porously
  • poshly
  • potholed
  • pouter
  • preggers
  • process
  • pummelo
  • punning
  • purify
  • reasoner
  • receipts
  • recover
  • relaxant
  • remarriage
  • remodify
  • resort
  • restuff
  • result
  • rewrote
  • richness
  • rifeness
  • rifler
  • roster
  • rustle
  • salinize
  • scooter
  • sedition
  • senores
  • sentimo
  • shadowy
  • Shawnee
  • sherbert
  • shinbone
  • showing
  • shrubby
  • simony
  • sinewy
  • slackening
  • sleazeball
  • slotted
  • sorry
  • sorter
  • splits
  • spookily
  • spouse
  • sprung
  • stolon
  • stoolie
  • stout
  • submenu
  • sufferable
  • summon
  • supper
  • surly
  • sutler
  • synergy
  • tarpaper
  • textile
  • therefor
  • toilful
  • trekking
  • trephine
  • tricycle
  • tripodal
  • Trollope
  • troupe
  • tumbril
  • twiddler
  • twofold
  • twohanded
  • ulster
  • uncaught
  • unholy
  • unruled
  • unwashed
  • Vermeer
  • virtue
  • volute
  • warrant
  • waspish
  • waterman
  • wayside
  • wayward
  • whisky
  • witter
  • workman
  • worst
  • yeasty
  • yessir
  • zesty
  • zoysia
All prime matches
  • abridgement
  • alimony
  • allegation
  • alluvial
  • animator
  • annotate
  • anopheles
  • archaically
  • archenemy
  • asepsis
  • aspirate
  • astatine
  • atypical
  • aviation
  • awayday
  • bacterium
  • Baptist
  • baptist
  • beginnings
  • biopsy
  • boatyard
  • bollocking
  • bookmobile
  • borewell
  • brakeless
  • bravely
  • bulwark
  • busboy
  • butter
  • Canopus
  • castrate
  • catechetics
  • cerebellum
  • chastener
  • chowderheaded
  • cirrus
  • classifiable
  • concerto
  • cortices
  • cricketeer
  • cricketing
  • crotchet
  • Daliesque
  • deathwatch
  • Deepfreeze
  • deepfreeze
  • deferential
  • deftness
  • deliverance
  • demotion
  • diglossia
  • dioptric
  • direness
  • doorframe
  • driveler
  • duster
  • eagerness
  • effusion
  • effusive
  • Empedocles
  • equipped
  • equitable
  • eradicator
  • Erfurt
  • estival
  • estranged
  • ethicist
  • exocrine
  • eyewash
  • fanaticism
  • fastening
  • fireless
  • focussed
  • fruitcake
  • gallows
  • gauzy
  • gawkily
  • generalised
  • Geronimo
  • getout
  • greenfly
  • gripping
  • haemoglobin
  • harasser
  • headwaiter
  • heartsick
  • henhouse
  • Hertford
  • highbrowed
  • Himalayas
  • Hitlerian
  • Honour
  • honour
  • Horlicks
  • housemaid
  • ignition
  • immigrate
  • inflexible
  • injector
  • innuendo
  • invincible
  • ionizable
  • Istrian
  • jingoism
  • jotter
  • kronor
  • ladyboy
  • leisured
  • leptonic
  • lessor
  • likeness
  • logistic
  • longtime
  • lyrics
  • magnetite
  • Mahratti
  • mainmast
  • malefactor
  • marbleize
  • Margery
  • Marseille
  • Maryland
  • massive
  • menfolks
  • merchandise
  • Merlyn
  • mineshaft
  • moiety
  • Moscow
  • muntjak
  • newsman
  • Orkney
  • overlap
  • paisley
  • parasite
  • pasty
  • Patsy
  • patsy
  • Pegasus
  • pewter
  • peyote
  • phyllo
  • piquet
  • Piraeus
  • placeholder
  • plumbing
  • Polaris
  • politick
  • precollege
  • prescience
  • primula
  • printhead
  • Ptolemaic
  • punchy
  • puttee
  • Realtor
  • realtor
  • reckless
  • referrer
  • regulated
  • relator
  • remarriage
  • remembrance
  • resonance
  • revers
  • rhymer
  • risers
  • rocailles
  • rusted
  • Samnium
  • sawmill
  • scrotal
  • seasonable
  • Semtex
  • semtex
  • server
  • severance
  • sgraffiti
  • shifty
  • shoemaker
  • simoniacal
  • smelly
  • snapper
  • snorer
  • soundable
  • spacecraft
  • splosh
  • standby
  • stridden
  • sulphide
  • swayback
  • synagog
  • tarrier
  • tebibyte
  • telecoms
  • tessera
  • theistic
  • thinly
  • treadmill
  • trendy
  • twohanded
  • unclosed
  • upraise
  • urbanised
  • victual
  • Vulgate
  • vulgate
  • Wampanoag
  • wandering
  • warring
  • wayside
  • Whiggism
  • wuss
This post posted at 4:54 am UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyLhNzlDG0Y
Blade Runner 2049 — 'Wallace'
  • "The Halloween Revelation" = 776 primes 1998 tri 3,747 sq 249 alphabetic
  • "Halloween Code" = 360 primes 1111 jewish-latin-agrippa
  • ... ( "The Halloween Code" = 1,224 jewish-latin-agrippa )
  • ... .. ( "Know Corona" = 1,224 jewish-latin-agrippa )
  • ... .. .. ( "Corona" = 224 jewish-latin-agrippa )
  • "A=1: on Halloween" = 1776 squares
.
https://www.wired.com/story/russias-laptev-sea-should-have-started-to-freeze-by-now/
Uh-Oh. Russia's Laptev Sea Should Have Started to Freeze by Now
Normally, the 'birthplace of ice' freezes by late October. For the first time in recorded history, it hasn't. That could have knock-on effects across the Arctic.
  • "Started to freeze" = 616 primes
  • ... ( "Perfect number" = 616 jewish-latin-agrippa )
  • ... .. ( "Number" = 616 trigonal )
  • "Laptev Sea" = "The Number" = 333 primes
  • .. ( "The birthplace of ice" = 474 jewish-latin-agrippa ) ( "Numerology" = 474 primes )
  • ... .. ( "The knock-on effects across the Arctic" = 2,474 square )
  • "Freeze a Laptev" = 1,618 english-extended
  • .. "Freeze a Lapteve" = 474 primes
  • .. "Freeze a Lapped Eve" = 474 primes
  • .. .. .. "Freeze Lapteve" = 1492 jewish-latin-agrippa
The coronavirus pandemic was declared 3/11
  • "Hello. Wine?" = 311 primes
  • "The Romance" = 311 primes
  • "Sorcerer" = 393 jewish-latin-agrippa
  • .. "To Date the Witch" = 1,393 jewish-latin-agrippa
  • ... ( "The Root" = "Tradition" = 393 jewish-latin-agrippa )
  • ... ( "Accurate" = "Count" = 393 jewish-latin-agrippa )
  • ... .. ( "Accountancy" = 393 primes )
  • ... .. .. [ "Count each Moon" = 1,166 trigonal 454 primes ]
  • ... .. .. [ "Decryption Key" = 1,166 jewish-latin-agrippa ]
Uh-Oh. Russia's Laptev Sea Should Have Started to Freeze by Now
In Godzilla: The Planet Eater, the third part of an animated trilogy, Ghidorah is depicted as an evolved entity from a universe with different physical laws that are worshiped by the Exif, who he influenced to become nihilists upon mastering advanced Gematron mathematics.
  • "Know Witch" = 2020 jewish-latin-agrippa
  • .. ( "To Gather Under the Moon" = 2020 trigonal )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRqyrMF_vgs
Moondance & Passion and the Opera
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2nPMcgmX5c
NIGHTWISH Live In Buenos Aires [Full Concert]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_witch,_by_Luis_Ricardo_Falero.jpg
submitted by Orpherischt to GeometersOfHistory [link] [comments]


2020.10.24 17:33 theshriekingpines Suggest a new deck for me

I'm looking for some suggestions on a new deck to purchase. I mostly use it the Tarot for self-reflection and inspiration points for journaling/creative writing. I tend to gravitate towards more surreal and darker decks, but that's not a requirement and I could probably use more rainbows and butterflies in my life tbh. My current decks are somewhat lacking in symbolism: colonumerology/etc.
Ideally, I'd like to find a deck that incorporates common symbolism from many world beliefs/traditions. Are there any decks that try to reconcile/incorporate Vedic or other Eastern traditions with Western mysticism? I used to have a Thoth deck, and will probably get that if I can't find something else. I like the attempt to dive deeper into global esotericism, but it's still pretty heavily presented through a "stuffy white christian male" lens, and not truly a view from a child of the world.
I currently have:
Tarot of the sweet twilight - All around great deck--I like the imagery and storytelling in it. The symbolism doesn't fully speak to me, and the color palette doesn't hold any meaning
Deviant Moon Tarot - This is a good deck overall, but I almost feel like the cards have too much personality/story in each one.
Ritual Abuse Tarot - my favorite in terms of design even though it's B&W; it incorporates standard symbolism, but is very light on it. I would use this more if the the artist had filled out the cards a little more. There's not much of a story thread through the deck.
Rider Waite - Same with Thoth deck, it's a classic, but dated.
Anyway, looking forward to your suggestions and discussion.
submitted by theshriekingpines to TarotDecks [link] [comments]


2020.10.24 12:21 RedPillWonder Dating older and age gap relationships

This post likely isn't for you.
But, if it is for you, then it might be one of the most important things you will read in the next few years, because it involves the second most important decision of your life.
And that is who you decide to marry one day.
In addition to being a Christian, having character and integrity, looks, interests, shared world views and more, one of the main things one looks for in a person they're considering dating is whether they are within an acceptable age range they've come up with.
Most of the time, that age range is within a year or two—or a few years at most—of one's age.
Often, family, friends and society at large say it's best to stay within this range, or at least reinforce the notion, and generally, I'd agree.
But is it best for everyone?
Is it best for you?
Let's take a look and discuss this.
First, a few points about the angle of this article:
  1. Its advice is geared toward the perspective of younger women dating older men.
  2. "Dating older" in this context is divided into three groupings.
6 to 15 years. 16 to 29 years age difference and 30+ years.
Most people don't blink an eye at a difference of five years or less. On the other end, there's the 30+ year age difference, which is extremely rare. So we'll be mainly talking about two in-between categories, 6 to 15 years and 16 to 29 years age differences.
  1. To use the 80/20 rule or Pareto principle, I'd say dating older is only best for about 20% of people and 80% of people are better off staying within a much smaller age difference, if any.
Moreover, as you increase in age difference for a couple, that 20% number gets smaller. For example, the 16 to 29 category is the “80/20 of the 80/20.”
So this advice is really only for a significantly smaller percentage of people to consider. But with hundreds of millions of people in the United States alone, we’re still talking about a lot of people who can (or currently do) fall into these categories.
With this said, let's look at the major reasons why most people oppose a big age difference and see if there's any substance to what they say.
 
He'll die long before you!
 
I have a friend who's had 3 heart attacks before he was 30.
Another who’s battled both cancer and heart attacks as a man in his prime years.
Add in car accidents that take the lives of many a young man, and you're not guaranteed a long life. Anything can happen.
Thankfully, accidents that take lives are rare, statistically speaking (although I wish it was far lower), and both of my friends are alive and doing well now. But either could have easily passed from this earth in their youth.
This is one reason why making a decision based mainly on age could cost you a great relationship, because youth doesn't guarantee protection from accidents, certain health risks, or any tragic happenings of life.
Does this mean you should find and date an older guy? Or date a much younger woman if you’re a man?
No. It does mean you shouldn't make it the determining factor, because you never know what may happen in life or how long either of you have.
 
Cultural references and interests. You have nothing in common!  
This one seems silly, as the same thing can apply to people the same age.
You can have a country girl who loves and prefers a certain lifestyle and a guy who's all about the city, and their interests and lifestyles may be world's apart.
It doesn't matter if they're the same age.
You can have one person who's into country music and the other loves alternative or heavy metal. One who's into art and another who knows nothing about it, nor desires to.
You can have someone who's an "old soul" and loves things from the 70's and 80's and finds it difficult to relate to guys her own age. One who's a sports fan and another who dislikes it and would rather have their head in a novel, or playing a video game.
There are all kinds of examples where, even at the same age, they don't know or understand (or care to) references and events and beliefs that flow from their interests and involvement in various things.
And, of course, you can find those with common interests and values, whether they're the same age or 10 or 20 or more years apart.
Where differences do occur, a lot depends on perspective. Do you look at any differences as opportunities to learn new things and grow, or as obstacles to overcome?
This will be true regardless of whether you're a year or twenty two years apart.
 
Health and fitness
 
This, to me, is the deciding factor. (All other things being equal, that is)
Is he going to be able to keep up?
Does he have the energy to be active with you? To continue to do things you both enjoy? To play with the kids (if you both want kids) and be in their life?
Is he committed to keeping his body in good shape and lives a healthy lifestyle?
You don't need a health nut or an extreme sports fanatic (perfectly good if he is) but you do want someone who's lifestyle is going to make it likely he lives a long, healthy life and can enjoy it with you.
The thing is, you can find examples of younger men who are overweight, lazy and lack drive, as well as fit men in their 40's and 50's who are ambitious, active and can run circles around men half their age.
For example, check out this guy at 53 years old. He has a better body than most men half his age. (And no, despite the colorful bow tie, he's not gay).
And yes, you can certainly find the opposite as well.
The question is, whether younger or older, is a man committed to health and wellness and willing to look after his body, so he can pursue his mission in life?
The odds are in the favor of youth, but some women shouldn't over look an older, fit man.
 
Sex and other fun stuff!
 
What's been surprising to me in recent years, is the number of dead bedroom stories of youthful men.
Whether it's lack of libido, or E.D. or some other issue, some young men are suffering from various bedroom problems.
To be clear, these are men who should be all over their wives, but aren't.
And I keep hearing stories of women who want it more than their husbands, and while the men may not have any particular health problem, they have a mismatched sex drive in comparison to their spouse.
Testosterone plays a huge role in this, but it's certainly not the only one.
And speaking of, there's the article from awhile back where the Buzzfeed boys (actually guys in their 20's) had their testosterone measured and 3 out of 4 were in the low to mid 200 ng/dL range, indicating low T.
Even the one who tested at 363 is still ridiculously low. This is sad, and in the range of an 80 year old man.
And yet these guys in their youth should all be at the higher end of the spectrum.
Which goes to show you, a younger woman can marry a man close to her age and still be dealing with sexual issues, low libido and more.
While an older man can have and maintain higher T levels and keep up with you in and out of the bedroom.
The odds, again, are very much in the favor of youth, but a lot depends on lifestyle, health, exercise and more.
 
Reasons why you want to date older or younger
 
You need to think through why you want or are attracted to someone with a large age gap.
If it’s a phase you’re going through, you’re in for trouble. If a woman wants a much older man for some shallow reason or an older man a younger woman for the same, and there’s no substance there to build on, you’re better off not considering this.
You’re dating a person, not a number.
And while “numbers” do correlate with things (maturity, wisdom, resources, etc for older men or beauty, fertility, etc for younger women), you need to know if you’re more hung up on age for the sake of age, or if there is a real foundation there to build on.
If you genuinely hit it off with the person you’re with, and there’s chemistry or a connection and shared interests and beliefs and more, then be open to it and see where it goes. I wouldn’t rule it out on age difference alone.
Let’s stop for a second and consider the elephant in the room in this section. When I mentioned “shallow” above, I bet many thought “money” for women or “looks” for men, as far as what each sex is after.
This is true no matter the age. Women do place a certain degree of emphasis on resources, as men do on a woman’s looks, and yes, there are exceptions where you find couples that don’t “fit” neatly into certain stereotypes or generalizations.
Speaking of stereotypes, you need to be willing to deal with…
Society’s standards and what friends and family say
You’re going to need tougher skin.
Because some people will frown or make faces or speak their mind about all kinds of things having to do with your relationship, some to your face and some behind your back.
It’s life.
Specifically, though, it’s your life. You get to decide.
Just know what you may be up against going in.
Can you handle what immediate family members say or do?
What colleagues or your church family might chime in about?
Because people will have opinions and very likely will share them with you, and depending on the age difference, it may not be pleasant.
And you know what?
Who cares?
I’m not being flippant. I mean, if you’re swayed by things like this, you probably shouldn’t be in any relationship.
If you are, it likely means you’re going to let your parents, siblings, church group, work colleagues and others have outsized influence on your life no matter who you date.
It’s just an age gap relationship will be magnified to a greater degree, but these underlying issues are still there.
With this said, do consider the counsel of godly people. God tells us “in the multitude of counselors there is wisdom.”
Weigh opinions, consider every angle, and make a decision that is right for you. That may be to forego any significant age gap while dating/marrying or it may be to pursue one, if you meet someone who is what you’re looking for, just much older or younger.
It may line up with what others think who you trust, and it may be you chart a path that is against what others have said.
 
God, prayer and open doors
 
This may seem like simple advice, but seek the Lord in every thing, most especially in who you choose to date and marry.
God can lead and guide you in your efforts if you seek Him in this matter.
While we often discount the Disney version of events for good reason, that doesn’t mean God doesn’t get involved in your search.
A simple question:
Do you think praying and asking God to intervene in any area of your life helps? Such as praying for healing? Or seeking a job? Or in making a life-changing decision in any area?
If yes, to whatever degree, then why wouldn’t it be the same with relationships?
The answer, of course, is it does help!
This does not mean you sit on your butt and God delivers a beautiful woman or handsome man to your doorstep because you prayed sincere prayers and cried alligator tears.
Obviously, we should become the best versions of ourselves we can be, be working for God and pursuing His kingdom, and if you’re so inclined, to be on the lookout for a great mate, with the requisite actions that reflect that desire!
But God can still be heavily involved.
God gives wisdom if you ask. And you’ll need it to navigate the various aspects of a relationship, in vetting, in setting and enforcing boundaries and much more.
God opens and closes doors.
In the Bible, God kept Paul from going into Asia at that time.
“And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia.” - Acts 16:6
Sometimes, God can lead you this way in potential relationships.
I could write a lengthy post on this one, but God can close (or open) doors in a relationship and this one I’ve experienced first hand.
With one woman I dated, no matter what we tried, one “door” after another after another was closed. Sometimes crazy stuff, finally to the point it was like “RPW, have you considered God doesn’t want you two together? How many ‘coincidences’ do you need?”
The same is true of open doors, and as you go through them, see what becomes available to you and how God leads.
To bring this back around to dating older, ask the Holy Spirit to give you a peace about things and if you should pursue a relationship, no matter the age difference, or if it’s a “no go” and something you shouldn’t pursue.
Speaking of God, let’s look at a few biblical couples.
 
Biblical examples of age gap relationships
 
One that comes to mind is Boaz and Ruth.
While we don’t know their exact age difference, it was likely significant.
“Then he (Boaz) said, "May you be blessed of the LORD…You have shown your last kindness to be better than the first by not going after young men, whether poor or rich. -Ruth 3:10
But let’s go back a bit further and pick up the story.
Keep in mind people married very, very young in those days, and God tells us in the book after her namesake, Ruth’s future mother in law, Naomi, had two sons:
“And they took them wives of the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they dwelled there about ten years.” - Ruth 1:4
If Ruth and Orpah were about 15 or 16 (could be older or younger) when they married, and they dwelt in the land about ten years according to the Bible, then Ruth is in her mid twenties when her husband dies and she meets Boaz and marries him not long thereafter.
Boaz is likely much, much older according to many scholars. How much so is in doubt, but it’s not a stretch to say there’s a significant age gap between them. He could have been 20 or 30 years older or more.
Another example is Abraham and Sarah, which the bible tells us were 10 years apart in age.
““Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, ‘Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?’” - Genesis 17:17
Yet another is Joseph and Mary, who scholars think had a big difference in age.
While interesting, in the end, it doesn’t matter whether there are many examples of large, small or non-existent age gap relationships in the bible, what matters is compatibility on Christian beliefs and doctrine, actions that show evidence of that faith, shared interests and world views, character and personality traits, mutual attraction and more.
 
Outlooks, opinions and acceptability
 
As they say, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one haha
The truth is people will have very different comfort levels and often a sliding scale with those.
For example, some might think an 8 year age gap is too much for 27 year old dating an 19 year old, but would have no problem if a 48 year old dated a 40 year old.
Obviously it’s the same age gap, but very different outlook because of different factors.
You can have a late thirty something that never grew up so to speak, and an early twenty something that is very mature due to different life experiences and responsibilities.
You’ll also see more acceptability when you change geography. In eastern Europe, you can find far more women willing to date a lot older, and 10, 20 or 30 year age gap relationships can be found in higher percentages than say, in the United States.
So acceptability can vary, what you thought was uncommon might not be somewhere else or even to someone else.
You’ll likely find surprises every where you look, with some more accepting and others less so in your family or friend circle.
 
Final thoughts
 
If you meet someone who’s much older or younger, look beyond the “x” number of years between you and really consider if it’s a good match or not.
Weigh the pros and cons and think them through. Then do it again. This article is on the “certainly worth considering” side of the age gap argument, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t issues that need to be thought through and acted on.
Do so with clear eyes and move forward accordingly.
Date and see where it goes.
Use common sense. Vet well. Watch their actions. Pray.
This is true of any relationship with any age difference.
And while I’ve argued various points, I’ll say again, the odds are in the favor of youth for health and vitality. Whether those odds outweigh other considerations is for you to decide.
The vast majority of people will end up choosing someone fairly close to their age. You may be one of them.
And if you choose to date someone with a large age gap, do so with a confidence and peace that you’ve thought this through, and can give it your all, as you should with any relationship.
Cross posted fromhere
submitted by RedPillWonder to RPCWomen [link] [comments]


2020.10.24 12:15 RedPillWonder Dating older and age gap relationships

[Note: While the angle is toward women, this should be of benefit to men as well in considering an age gap relationship]
This post likely isn't for you.
But, if it is for you, then it might be one of the most important things you will read in the next few years, because it involves the second most important decision of your life.
And that is who you decide to marry one day.
In addition to being a Christian, having character and integrity, looks, interests, shared world views and more, one of the main things one looks for in a person they're considering dating is whether they are within an acceptable age range they've come up with.
Most of the time, that age range is within a year or two—or a few years at most—of one's age.
Often, family, friends and society at large say it's best to stay within this range, or at least reinforce the notion, and generally, I'd agree.
But is it best for everyone?
Is it best for you?
Let's take a look and discuss this.
First, a few points about the angle of this article:
  1. Its advice is geared toward the perspective of younger women dating older men.
  2. "Dating older" in this context is divided into three groupings.
6 to 15 years. 16 to 29 years age difference and 30+ years.
Most people don't blink an eye at a difference of five years or less. On the other end, there's the 30+ year age difference, which is extremely rare. So we'll be mainly talking about two in-between categories, 6 to 15 years and 16 to 29 years age differences.
  1. To use the 80/20 rule or Pareto principle, I'd say dating older is only best for about 20% of people and 80% of people are better off staying within a much smaller age difference, if any.
Moreover, as you increase in age difference for a couple, that 20% number gets smaller. For example, the 16 to 29 category is the “80/20 of the 80/20.”
So this advice is really only for a significantly smaller percentage of people to consider. But with hundreds of millions of people in the United States alone, we’re still talking about a lot of people who can (or currently do) fall into these categories.
With this said, let's look at the major reasons why most people oppose a big age difference and see if there's any substance to what they say.
 
He'll die long before you!
 
I have a friend who's had 3 heart attacks before he was 30.
Another who’s battled both cancer and heart attacks as a man in his prime years.
Add in car accidents that take the lives of many a young man, and you're not guaranteed a long life. Anything can happen.
Thankfully, accidents that take lives are rare, statistically speaking (although I wish it was far lower), and both of my friends are alive and doing well now. But either could have easily passed from this earth in their youth.
This is one reason why making a decision based mainly on age could cost you a great relationship, because youth doesn't guarantee protection from accidents, certain health risks, or any tragic happenings of life.
Does this mean you should find and date an older guy? Or date a much younger woman if you’re a man?
No. It does mean you shouldn't make it the determining factor, because you never know what may happen in life or how long either of you have.
 
Cultural references and interests. You have nothing in common!  
This one seems silly, as the same thing can apply to people the same age.
You can have a country girl who loves and prefers a certain lifestyle and a guy who's all about the city, and their interests and lifestyles may be world's apart.
It doesn't matter if they're the same age.
You can have one person who's into country music and the other loves alternative or heavy metal. One who's into art and another who knows nothing about it, nor desires to.
You can have someone who's an "old soul" and loves things from the 70's and 80's and finds it difficult to relate to guys her own age. One who's a sports fan and another who dislikes it and would rather have their head in a novel, or playing a video game.
There are all kinds of examples where, even at the same age, they don't know or understand (or care to) references and events and beliefs that flow from their interests and involvement in various things.
And, of course, you can find those with common interests and values, whether they're the same age or 10 or 20 or more years apart.
Where differences do occur, a lot depends on perspective. Do you look at any differences as opportunities to learn new things and grow, or as obstacles to overcome?
This will be true regardless of whether you're a year or twenty two years apart.
 
Health and fitness
 
This, to me, is the deciding factor. (All other things being equal, that is)
Is he going to be able to keep up?
Does he have the energy to be active with you? To continue to do things you both enjoy? To play with the kids (if you both want kids) and be in their life?
Is he committed to keeping his body in good shape and lives a healthy lifestyle?
You don't need a health nut or an extreme sports fanatic (perfectly good if he is) but you do want someone who's lifestyle is going to make it likely he lives a long, healthy life and can enjoy it with you.
The thing is, you can find examples of younger men who are overweight, lazy and lack drive, as well as fit men in their 40's and 50's who are ambitious, active and can run circles around men half their age.
For example, check out this guy at 53 years old. He has a better body than most men half his age. (And no, despite the colorful bow tie, he's not gay).
And yes, you can certainly find the opposite as well.
The question is, whether younger or older, is a man committed to health and wellness and willing to look after his body, so he can pursue his mission in life?
The odds are in the favor of youth, but some women shouldn't over look an older, fit man.
 
Sex and other fun stuff!
 
What's been surprising to me in recent years, is the number of dead bedroom stories of youthful men.
Whether it's lack of libido, or E.D. or some other issue, some young men are suffering from various bedroom problems.
To be clear, these are men who should be all over their wives, but aren't.
And I keep hearing stories of women who want it more than their husbands, and while the men may not have any particular health problem, they have a mismatched sex drive in comparison to their spouse.
Testosterone plays a huge role in this, but it's certainly not the only one.
And speaking of, there's the article from awhile back where the Buzzfeed boys (actually guys in their 20's) had their testosterone measured and 3 out of 4 were in the low to mid 200 ng/dL range, indicating low T.
Even the one who tested at 363 is still ridiculously low. This is sad, and in the range of an 80 year old man.
And yet these guys in their youth should all be at the higher end of the spectrum.
Which goes to show you, a younger woman can marry a man close to her age and still be dealing with sexual issues, low libido and more.
While an older man can have and maintain higher T levels and keep up with you in and out of the bedroom.
The odds, again, are very much in the favor of youth, but a lot depends on lifestyle, health, exercise and more.
 
Reasons why you want to date older or younger
 
You need to think through why you want or are attracted to someone with a large age gap.
If it’s a phase you’re going through, you’re in for trouble. If a woman wants a much older man for some shallow reason or an older man a younger woman for the same, and there’s no substance there to build on, you’re better off not considering this.
You’re dating a person, not a number.
And while “numbers” do correlate with things (maturity, wisdom, resources, etc for older men or beauty, fertility, etc for younger women), you need to know if you’re more hung up on age for the sake of age, or if there is a real foundation there to build on.
If you genuinely hit it off with the person you’re with, and there’s chemistry or a connection and shared interests and beliefs and more, then be open to it and see where it goes. I wouldn’t rule it out on age difference alone.
Let’s stop for a second and consider the elephant in the room in this section. When I mentioned “shallow” above, I bet many thought “money” for women or “looks” for men, as far as what each sex is after.
This is true no matter the age. Women do place a certain degree of emphasis on resources, as men do on a woman’s looks, and yes, there are exceptions where you find couples that don’t “fit” neatly into certain stereotypes or generalizations.
Speaking of stereotypes, you need to be willing to deal with…
Society’s standards and what friends and family say
You’re going to need tougher skin.
Because some people will frown or make faces or speak their mind about all kinds of things having to do with your relationship, some to your face and some behind your back.
It’s life.
Specifically, though, it’s your life. You get to decide.
Just know what you may be up against going in.
Can you handle what immediate family members say or do?
What colleagues or your church family might chime in about?
Because people will have opinions and very likely will share them with you, and depending on the age difference, it may not be pleasant.
And you know what?
Who cares?
I’m not being flippant. I mean, if you’re swayed by things like this, you probably shouldn’t be in any relationship.
If you are, it likely means you’re going to let your parents, siblings, church group, work colleagues and others have outsized influence on your life no matter who you date.
It’s just an age gap relationship will be magnified to a greater degree, but these underlying issues are still there.
With this said, do consider the counsel of godly people. God tells us “in the multitude of counselors there is wisdom.”
Weigh opinions, consider every angle, and make a decision that is right for you. That may be to forego any significant age gap while dating/marrying or it may be to pursue one, if you meet someone who is what you’re looking for, just much older or younger.
It may line up with what others think who you trust, and it may be you chart a path that is against what others have said.
 
God, prayer and open doors
 
This may seem like simple advice, but seek the Lord in every thing, most especially in who you choose to date and marry.
God can lead and guide you in your efforts if you seek Him in this matter.
While we often discount the Disney version of events for good reason, that doesn’t mean God doesn’t get involved in your search.
A simple question:
Do you think praying and asking God to intervene in any area of your life helps? Such as praying for healing? Or seeking a job? Or in making a life-changing decision in any area?
If yes, to whatever degree, then why wouldn’t it be the same with relationships?
The answer, of course, is it does help!
This does not mean you sit on your butt and God delivers a beautiful woman or handsome man to your doorstep because you prayed sincere prayers and cried alligator tears.
Obviously, we should become the best versions of ourselves we can be, be working for God and pursuing His kingdom, and if you’re so inclined, to be on the lookout for a great mate, with the requisite actions that reflect that desire!
But God can still be heavily involved.
God gives wisdom if you ask. And you’ll need it to navigate the various aspects of a relationship, in vetting, in setting and enforcing boundaries and much more.
God opens and closes doors.
In the Bible, God kept Paul from going into Asia at that time.
“And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia.” - Acts 16:6
Sometimes, God can lead you this way in potential relationships.
I could write a lengthy post on this one, but God can close (or open) doors in a relationship and this one I’ve experienced first hand.
With one woman I dated, no matter what we tried, one “door” after another after another was closed. Sometimes crazy stuff, finally to the point it was like “RPW, have you considered God doesn’t want you two together? How many ‘coincidences’ do you need?”
The same is true of open doors, and as you go through them, see what becomes available to you and how God leads.
To bring this back around to dating older, ask the Holy Spirit to give you a peace about things and if you should pursue a relationship, no matter the age difference, or if it’s a “no go” and something you shouldn’t pursue.
Speaking of God, let’s look at a few biblical couples.
 
Biblical examples of age gap relationships
 
One that comes to mind is Boaz and Ruth.
While we don’t know their exact age difference, it was likely significant.
“Then he (Boaz) said, "May you be blessed of the LORD…You have shown your last kindness to be better than the first by not going after young men, whether poor or rich. -Ruth 3:10
But let’s go back a bit further and pick up the story.
Keep in mind people married very, very young in those days, and God tells us in the book after her namesake, Ruth’s future mother in law, Naomi, had two sons:
“And they took them wives of the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they dwelled there about ten years.” - Ruth 1:4
If Ruth and Orpah were about 15 or 16 (could be older or younger) when they married, and they dwelt in the land about ten years according to the Bible, then Ruth is in her mid twenties when her husband dies and she meets Boaz and marries him not long thereafter.
Boaz is likely much, much older according to many scholars. How much so is in doubt, but it’s not a stretch to say there’s a significant age gap between them. He could have been 20 or 30 years older or more.
Another example is Abraham and Sarah, which the bible tells us were 10 years apart in age.
““Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, ‘Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?’” - Genesis 17:17
Yet another is Joseph and Mary, who scholars think had a big difference in age.
While interesting, in the end, it doesn’t matter whether there are many examples of large, small or non-existent age gap relationships in the bible, what matters is compatibility on Christian beliefs and doctrine, actions that show evidence of that faith, shared interests and world views, character and personality traits, mutual attraction and more.
 
Outlooks, opinions and acceptability
 
As they say, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one haha
The truth is people will have very different comfort levels and often a sliding scale with those.
For example, some might think an 8 year age gap is too much for 27 year old dating an 19 year old, but would have no problem if a 48 year old dated a 40 year old.
Obviously it’s the same age gap, but very different outlook because of different factors.
You can have a late thirty something that never grew up so to speak, and an early twenty something that is very mature due to different life experiences and responsibilities.
You’ll also see more acceptability when you change geography. In eastern Europe, you can find far more women willing to date a lot older, and 10, 20 or 30 year age gap relationships can be found in higher percentages than say, in the United States.
So acceptability can vary, what you thought was uncommon might not be somewhere else or even to someone else.
You’ll likely find surprises every where you look, with some more accepting and others less so in your family or friend circle.
 
Final thoughts
 
If you meet someone who’s much older or younger, look beyond the “x” number of years between you and really consider if it’s a good match or not.
Weigh the pros and cons and think them through. Then do it again. This article is on the “certainly worth considering” side of the age gap argument, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t issues that need to be thought through and acted on.
Do so with clear eyes and move forward accordingly.
Date and see where it goes.
Use common sense. Vet well. Watch their actions. Pray.
This is true of any relationship with any age difference.
And while I’ve argued various points, I’ll say again, the odds are in the favor of youth for health and vitality. Whether those odds outweigh other considerations is for you to decide.
The vast majority of people will end up choosing someone fairly close to their age. You may be one of them.
And if you choose to date someone with a large age gap, do so with a confidence and peace that you’ve thought this through, and can give it your all, as you should with any relationship.
Cross posted from: LoydWalker.com
submitted by RedPillWonder to RPChristians [link] [comments]


2020.10.24 10:12 el_moro_blanco Would I be more attractive if I left Islam?

So I'm a 40m, and I've been a Muslim for most of my life, but over the last decade or so I've grown increasingly disillusioned by my faith. Or maybe moreso my coreligionists rather than anything else. One huge thing is that I've been single all this time, and my religion has come to feel more like a trap than a way of life. I haven't been on a date in a decade. Women just don't like me, least of all Muslim women. I repeatedly get told to leave my faith, that I don't belong, that I should convert, that I'm not really white, and frankly I'm getting very sick of it. I've already written off the possibility of ever marrying someone within my faith because I've never had a Muslim woman who was interested in me or returned my attraction. The best I could hope for would be marrying someone and getting them to convert, which is already a pretty tall order. But lately I've been entertaining the notion of simply leaving my faith altogether.
I have a huge advantage; I'm white. I'm an American. My family isn't Muslim, and to be honest, I doubt anyone in my own community cares enough about me to even notice I was gone. I'm sure some people would be relieved not to have to deal with me. It seems Islam in America has increasingly become more of an ethnic social club than a real religion, and since South Asian and Arab women REALLY dislike me, I'm left wondering if I shouldn't just leave my religion entirely. Stop praying, stop going to mosque, stop observing Ramadan, burn my Quran and never mention it. Its a daunting step. I really don't have a lot of friends, but I never have so that's not an issue. I'm... really not sure how to be a white Anglo-American, and that's a bigger one.
But would it help my dating life? I would imagine it might open up a few more possibilities. At the very least it might make me more attractive to white Christian and Atheist women with lower standards. Its not like Muslims are especially well liked in America, especially white converts. If I leave, I can just focus on my race and be an Atheist or whatever and it might make more women like me. Or is this a silly thing to even think about?
submitted by el_moro_blanco to dating [link] [comments]


2020.10.24 00:32 TheBlueMango01 I (M18) am ducked up relationship wise and I don’t know who I am. What do I do?

Hi,
I’m in a very weird situation which I don’t even know where to start.
I’m born in a super catholic family where the notion of premarital sex was considered a sin, and too early in a relationship to lead to good things. (Just setting the context). I, having been forced this religion on me, am more or less agnostic although I haven’t told my parents that. They still believe me to be super catholic like them.
Anyway, when I was 16 I really liked this girl (who loves liked me back too) and we went out on a couple dates. Considering how Christian my parents were I decided not to tell them anything in fear of, well, repercussions. But as you can imagine at some point through my friends and their parents it landed in my parents ears. Of course they lost their shit stating I was too young for it, and that she wasn’t up to my standards. (My parents are snobs, and this girl I was dating wasn’t...). All my parents did for the next month was tell me it wasn’t gonna work and just giving me very negative comments about everything. I tell of course this girl the general outlines of what my parents told me, (leaving out some stuff to not offend her) but she decides my parents are too much and completely cuts communication with me. As you can imagine that left me pretty broken.
Since then I’ve been trying to get into other serious relationships too, but it seems at some point I hit a wall after a max of 2 months dating. Either I fuck something up because I’m scared of fucking up (I know ironic right), or I panic because I realise my parents wouldn’t approve of her and shut the whole thing down, because of course I don’t tell them about my dating life.
I honestly don’t know how to move forward from this. I really want someone to complement me, to really appreciate who I am, but all these barriers seem to be getting in the way.
I also want to add another thing I’m realizing as I write this down, I don’t know who I am anymore. Having been raised a super catholic by snobby parents or the more rebellious agnostic that has grown in me. There are morals and views from each that I understand like their pros but I’m stuck between both, and I’m realizing I can’t be both and lead a double life. A piece of me want to become that rebel and fully admit it but I don’t want to disappoint my parents and another piece of me is telling me to remain that Christian guy, but being stuck in the middle feels like I’m alienating myself from both “worlds”...
I don’t know what to do...
submitted by TheBlueMango01 to therapy [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 18:29 ncci1694 Will I regret this later?

Somewhat newly bisexual woman here wondering what to do. I discovered my attraction towards women 4 years ago when I made out with my female friend. Fast forward to now, I have been on dates with women and slept with women but nothing serious has come from it. I am finally out to most of my friends who are super supportive. A few months ago I was set up with a dude by a friend. We hit it off at first. He is relatively feminine and what I would consider to be a feminist male. However I can't help but to worry that one day I will regret never having tried to make it work with a woman. I keep finding reasons to be annoyed with him when he has literally done nothing wrong. He is exactly what I thought I was looking for in a person but I can't shake these feelings. I've always dated feminine men and the relationships have never been super long term. I always find ways to get annoyed with men and feel that none of them can ever live up to this weird standard that I have created in my head. I am wondering if it may be because I don't want to be with a man at all... I am worried that I am creating an issue in my head and am having trouble trusting my feelings. My fear is also that I will push him away and regret it later. Has anyone experienced this? Or have any advice really? All my girl friends are straight and don't have many people to work through these feelings with. Also worth noting that my family is very Christian and I have not come out to them.
submitted by ncci1694 to latebloomerlesbians [link] [comments]


2020.10.22 19:28 TitanicYeetLobster 25 [M4F] USA - Men literally just want one thing and its to play Kirby superstar ultra

Despicable, I know. But for real, my idea of a perfect date is sharing a pizza and playing some vidya, then maybe cuddling and watching a movie 🙂 It would be super cool to bond over some co-op games! Im mostly a PC gamer but at this point Im just looking for excuses to buy a switch too. Other than that Im really looking for someone who has a lot in common with me, which is a tall order given how odd I am. We dont have to be identical but its nice to have stuff in common! Im open to long distance if you're in the US.
About me:
-Non denominational Christian. So no hookups + I'm waiting untill marriage, yo.
-Into the standard nerd stuff; anime, video games, and D&D
-Music: Really into heavy metal and hard rock, anything from Metallica and Led Zeppelin to Children of Bodom and Gojira. Send me some band recommendations!
-INTJ, a bit of a homebody
-Conservative values (politically libertarian)
-5'8" and a bit slender
-Full time Engineer, aspiring firearm designer.
-Personality like a burnt marshmallow (I'm a softie on the inside once you get past the outside!)
-Dark but clean sense of humor, definitely a goof
-I don't smoke or do drugs and hardly ever drink. Drugs are a big deal breaker for me...
Its me, ya boi
So if you somehow have a lot in common with me, send a DM or chat! Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
submitted by TitanicYeetLobster to ForeverAloneDating [link] [comments]


2020.10.21 23:00 HelloiRow Planning an NYE wedding - tips or advice?

Hello lovely people of weddit, my fiance and I are planning our wedding for December 31, 2022, (which is a Saturday, hooray!) and would love to hear your experiences. We have a couple of logistical challenges that we’ve brainstormed solutions for, but are so early in the planning process right now that we welcome any constructive feedback to help us move in the right direction. :)
Some background on us:
We live in the northeast US, but would like to have our wedding in California, which is where we both grew up and our families still live. He’s from the SF Bay area and I’m from the Los Angeles region, so we’re hoping to split the difference and find a venue either in Santa Barbara or Monterey/Santa Cruz.
My fiance is an Indian man (raised Hindu) and I am a white woman (raised Christian), but both of us have relaxed relationships with our faiths, meaning a religious ceremony is not incredibly important to us. However, his dad is a priest and my parents are extremely devoted, traditional Christians. We love our families and want to include elements from both cultures and faiths.
Where we’re planning so far:
We’re considering taking photos with family and the wedding party before anything else, to take advantage of the daylight and sunset, followed by an intimate restaurant dinner with them. Then, we could move to the venue and start our ceremony later in the evening, with the reception afterward through midnight. Not only would this let us spend that extra mealtime with the people closest to us, but it would also help eliminate the usual clunkiness of ceremony→photos→reception while the guests wait around for us to finish up photos and arrive at the reception. (Plus I just know I’ll cry of happiness during the ceremony lol, so getting pics before my makeup is ruined feels like a win.)
To summarize, the timeline we are picturing would be something like:
5:00 - photos with family and wedding party
6:00 - dinner at restaurant with family and wedding party
7:30 - ceremony at venue with all guests
8:30 - reception with all guests (same venue as ceremony)
12:00 - ring in the new year with everyone!
Next Day Brunch
Before realizing we loved the idea of an NYE wedding, we were going to choose a random weekend and do a 2-day affair: Indian/Hindu ceremony on Saturday, and American/Christian ceremony on Sunday. But now that we’re settled on NYE, we’re planning just one blended ceremony. The downside of this is a blended ceremony may be slightly longer than either of the individual ceremonies would be on their own, since we’re incorporating multiple traditions (My fiance’s dad is looking forward to leading us through certain Hindu parts of our ceremony, for example, and I know my dad wants to read a prayer). I’d hate to bore our guests with an overly-long ceremony, so we’re trying to decide what to include and leave out.
For the ceremony & reception, we’re hoping to find a venue where we can rent one indoor space and one outdoor space, since it will be cold outside even with heaters! Food-wise, we want to provide heavy hors d'oeuvres so people don’t get hungry through the evening. We’re picturing a variety of “stations” with our favorite appetizers, enough for guests to snack throughout the night and mingle with each other at high/cocktail tables. We like the idea of a variety of food so guests can choose to eat what they like, especially since some of our white guests may be trying indian food for the first time!
On the decor side, we want to lean in to the New Year’s Eve theme (Sparkles! Sparkly things everywhere!) without being tacky. We have more or less settled on jewel tones for our color palette, which goes great with some of the traditional Indian wedding decor we’re hoping to incorporate (warm colors, clusters and strings of flowers, etc.).
We both work in the aerospace industry and love our jobs, so we are also planning to incorporate a few decor elements as a nod to that. (For example, opting for a “celestial” or “under the stars” theme could be fun, but I'm apprehensive about having too much going on and end up with clashing decor!)
Our questions:
(Edited multiple times for formatting, as I haven't been on reddit for a while!)
submitted by HelloiRow to weddingplanning [link] [comments]


2020.10.21 01:46 John_Charles_Fremont /r/neoliberal elects the American Presidents - Part 54, Obama v McCain in 2008

Previous editions:
(All strawpoll results counted as of the next post made)
Part 1, Adams v Jefferson in 1796 - Adams wins with 68% of the vote
Part 2, Adams v Jefferson in 1800 - Jefferson wins with 58% of the vote
Part 3, Jefferson v Pinckney in 1804 - Jefferson wins with 57% of the vote
Part 4, Madison v Pinckney (with George Clinton protest) in 1808 - Pinckney wins with 45% of the vote
Part 5, Madison v (DeWitt) Clinton in 1812 - Clinton wins with 80% of the vote
Part 6, Monroe v King in 1816 - Monroe wins with 51% of the vote
Part 7, Monroe and an Era of Meta Feelings in 1820 - Monroe wins with 100% of the vote
Part 8, Democratic-Republican Thunderdome in 1824 - Adams wins with 55% of the vote
Part 9, Adams v Jackson in 1828 - Adams wins with 94% of the vote
Part 10, Jackson v Clay (v Wirt) in 1832 - Clay wins with 53% of the vote
Part 11, Van Buren v The Whigs in 1836 - Whigs win with 87% of the vote, Webster elected
Part 12, Van Buren v Harrison in 1840 - Harrison wins with 90% of the vote
Part 13, Polk v Clay in 1844 - Polk wins with 59% of the vote
Part 14, Taylor v Cass in 1848 - Taylor wins with 44% of the vote (see special rules)
Part 15, Pierce v Scott in 1852 - Scott wins with 78% of the vote
Part 16, Buchanan v Frémont v Fillmore in 1856 - Frémont wins with 95% of the vote
Part 17, Peculiar Thunderdome in 1860 - Lincoln wins with 90% of the vote.
Part 18, Lincoln v McClellan in 1864 - Lincoln wins with 97% of the vote.
Part 19, Grant v Seymour in 1868 - Grant wins with 97% of the vote.
Part 20, Grant v Greeley in 1872 - Grant wins with 96% of the vote.
Part 21, Hayes v Tilden in 1876 - Hayes wins with 87% of the vote.
Part 22, Garfield v Hancock in 1880 - Garfield wins with 67% of the vote.
Part 23, Cleveland v Blaine in 1884 - Cleveland wins with 53% of the vote.
Part 24, Cleveland v Harrison in 1888 - Harrison wins with 64% of the vote.
Part 25, Cleveland v Harrison v Weaver in 1892 - Harrison wins with 57% of the vote
Part 26, McKinley v Bryan in 1896 - McKinley wins with 71% of the vote
Part 27, McKinley v Bryan in 1900 - Bryan wins with 55% of the vote
Part 28, Roosevelt v Parker in 1904 - Roosevelt wins with 71% of the vote
Part 29, Taft v Bryan in 1908 - Taft wins with 64% of the vote
Part 30, Taft v Wilson v Roosevelt in 1912 - Roosevelt wins with 81% of the vote
Part 31, Wilson v Hughes in 1916 - Hughes wins with 62% of the vote
Part 32, Harding v Cox in 1920 - Cox wins with 68% of the vote
Part 33, Coolidge v Davis v La Follette in 1924 - Davis wins with 47% of the vote
Part 34, Hoover v Smith in 1928 - Hoover wins with 50.2% of the vote
Part 35, Hoover v Roosevelt in 1932 - Roosevelt wins with 85% of the vote
Part 36, Landon v Roosevelt in 1936 - Roosevelt wins with 75% of the vote
Part 37, Willkie v Roosevelt in 1940 - Roosevelt wins with 56% of the vote
Part 38, Dewey v Roosevelt in 1944 - Dewey wins with 50.2% of the vote
Part 39, Dewey v Truman in 1948 - Truman wins with 65% of the vote
Part 40, Eisenhower v Stevenson in 1952 - Eisenhower wins with 69% of the vote
Part 41, Eisenhower v Stevenson in 1956 - Eisenhower wins with 60% of the vote
Part 42, Kennedy v Nixon in 1960 - Kennedy wins with 63% of the vote
Part 43, Johnson v Goldwater in 1964 - Johnson wins with 87% of the vote
Part 44, Nixon v Humphrey in 1968 - Humphrey wins with 60% of the vote
Part 45, Nixon v McGovern in 1972 - Nixon wins with 56% of the vote
Part 46, Carter v Ford in 1976 - Carter wins with 71% of the vote
Part 47 - Carter v Reagan v Anderson in 1980 - Carter wins with 44% of the vote
Part 48, Reagan v Mondale in 1984 - Mondale wins with 55% of the vote
Part 49, Bush v Dukakis in 1988 - Bush wins with 54% of the vote
Part 50, Bush v Clinton v Perot in 1992 - Clinton wins with 71% of the vote
Part 51, Clinton v Dole in 1996 - Clinton wins with 91% of the vote
Part 52, Bush v Gore in 2000 - Gore wins with 88% of the vote
Part 53, Bush v Kerry in 2004 - Kerry wins with 89% of the vote
Welcome back to the fifty-fourth edition of /neoliberal elects the American presidents!
This will be a fairly consistent weekly thing - every week, a new election, until we run out.
I highly encourage you - at least in terms of the vote you cast - to try to think from the perspective of the year the election was held, without knowing the future or how the next administration would go. I'm not going to be trying to enforce that, but feel free to remind fellow commenters of this distinction.
If you're really feeling hardcore, feel free to even speak in the present tense as if the election is truly upcoming!
Whether third and fourth candidates are considered "major" enough to include in the strawpoll will be largely at my discretion and depend on things like whether they were actually intending to run for President, and whether they wound up actually pulling in a meaningful amount of the popular vote and even electoral votes. I may also invoke special rules in how the results will be interpreted in certain elections to better approximate historical reality.
While I will always give some brief background info to spur the discussion, please don't hesitate to bring your own research and knowledge into the mix! There's no way I'll cover everything!
John McCain v Barack Obama, 2008
Profiles
  • John McCain is the 72-year-old Republican candidate and a US Senator from Arizona. His running mate is Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin.
  • Barack Obama is the 47-year-old Democratic candidate and a US Senator from Illinois. His running mate is US Senator from Delaware Joe Biden.
Issues and Background
  • The United States and other countries are in the midst of what many are describing as the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. The crisis was largely triggered by a collapse in home prices, which in turn caused securities tied directly or indirectly to real estate to plummet in value. In September, major investment bank Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy. A day later, the Federal Reserve bailed out and essentially took control of insurance giant AIG. Credit markets were on the brink of meltdown. In early October, Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, which created an enormous government program to purchase "toxic assets" from banks and significantly increased the amount of insurance provided by the FDIC. Both McCain and Obama supported this rescue plan. Liquidity appears to have been restored, but the economic situation is still otherwise dire.
    • Senator Obama has described the current crisis as a "final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down." Obama has spoken of the importance of oversight over the TARP $700 billion, of the possibility of getting that money back, of making sure none of that money is going to executive pay or executive severance packages, and of following up the package with help for homeowners.
    • Senator McCain has said that what distinguishes him from Senator Obama on how he will lead the country out of the economic crisis is his commitment to get government spending under control. McCain has proposed a one-year spending freeze on "non-defense, non-veterans discretionary spending." McCain has criticized Senator Obama for supporting "pork-barrel spending" in the past.
  • The US occupation of Iraq continues. Last year, the Bush Administration oversaw a troop surge, and the conventional wisdom is that the situation has generally improved as a result. There are some indications that the security situation is improving and that the training of the new Iraqi military is working. That said, pressure on the US to withdraw has increased, as the Iraqi government has sought a withdrawal timetable and the US coalition partners have begun their own withdraw. Security responsibility for several provinces has already been transferred from US forces to Iraqi forces. However, earlier this year, General David Petraeus called for the delaying of troop withdrawals.
    • Both candidates accuse the other of failures of judgement. Senator Obama has criticized McCain sharply for supporting invading Iraq in the first place, while Senator McCain has criticized Obama for not supporting the 2007 surge. On the latter point, in January 2007 Senator Obama's stance was:
      The need to bring this war to an end is here. That is why today I am introducing the Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007. This plan would not only place a cap on the number of troops in Iraq and stop the escalation: more importantly, it would begin a phased redeployment of United States forced with the goal of removing all United States combat forces from Iraq by March 31, 2008.
    • Early this year, Democrats seized on a statement from Senator McCain in which he indicated that he would be comfortable with an American presence in Iraq for "maybe 100" years. He has stood by the comments, saying he was referring to a presence comparable to what the US has had in South Korea, Germany, and Japan.
    • Under the Obama plan for Iraq, a phased withdrawal of most troops would begin which would likely remove the US troop presence by summer of 2010. A residual force would remain "to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel."
    • Under the McCain plan for Iraq, the US would not leave Iraq "before Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated and before a competent, trained, and capable Iraqi security force is in place and operating effectively."
  • Sarah Palin has received a significant amount of both positive and negative attention relative to most VP nominees. Supporters praise her history as a reformer, her advocacy for families with special needs children, and her ability to energize parts of the Republican base. However, critics have raised questions about her knowledge of policy and her readiness to be President if it became necessary. Some in the media have expressed frustration at their limited access to Governor Palin. This scrutiny increased following a poorly received interview with Katie Couric which included the following exchanges:
    COURIC: You've cited Alaska's proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?
    PALIN: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land boundary that we have with Canada ... We have trade missions back and forth. We -- we do -- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where -- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to -- to our state.
    ...
    COURIC: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?
    PALIN: Well, let’s see. There’s, of course in the great history of America there have been rulings, that’s never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but …
    COURIC: Can you think of any?
    PALIN: Well, I could think of … any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But, you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a vice president, if I’m so privileged to serve, wouldn’t be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.
    ...
    COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?
    PALIN: I’ve read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.
    COURIC: What, specifically?
    PALIN: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.
    COURIC: Can you name a few?
    PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn’t a foreign country, where it’s kind of suggested, “Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?”
  • Health care reform has come up frequently on the campaign trail. Both candidates recognize a need to increase coverage and lower costs.
    • The Obama plan includes requiring health insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, a tax credit to incentivize small businesses to provide health coverage, requirements on large employers to provide health coverage or otherwise contribute financially to their employee's health care, and "a National Health Insurance Exchange with a range of private insurance options as well as a new public plan based on benefits available to members of Congress."
    • The McCain plan is to offer "a direct refundable tax credit ... of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance" and promote health savings accounts. McCain also seeks to make it easier to purchase health insurance across state lines.
  • Attention has also been given to the candidate's differing tax plans.
    • The Obama tax plan is to cut taxes for the middle class further than the Bush tax cuts did, while increasing taxes on the wealthiest 2% of Americans back to levels as they were in the 1990s. Senator Obama also seeks to implement a universal 10% mortgage interest tax credit, the elimination of income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000 a year, and an expansion of the EITC.
    • The McCain tax plan is to preserve all of the Bush tax cuts, phase out the Alternative Minimum Tax, cut the corporate tax rate to 25%, and establish a large R&D tax credit. Senator McCain also pledges to keep the Internet free of taxes.
    • In October at a campaign stop, Senator Obama was confronted by Joe Wurzelbacher, who has since become known colloquially as "Joe the Plumber", with concerns that he would be taxed more if Senator Obama were to become President. More recently, Wurzelbacher has made joint appearances with John McCain on the campaign trail. The McCain campaign has in particular seized on Obama's comment to Joe that "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
  • McCain, currently 72, would be the oldest first-term President if elected. McCain gave reporters an opportunity to review his full medical records, which showed that he is generally in good health and has relatively low risk of heart disease despite slightly elevated cholesterol and past issues with skin cancer.
  • If elected, Senator Obama would be the first African-American President of the United States. Obama was born in Hawaii, the son of a Kenyan economist and an anthropologist from Kansas. While many find the possibility of the first African-American President inspiring, particularly when combined with the optimistic rhetoric of Senator Obama's campaign, his identity has also been related to unique challenges for him during the campaign. Members of his own party during the primary implied that his success in the race was mainly due to his race. Former VP nominee Geraldine Ferraro said:
    If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.
    Senator Biden, now Obama's running mate, said:
    I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man.
    In addition, Senator Obama has faced false rumors that he was born in Kenya and that he is not Christian. Some argue that the spread of these rumors is motivated partially or entirely by racism.
  • Republicans have argued that Senator Obama is connected to problematic persons and organizations.
    • Roughly 40 years ago, now-professor Bill Ayers was a leading member of the militant Weather Underground Organization, which conducted a bombing campaign of targeting government buildings and financial institutions. Ayers first met Barack Obama through a non-profit reform project's board of directors, and later hosted a small informal event where a departing State Senator introduced Obama as her chosen successor. Through each of their active involvements in Chicago events and initiatives, they would serve on a couple of the same boards and panels in the years afterwards. There is virtually no evidence to support some Republican claims that Ayers was some sort of political adviser to Obama, who has referred to Ayers as "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8."
    • Senator Obama's pastor, Jeremiah Wright, has been the subject of controversy related to several sermon excerpts. The excerpts include claims that the government lied about its advance knowledge of Pearl Harbor, that the government lied about "inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color," and his comment that "America's chickens are coming home to roost," interpreted by some to be referring to the 9/11 attacks given the date of the sermon. President Obama addressed the issue in a broader speech on race in March of this year. Senator Obama stated:
      I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely—just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
      ...
      I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother—a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe. These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.
    • Pro-labor NGO ACORN has been accused by Republicans of orchestrating voter fraud, though further investigation has revealed this claim to be overstated at best. ACORN has hired people in the past to assist in voter registration, and sometimes these workers have come up with phony registrations - however, this issue seems to be motivated by laziness of individual workers rather than an attempt to conduct voter fraud. Obama served as a local counsel for ACORN in the 90s, and was endorsed by the ACORN political action committee during the primary. The Obama campaign also hired an ACORN affiliate for get-out-the-vote efforts during the primary.
  • Representative John Lewis, a civil rights icon, has received blowback for comments he made regarding the tone of the McCain/Palin campaign. Lewis accused the campaign of "sowing the seeds of hatred and division," and brought up the example of George Wallace never throwing a bomb or firing a gun but creating "the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans." McCain called the comments "hurtful" and called on Senator Obama to repudiate the comments. The Obama campaign has said that the comparison made by Rep. Lewis was inappropriate.
  • Senator McCain describes himself as a "free trader" and has criticized Senator Obama for opposing some free trade agreements. The Obama team has pledged to "use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to those important benchmarks." Senator Obama has also pledged to "fix" NAFTA.
Debate Excerpts
First Presidential Debate (full transcript)
(1) Obama on government spending:
John, it's been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending. This orgy of spending and enormous deficits you voted for almost all of his budgets. So to stand here and after eight years and say that you're going to lead on controlling spending and, you know, balancing our tax cuts so that they help middle class families when over the last eight years that hasn't happened I think just is, you know, kind of hard to swallow.
(2) McCain on Iraq:
I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict. Our initial military success, we went in to Baghdad and everybody celebrated. And then the war was very badly mishandled. I went to Iraq in 2003 and came back and said, we've got to change this strategy. This strategy requires additional troops, it requires a fundamental change in strategy and I fought for it. And finally, we came up with a great general and a strategy that has succeeded.
(3) Obama on meeting foreign adversaries "without precondition":
I reserve the right, as president of the United States to meet with anybody at a time and place of my choosing if I think it's going to keep America safe ... Now, understand what this means "without preconditions." It doesn't mean that you invite them over for tea one day. What it means is that we don't do what we've been doing, which is to say, "Until you agree to do exactly what we say, we won't have direct contacts with you."
(4) McCain on Iran:
My reading of the threat from Iran is that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region because the other countries in the region will feel compelling requirement to acquire nuclear weapons as well.
Now we cannot have a second Holocaust. Let's just make that very clear. What I have proposed for a long time, and I've had conversation with foreign leaders about forming a league of democracies, let's be clear and let's have some straight talk. The Russians are preventing significant action in the United Nations Security Council.
Vice-Presidential Debate (full transcript)
(1) Biden on what his administration would look like if a President Obama were to die in office:
God forbid that would ever happen, it would be a national tragedy of historic proportions if it were to happen.
But if it did, I would carry out Barack Obama's policy, his policies of reinstating the middle class, making sure they get a fair break, making sure they have access to affordable health insurance, making sure they get serious tax breaks, making sure we can help their children get to college, making sure there is an energy policy that leads us in the direction of not only toward independence and clean environment but an energy policy that creates 5 million new jobs, a foreign policy that ends this war in Iraq, a foreign policy that goes after the one mission the American public gave the president after 9/11, to get and capture or kill bin Laden and to eliminate al Qaeda. A policy that would in fact engage our allies in making sure that we knew we were acting on the same page and not dictating.
(2) Palin on what her administration would look like if a President McCain were to die in office:
And heaven forbid, yes, that would ever happen, no matter how this ends up, that that would ever happen with either party.
As for disagreeing with John McCain and how our administration would work, what do you expect? A team of mavericks, of course we're not going to agree on 100 percent of everything. As we discuss ANWR there, at least we can agree to disagree on that one. I will keep pushing him on ANWR. I have so appreciated he has never asked me to check my opinions at the door and he wants a deliberative debate and healthy debate so we can make good policy.
What I would do also, if that were to ever happen, though, is to continue the good work he is so committed to of putting government back on the side of the people and get rid of the greed and corruption on Wall Street and in Washington.
Second Presidential Debate (Town Hall) (full transcript)
(1) McCain on nuclear energy:
But we kept the debate going, and we kept this issue to -- to posing to Americans the danger that climate change opposes. Now, how -- what's -- what's the best way of fixing it? Nuclear power. Senator Obama says that it has to be safe or disposable or something like that. Look, I -- I was on Navy ships that had nuclear power plants. Nuclear power is safe, and it's clean, and it creates hundreds of thousands of jobs.
(2) Obama on McCain's criticism that he's being reckless on foreign policy:
Senator McCain, this is the guy who sang, "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran," who called for the annihilation of North Korea. That I don't think is an example of "speaking softly." This is the person who, after we had -- we hadn't even finished Afghanistan, where he said, "Next up, Baghdad."
(3) McCain on Russia:
I said before, watch Ukraine. Ukraine, right now, is in the sights of Vladimir Putin, those that want to reassemble the old Soviet Union. We've got to show moral support for Georgia.We've got to show moral support for Ukraine. We've got to advocate for their membership in NATO. We have to make the Russians understand that there are penalties for these this kind of behavior, this kind of naked aggression into Georgia, a tiny country and a tiny democracy.
(4) Obama on spending priorities:
You know, you may have seen your health care premiums go up. We've got to reform health care to help you and your budget. We are going to have to deal with energy because we can't keep on borrowing from the Chinese and sending money to Saudi Arabia. We are mortgaging our children's future. We've got to have a different energy plan. We've got to invest in college affordability. So we're going to have to make some investments, but we've also got to make spending cuts. And what I've proposed, you'll hear Senator McCain say, well, he's proposing a whole bunch of new spending, but actually I'm cutting more than I'm spending so that it will be a net spending cut.
Third Presidential Debate (full transcript)
(1) McCain on Obama's economic plans:
I don't think there's any doubt that Sen. Obama wants to restrict trade and he wants to raise taxes. And the last president of the United States that tried that was Herbert Hoover, and we went from a deep recession into a depression.
(2) Obama on comments by Congressman Lewis:
I mean, look, if we want to talk about Congressman Lewis, who is an American hero, he, unprompted by my campaign, without my campaign's awareness, made a statement that he was troubled with what he was hearing at some of the rallies that your running mate was holding, in which all the Republican reports indicated were shouting, when my name came up, things like "terrorist" and "kill him," and that your running mate didn't mention, didn't stop, didn't say "Hold on a second, that's kind of out of line."
(3) McCain on Obama's connections:
I don't care about an old washed-up terrorist [Bill Ayers]. But as Sen. Clinton said in her debates with you, we need to know the full extent of that relationship.
We need to know the full extent of Sen. Obama's relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy. The same front outfit organization that your campaign gave $832,000 for "lighting and site selection." So all of these things need to be examined, of course.
(4) Obama on who he associates with:
Let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy, I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. If I'm interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO.
Those are the people, Democrats and Republicans, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House. And I think the fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, Sen. McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me.
Platforms
Read the full 2008 Republican platform here.
Read the full 2008 Democratic platform here.
Internet Resources
Obama/Biden Website
McCain/Palin Website
The GOP's BarackBook
The Obama Campaign's Fight the Smears
Videos
Debates
First Presidential Debate
Vice-Presidential Debate
Second Presidential Debate (Town Hall)
Third Presidential Debate
Advertisements
Obama "same path" ad
Obama "McCain tax" ad
Obama "something" ad
McCain "fight" ad
McCain anti-Obama "celebrity" ad
McCain anti-Obama Bill Ayers ad
Strawpoll
>>>VOTE HERE<<<
submitted by John_Charles_Fremont to neoliberal [link] [comments]


2020.10.20 20:57 JessCHistory England's First Murder By Gun - Who Shot Robert Pakington in 1536?

I’m back with another curious mystery from London that I’m fairly sure hasn’t been covered here before. I’m a historian and the Tudor period, particularly the Henrican Reformation, was my specialty at degree. It’s got guns, clerical reform, and the first ever murder committed with a handgun in England.

Who Was Robert Pakington?
Robert Pakington was born to John Pakington and Elizabeth Washborne in a village called Stanforn-in-Teme. The village is in the county of Worcestershire, which is part of the West Midlands, and located not far from the Welsh border. His date of birth is not precisely known, being estimated around 1489 to fit in with later details we know of his life.
The family had a long lineage of genteel origin, the line stretching all the way back to the reign of Henry I. Elizabeth Washborne was an heiress that brought wealth to the Pakington family, and her and John would produce a large family. They would have four sons (John, Humphrey, Robert, Augustine) and three daughters (Joyce, Eleanor, and Margery). Money and influence was clearly spent on educating their children and putting them in the most favourable positions possible. The eldest son, John, would go on to become a lawyer and take a position at court, rising so high in Henry VIII’s favour that he was granted special permission to wear his hat in the presence of the king.
Robert was sent away at a young age to be an apprentice for the Mercer’s Company in London. This was entirely normal. Living with another household was important in the education of any young person, giving them vital social connections, a polish on their manners, as well as educating them in a trade. The Mercer’s Company was a guild and trade association for merchants, but most especially for those trading in fabrics such as wool, velvet, and silk. Wool fabric was the backbone of the English economy. Widely considered to be the finest fabric in Europe and generated huge amounts of wealth for an emerging merchant class that would become hugely influential throughout the sixteenth century.
Guilds were like a mixture of trade unions and secret societies. They would hold the secrets of their trade to members and their families, controlling trade standards and techniques, but also operated as communities of like-minded families. They would put on events, masques, parades, and care for the families of members who fell into destitution. Robert was clearly a respected member of the company as he worked as a Warden in the years 1527 and 1528.
Many guilds had strong religious links, although that really goes without saying for anything in the sixteenth century! There was not a single aspect of life in Tudor England that did not link back to religion. However, the nature of those connections and the role the church played in everyday life was rapidly changing. Humanist thought, where authors, writers, and theologians sought to look at original Biblical texts and examined works of classical Republicanism, had encouraged increased interest and criticism of the function and theology of the Catholic church.
This can be seen as coming to a head with Martin Luther nailing his 95 theses to the church door in Wittenburg in 1517. While other movements that sought to reform the practices of the Catholic church had faltered before, this was a new age. The printing press allowed quicker dissemination of ideas, especially in bustling urban centres, full of newly made men who did not entirely fit into the traditional social hierarchy.
Anti-clerical thought was high and common in London. Robert Hunne, a merchant tailor, was accused of heresy in 1514 after refusing to pay a church fee for his baby’s burial robe. He was found hanging in his cell in suspicious circumstances and the authorities had his corpse burnt for his supposed crimes. It is possible that Robert, employed in a similar trade, may have known Hunne socially. He would have certainly known him in his network of contacts and through working in the same circles.
In any case, Pakington wrote articles for the Mercers in 1523 and 1529 that were extremely anti-clerical. It is important to note that ‘Protestant’ did not exist as a cohesive branch of religious thought or even as a term at this point. Robert would have been known as a reformist or an evangelical, and his views were extremely common for men of his position and rank. He also would have still considered himself a Catholic. What reformers wanted was for the church to return to a state of spiritual purity that existed in the earliest days of the Christian church and to cut through rules and customs that had been built up over the centuries.
Robert Pakington was elected to parliament in October 1533 and re-elected in 1536. Edward Hall, a lawyer and historian, recorded that Pakington spent time in parliament ‘speaking somewhat against the covetousness and cruelty of the clergy’. It was most likely during this time that he came into contact with Thomas Cromwell.
Working as chancellor from 1533, Cromwell is, to put it mildly, a much discussed and controversial figure. To avoid any big discussions on Cromwell and his role in the Reformation, let’s simplify by saying that he held strongly reformist views and that when Henry VIII said he wished for people to jump, Cromwell would ask how high it should be. He was responsible for overseeing the king’s wishes, especially in directing policy for the Church of England after it broke away from the main body of the Roman Catholic Church in 1533. Pakington supplied Cromwell with reports on Flanders, an influential area in the Low Countries that is now in Belgium. The Low Countries had embraced reformist beliefs fairly quickly and was the key market for international trade, especially woollen cloth. Pakington definitely had knowledge on both fronts to keep the Chancellor well informed.

The Murder
Pakington lived in an area called ‘Westcheap’ - now known as Cheapside. ‘Cheap’ was the word for market in Middle English and the area was the site of the major produce markets for the city. Cheapside has also had a long association with fabric and cloth, most likely because the Mercer’s Company was based there. In fact, their main chapel at St Thomas of Acre was located just across the street from Robert Pakington’s home.
Robert attended mass at this chapel daily. As he left his home on the 13th November 1536, leaving his second wife Katherine and his five children inside, he found that the street was blocked by a man driving a cart. The man turned to Robert and asked whether he was Robert Pakington. Robert, used to dealing with messengers and merchants on a daily basis, confirmed that he was indeed Master Pakington.
The man in the cart turned, leaning into the haystack on his cart, and removed a wheellock handgun. He shot Robert in the head, killing him instantly. The shot was heard throughout the neighbourhood. It was the first murder committed with a handgun in London.
‘And one morning amongst all other, being a great misty morning such as hath seldom been seen, even as he was crossing the street from his house to the church, he was suddenly murdered with a gun, which of the neighbours was plainly heard and by a great number of labourers there standing at Soper's Lane [NB. now known as Queen Street] end...but the deed doer was never espied nor known.’
Neighbours and bystanders came running to see the noise as the murderer on the cart quickly made a get away. The strong mist and fog limited what they could see of the killer; it is probably why Pakington was not suspicious of being asked his identity. The neighbours gave conflicting reports about what the murderer looked like and the direction he had escaped. A ‘gret rewarde’ was put forward but who did it was never discovered.

The Murder Weapon
Robert Pakington was shot with a wheellock handgun. These were developed from around 1500 and they are fired in a way similar to a cigarette lighter. A wheel is spun against pyrite to create a spark that ignites the charge. They were the perfect weapon for a quick murder in an urban environment. A wheellock can be fired with just one hand, unlike most guns of the time that required packed powders and being locked and prepared in a long process. They are also resistant to rain or damp conditions. While other guns required a burning slow match to be applied to a fuse, the wheellock meant a spark could be made in any weather. The smaller size meant it could easily be hidden in cloaks and pockets. Later on in the sixteenth century, these very factors meant wheellocks were used for the assassinations of William the Silent and Francis, Duke of Guise.
However, those factors that made the wheellock such an effective weapon made it incredibly expensive. The mechanisms required an extremely skilled gunsmith to craft them and to maintain them. The complexity of design made it prone to malfunctions and breakages if the gun is not kept carefully. This would suggest that someone with access to a lot of money killed Pakington or arranged for his death. The gun may have even been sourced from abroad. London was one of the larger cities in England but the population was around 100,000. Any gunsmith with knowledge of selling such a notable weapon would have been identified and questioned (although, he may also have been bought off). In any case, the use of the gun makes this murder particularly notable.

Who Murdered Robert Pakington?
It is extremely unlikely at this point that we will ever know the exact identity of Pakington’s killer - not unless we find a signed confession or will confessing to the crime - there have been theories put forth over the years as to who did the deed.
Robert Barnes, a reformist priest who led the sermon for Pakington’s funeral, called Robert a martyr. This idea was promoted by many of those who knew Robert and who became committed to the new Protestant cause. John Bale, a Protestant reformer, suggested in 1545 that conservative Catholic bishops funded an assassin to do the deed. Edward Hall agreed. John Foxe, a martyrologist who wrote accounts of Protestant martyrs being horribly killed by corrupt Catholic authorities in his work Actes and Monuments, also blamed the clergy. He added to the story by alleging that John Incent, a Dean of St. Paul’s, made a deathbed confession that he murdered Pakington. He also came up with a theory that an Italian may have been the assassin. After all, Italy had the most skilled gunsmiths in Europe and guns were thought to be more part of Italian culture than anywhere else.
The chroniclers John Stow, Richard Grafton, and Raphael Holinshed did not repeat Foxe’s claims in their accounts of the murder. Instead, they claimed that a felon hanged in Banbury, an Oxfordshire village, confessed to the murder while on the gallows.
Finger pointing about religion aside, it is extremely unlikely that bishops got together to conspire to assassinate Robert Pakington. He was a minor figure of reformist policy with no real say over anything. There was nothing especially controversial or notable about his views. He was not translating or publishing Bibles, although he may have imported illegal Tyndale translations from his connections in the Low Countries. There was nothing that would have made him more of a target than, say, Thomas Cromwell. In fact, if bishops wanted to conspire to kill anyone, Thomas Cromwell would have been top of their list.
The death seems to have definitely been arranged. The weapon was chosen for the weather in London in a cold, wet November. The day was chosen carefully, picking one of mist and fog where it would be easy to make a getaway without any neighbours making an identification. Preparing the cart and the hay implies premeditation. Whoever did the murder must have known Pakington’s schedule to be aware of when he was likely to leave his home for mass and that he would not be accompanied with his wife or children. There was money spent on the crime. Handguns were still very rare in England and effort had been put into selecting a weapon that would be the most efficient at killing Pakington to give the killer time to get away.
If he wasn’t killed for his politics, maybe Pakington’s finances provide a clue. He left behind a fortune of around £300 - equivalent to £126,407 in modern money, or around the wages due from 10,000 days of labour. That is a considerable amount of money and he was part of an influential guild with connections stretching into Europe. In the rush to label him a martyr, any business dealings, debts, or disputes that had gone sour were forgotten and never recorded.
There is always the chance that Pakington was, as one in Cheapside might say today, a bit of a dick and someone just wanted to kill him for entirely personal reasons.
Whoever it was that killed Robert Pakington put time, effort, and money into ensuring it was well done. So well done that, while Robert Pakington is still remembered as the first man murdered by a gun in England, we have no idea who killed him and why.

What ideas do you have about the murder of Robert Pakington?
Some sources used:
https://inquisitivewonder.com/the-assassination-of-robert-pakington/
https://www.tudorsociety.com/tag/robert-pakington/
https://peoplepill.com/people/robert-pakington/
http://www.johnfoxe.org/index_realm_text_gototype_modern_edition_1570_pageid_1330.html
submitted by JessCHistory to UnresolvedMysteries [link] [comments]


2020.10.19 07:00 coRvid_ice_elation COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless

https://archive.is/R4gPW
Though the whole world relies on RT-PCR to “diagnose” Sars-Cov-2 infection, the science is clear: they are not fit for purpose
Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter
Lockdowns and hygienic measures around the world are based on numbers of cases and mortality rates created by the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests used to identify “positive” patients, whereby “positive” is usually equated with “infected.”But looking closely at the facts, the conclusion is that these PCR tests are meaningless as a diagnostic tool to determine an alleged infection by a supposedly new virus called SARS-CoV-2.

UNFOUNDED “TEST, TEST, TEST,…” MANTRA

At the media briefing on COVID-19 on March 16, 2020, the WHO Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said:
We have a simple message for all countries: test, test, test.”
The message was spread through headlines around the world, for instance by Reuters and the BBC.Still on the 3 of May, the moderator of the heute journal — one of the most important news magazines on German television— was passing the mantra of the corona dogma on to his audience with the admonishing words:
Test, test, test—that is the credo at the moment, and it is the only way to really understand how much the coronavirus is spreading.”
This indicates that the belief in the validity of the PCR tests is so strong that it equals a religion that tolerates virtually no contradiction.But it is well known that religions are about faith and not about scientific facts. And as Walter Lippmann, the two-time Pulitzer Prize winner and perhaps the most influential journalist of the 20th century said: “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.”So to start, it is very remarkable that Kary Mullis himself, the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology, did not think alike. His invention got him the Nobel prize in chemistry in 1993.Unfortunately, Mullis passed away last year at the age of 74, but there is no doubt that the biochemist regarded the PCR as inappropriate to detect a viral infection.The reason is that the intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.How declaring virus pandemics based on PCR tests can end in disaster was described by Gina Kolata in her 2007 New York Times article Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.

LACK OF A VALID GOLD STANDARD

Moreover, it is worth mentioning that the PCR tests used to identify so-called COVID-19 patients presumably infected by what is called SARS-CoV-2 do not have a valid gold standard to compare them with.This is a fundamental point. Tests need to be evaluated to determine their preciseness — strictly speaking their “sensitivity”[1] and “specificity” — by comparison with a “gold standard,” meaning the most accurate method available.As an example, for a pregnancy test the gold standard would be the pregnancy itself. But as Australian infectious diseases specialist Sanjaya Senanayake, for example, stated in an ABC TV interview in an answer to the question “How accurate is the [COVID-19] testing?”:
If we had a new test for picking up [the bacterium] golden staph in blood, we’ve already got blood cultures, that’s our gold standard we’ve been using for decades, and we could match this new test against that. But for COVID-19 we don’t have a gold standard test.”
Jessica C. Watson from Bristol University confirms this. In her paper “Interpreting a COVID-19 test result”, published recently in The British Medical Journal, she writes that there is a “lack of such a clear-cut ‘gold-standard’ for COVID-19 testing.”But instead of classifying the tests as unsuitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection and COVID-19 diagnosis, or instead of pointing out that only a virus, proven through isolation and purification, can be a solid gold standard, Watson claims in all seriousness that, “pragmatically” COVID-19 diagnosis itself, remarkably including PCR testing itself, “may be the best available ‘gold standard’.” But this is not scientifically sound.Apart from the fact that it is downright absurd to take the PCR test itself as part of the gold standard to evaluate the PCR test, there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, as even people such as Thomas Löscher, former head of the Department of Infection and Tropical Medicine at the University of Munich and member of the Federal Association of German Internists, conceded to us[2].And if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, COVID-19 diagnosis — contrary to Watson’s statement — cannot be suitable for serving as a valid gold standard.In addition, “experts” such as Watson overlook the fact that only virus isolation, i.e. an unequivocal virus proof, can be the gold standard.That is why I asked Watson how COVID-19 diagnosis “may be the best available gold standard,” if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, and also whether the virus itself, that is virus isolation, wouldn’t be the best available/possible gold standard. But she hasn’t answered these questions yet – despite multiple requests. And she has not yet responded to our rapid response post on her article in which we address exactly the same points, either, though she wrote us on June 2nd: “I will try to post a reply later this week when I have a chance.”

NO PROOF FOR THE RNA BEING OF VIRAL ORIGIN

Now the question is: What is required first for virus isolation/proof? We need to know where the RNA for which the PCR tests are calibrated comes from.As textbooks (e.g., White/Fenner. Medical Virology, 1986, p. 9) as well as leading virus researchers such as Luc Montagnier or Dominic Dwyer state, particle purification — i.e. the separation of an object from everything else that is not that object, as for instance Nobel laureate Marie Curie purified 100 mg of radium chloride in 1898 by extracting it from tons of pitchblende — is an essential pre-requisite for proving the existence of a virus, and thus to prove that the RNA from the particle in question comes from a new virus.The reason for this is that PCR is extremely sensitive, which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of DNA or RNA — but it cannot determine where these particles came from. That has to be determined beforehand.And because the PCR tests are calibrated for gene sequences (in this case RNA sequences because SARS-CoV-2 is believed to be a RNA virus), we have to know that these gene snippets are part of the looked-for virus. And to know that, correct isolation and purification of the presumed virus has to be executed.Hence, we have asked the science teams of the relevant papers which are referred to in the context of SARS-CoV-2 for proof whether the electron-microscopic shots depicted in their in vitro experiments show purified viruses.But not a single team could answer that question with “yes” — and NB., nobody said purification was not a necessary step. We only got answers like “No, we did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification” (see below).We asked several study authors “Do your electron micrographs show the purified virus?”, they gave the following responses:Study 1: Leo L. M. Poon; Malik Peiris. “Emergence of a novel human coronavirus threatening human health” Nature Medicine, March 2020 Replying Author: Malik Peiris Date: May 12, 2020 Answer: “The image is the virus budding from an infected cell. It is not purified virus.”Study 2: Myung-Guk Han et al. “Identification of Coronavirus Isolated from a Patient in Korea with COVID-19”, Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives, February 2020 Replying Author: Myung-Guk Han Date: May 6, 2020 Answer: “We could not estimate the degree of purification because we do not purify and concentrate the virus cultured in cells.”Study 3: Wan Beom Park et al. “Virus Isolation from the First Patient with SARS-CoV-2 in Korea”, Journal of Korean Medical Science, February 24, 2020 Replying Author: Wan Beom Park Date: March 19, 2020 Answer: “We did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification.”Study 4: Na Zhu et al., “A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China”, 2019, New England Journal of Medicine, February 20, 2020 Replying Author: Wenjie Tan Date: March 18, 2020 Answer: “[We show] an image of sedimented virus particles, not purified ones.”Regarding the mentioned papers it is clear that what is shown in the electron micrographs (EMs) is the end result of the experiment, meaning there is no other result that they could have made EMs from.That is to say, if the authors of these studies concede that their published EMs do not show purified particles, then they definitely do not possess purified particles claimed to be viral. (In this context, it has to be remarked that some researchers use the term “isolation” in their papers, but the procedures described therein do not represent a proper isolation (purification) process. Consequently, in this context the term “isolation” is misused).Thus, the authors of four of the principal, early 2020 papers claiming discovery of a new coronavirus concede they had no proof that the origin of the virus genome was viral-like particles or cellular debris, pure or impure, or particles of any kind. In other words, the existence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is based on faith, not fact.We have also contacted Dr Charles Calisher, who is a seasoned virologist. In 2001, Science published an “impassioned plea…to the younger generation” from several veteran virologists, among them Calisher, saying that:
[modern virus detection methods like] sleek polymerase chain reaction […] tell little or nothing about how a virus multiplies, which animals carry it, [or] how it makes people sick. [It is] like trying to say whether somebody has bad breath by looking at his fingerprint.”[3]
And that’s why we asked Dr Calisher whether he knows one single paper in which SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated and finally really purified. His answer:
I know of no such a publication. I have kept an eye out for one.”[4]
This actually means that one cannot conclude that the RNA gene sequences, which the scientists took from the tissue samples prepared in the mentioned in vitro trials and for which the PCR tests are finally being “calibrated,” belong to a specific virus — in this case SARS-CoV-2.
In addition, there is no scientific proof that those RNA sequences are the causative agent of what is called COVID-19.In order to establish a causal connection, one way or the other, i.e. beyond virus isolation and purification, it would have been absolutely necessary to carry out an experiment that satisfies the four Koch’s postulates. But there is no such experiment, as Amory Devereux and Rosemary Frei recently revealed for OffGuardian.The necessity to fulfill these postulates regarding SARS-CoV-2 is demonstrated not least by the fact that attempts have been made to fulfill them. But even researchers claiming they have done it, in reality, did not succeed.One example is a study published in Nature on May 7. This trial, besides other procedures which render the study invalid, did not meet any of the postulates.For instance, the alleged “infected” laboratory mice did not show any relevant clinical symptoms clearly attributable to pneumonia, which according to the third postulate should actually occur if a dangerous and potentially deadly virus was really at work there. And the slight bristles and weight loss, which were observed temporarily in the animals are negligible, not only because they could have been caused by the procedure itself, but also because the weight went back to normal again.Also, no animal died except those they killed to perform the autopsies. And let’s not forget: These experiments should have been done before developing a test, which is not the case.Revealingly, none of the leading German representatives of the official theory about SARS-Cov-2/COVID-19 — the Robert Koch-Institute (RKI), Alexander S. Kekulé (University of Halle), Hartmut Hengel and Ralf Bartenschlager (German Society for Virology), the aforementioned Thomas Löscher, Ulrich Dirnagl (Charité Berlin) or Georg Bornkamm (virologist and professor emeritus at the Helmholtz-Zentrum Munich) — could answer the following question I have sent them:If the particles that are claimed to be to be SARS-CoV-2 have not been purified, how do you want to be sure that the RNA gene sequences of these particles belong to a specific new virus?Particularly, if there are studies showing that substances such as antibiotics that are added to the test tubes in the in vitro experiments carried out for virus detection can “stress” the cell culture in a way that new gene sequences are being formed that were not previously detectable — an aspect that Nobel laureate Barbara McClintock already drew attention to in her Nobel Lecture back in 1983.It should not go unmentioned that we finally got the Charité – the employer of Christian Drosten, Germany’s most influential virologist in respect of COVID-19, advisor to the German government and co-developer of the PCR test which was the first to be “accepted” (not validated!) by the WHO worldwide – to answer questions on the topic.But we didn’t get answers until June 18, 2020, after months of non-response. In the end, we achieved it only with the help of Berlin lawyer Viviane Fischer.Regarding our question “Has the Charité convinced itself that appropriate particle purification was carried out?,” the Charité concedes that they didn’t use purified particles.And although they claim “virologists at the Charité are sure that they are testing for the virus,” in their paper (Corman et al.) they state:
RNA was extracted from clinical samples with the MagNA Pure 96 system (Roche, Penzberg, Germany) and from cell culture supernatants with the viral RNA mini kit (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany),”
Which means they just assumed the RNA was viral.Incidentally, the Corman et al. paper, published on January 23, 2020 didn’t even go through a proper peer review process, nor were the procedures outlined therein accompanied by controls — although it is only through these two things that scientific work becomes really solid.

IRRATIONAL TEST RESULTS

It is also certain that we cannot know the false positive rate of the PCR tests without widespread testing of people who certainly do not have the virus, proven by a method which is independent of the test (having a solid gold standard).Therefore, it is hardly surprising that there are several papers illustrating irrational test results.For example, already in February the health authority in China’s Guangdong province reported that people have fully recovered from illness blamed on COVID-19, started to test “negative,” and then tested “positive” again.A month later, a paper published in the Journal of Medical Virology showed that 29 out of 610 patients at a hospital in Wuhan had 3 to 6 test results that flipped between “negative”, “positive” and “dubious”.A third example is a study from Singapore in which tests were carried out almost daily on 18 patients and the majority went from “positive” to “negative” back to “positive” at least once, and up to five times in one patient.Even Wang Chen, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, conceded in February that the PCR tests are “only 30 to 50 per cent accurate”; while Sin Hang Lee from the Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory sent a letter to the WHO’s coronavirus response team and to Anthony S. Fauci on March 22, 2020, saying that:
It has been widely reported in the social media that the RT-qPCR [Reverse Transcriptase quantitative PCR] test kits used to detect SARSCoV-2 RNA in human specimens are generating many false positive results and are not sensitive enough to detect some real positive cases.”
In other words, even if we theoretically assume that these PCR tests can really detect a viral infection, the tests would be practically worthless, and would only cause an unfounded scare among the “positive” people tested.This becomes also evident considering the positive predictive value (PPV).The PPV indicates the probability that a person with a positive test result is truly “positive” (ie. has the supposed virus), and it depends on two factors: the prevalence of the virus in the general population and the specificity of the test, that is the percentage of people without disease in whom the test is correctly “negative” (a test with a specificity of 95% incorrectly gives a positive result in 5 out of 100 non-infected people).With the same specificity, the higher the prevalence, the higher the PPV.In this context, on June 12 2020, the journal Deutsches Ärzteblatt published an article in which the PPV has been calculated with three different prevalence scenarios.The results must, of course, be viewed very critically, first because it is not possible to calculate the specificity without a solid gold standard, as outlined, and second because the calculations in the article are based on the specificity determined in the study by Jessica Watson, which is potentially worthless, as also mentioned.But if you abstract from it, assuming that the underlying specificity of 95% is correct and that we know the prevalence, even the mainstream medical journal Deutsches Ärzteblatt reports that the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests may have “a shockingly low” PPV.In one of the three scenarios, figuring with an assumed prevalence of 3%, the PPV was only 30 percent, which means that 70 percent of the people tested “positive” are not “positive” at all. Yet “they are prescribed quarantine,” as even the Ärzteblatt notes critically.In a second scenario of the journal’s article, a prevalence of rate of 20 percent is assumed. In this case they generate a PPV of 78 percent, meaning that 22 percent of the “positive” tests are false “positives.”That would mean: If we take the around 9 million people who are currently considered “positive” worldwide — supposing that the true “positives” really have a viral infection — we would get almost 2 million false “positives.”All this fits with the fact that the CDC and the FDA, for instance, concede in their files that the so-called “SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests” are not suitable for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.In the “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel“ file from March 30, 2020, for example, it says:
Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms”
And:
This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”
And the FDA admits that:
positive results […] do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease.”
Remarkably, in the instruction manuals of PCR tests we can also read that they are not intended as a diagnostic test, as for instance in those by Altona Diagnostics and Creative Diagnostics[5].To quote another one, in the product announcement of the LightMix Modular Assays produced by TIB Molbiol — which were developed using the Corman et al. protocol — and distributed by Roche we can read:
These assays are not intended for use as an aid in the diagnosis of coronavirus infection”
see comment below for MORE
submitted by coRvid_ice_elation to u/coRvid_ice_elation [link] [comments]


2020.10.16 20:23 German_Blondie German Christian girl(23F) facing cultural and religius bias from American Jewish boyfriend's (28M) family and acquaintances

TLDR: Whenever my boyfriend brings me around Jewish people in the US and it comes up that I am German and not Jewish they guilt me for "my ancestors doing horrible things" and how I should still show responsibility for it to this day. Some of my family was actually unaware of what was going on and another part was part of the resistance and my family lost everything due to that. How can we put a stop to this without being rude?
------------------------------------------------
I am a 23-year-old Christian German girl and my boyfriend (28M) of nearly two years is a Jewish American guy.
We are both graduate students in the United States and I never really cared about him being Jewish because honestly: we agree on certain core values and religion is not super important to either of us. Yes, we are from different religions and cultures but most of the time we actually do not even think about that. We just do us and we are happy with that.
Now the longer we are dating the more obvious it becomes to the both of us that his Jewish part of the family and acquaintances will never see me for my boyfriend's partner but "the German non-Jewish girl". When we started dating it did not even come to my mind that we might be facing issues due to German history concerning Jews. Like I learned a lot about it during history classes in school, how things spiraled out of control and how to notice the signals early enough and stop it from happening again but I did not think it would ever affect me in 2020 given that my grandfather was a toddler when WW2 ended.
Whenever we meet new people they say things like "It took me a while to forgive the Germans but I have forgiven them" or "what is your opinion on what your people did back then?". Those are the same people that seem to have never heard of resistance groups like the "Weiße Rose" or heard of the hardships German people were facing after WW2. Yes, obviously the system overall was corrupt and there were bad people. What happened was horrible. Nothing to say about that. But implying that EVERYONE was bad really annoys me. There are good and bad people in every group. My great grandfather did not agree with the regime and the wars. He deserted and joined the resistance for all we know. This part of the family lost everything because of that. Another part of the family lived super rural - imagine the family having their own zip code and hardly interacting with other people. They were farmers. They knew a war was going on and from time to time they heard weird rumours that sounded too strange to be true. They did not participate in any of the camps and those things and did not even know they existed until after the war was over.
I never had any resentment when it comes to spending time with people from other religions but I have noticed that due to how Jewish people in the US treat me I am growing more and more reluctant to join events that are with Jewish groups of people. My boyfriend has already called out his mother for being hurtful toward me (this was even before we talked about how hurtful it is to me because he could tell she was making me uncomfortable). On top of that if I join for holidays people will be condescending along the lines of "you are Christian you do not know anything about our holidays either way". I had religion class in school where we were taught about other religions and I know how to operate google search. Obviously, if I am unsure about what a holiday is I google it before joining because I want to be respectful to the hosts.
How can we make people see me for my boyfriend's partner and not the German girl that is not Jewish? Unfortunately I am very blond, have blue eyes and are considered tall for American standards so I get my appearance does not do us a favour either. At this point it is not only bothering me but my boyfriend as well and we are trying to put an end to people treating me like I am guilty of what happened in Germany when my Grandpa was a toddler without being rude. Did anyone experience anything similar and how can we put an end to this? I hate how being exposed to hatred all the time pushes me further to the stereotypical thing of Germans having reservations when it comes to Jewish people when this stereotype is not true at all.
submitted by German_Blondie to relationship_advice [link] [comments]


2020.10.15 00:25 throwawayjacob2 I (26M) broke up with my girlfriend (24F) because she crossed a boundary

This is a throwaway account since she uses Reddit. I am a devout Christian and I believe that premarital sex is wrong. I'm not particularly judgemental about it and I won't chew someone out for doing it, but I try to live my life by these standards. Recently, I met a Christian girl using dating app hinge. We'll call her Venessa. We bonded over our faith and other interests such as Queen and Marvel movies. Things were going well and eventually Venessa started doing things like making out and dry humping. I was uncomfortable with this but did not stop her because I know it's hard to not be able to do stuff with your partner. Then one day she actually undressed me and I stood up and redressed, telling her that I'm Christian and don't think premarital sex is ok. She leaned in to reinitiate and I pushed her off. At which point Venessa started melting down and crying saying that I was oppressing her feminity and not accepting her. She said I was sexist and walked out of the apartment crying. I then broke up with her shortly thereafter. I still have mixed feelings and I'm not sure I did the right thing. Any advice?
submitted by throwawayjacob2 to relationship_advice [link] [comments]


2020.10.14 12:26 taat50 Cute roommate update 🦋

So I'm like hella tired right now. So sorry ahead of time if this post is loaded with spelling errors or just doesn't make any sense, but I want to gush about my roommate again because gay :)
If you don't know wtf I'm talking about, I made a bunch of posts on here about my roommate because she's beautiful and I like her and idk how to deal with my feelings without talking about them, but I don't wanna overwhelm my other friend with all this info and I sure as hell can't tell my roommate lol
But yeah anyways, the other day, we had a career fair. I didn't go because it was at a place that something really bad happened to me last year and also it's usually pretty pointless, but my roommate wanted to go. She usually dresses pretty plain, like a t-shirt and long pants with like vans or boots. Occasionally, she'll dress up a little and she honestly looks really pretty, but never in like a professional way or to the extent that your would for a career fair. She had her friend come to our room and help her pick out an outfit and it was really cute because the contrast between her friend's fashion sense and hers was noticable to say the least. Like she just seemed so helpless lmao. At one point, they came up with an outfit that was like a black shirt and brownish orange pants. She had already tried on like a bunch of shoes in the process, so there was a pile of them on the chair. She reached for some brown boots and her friend was like, "Now don't put those ones on, put the black ones on," in a voice that you would use on a little kid. Her friend and I looked at each other and started laughing, and my roommate was like, "I was just I was gonna put them away Iwasgonnaputthemawayyy. Whatever, you guys are mean." It was so cute.
That day was pretty hot, so she asked me if I would drive her to the career fair. I reeeally didn't want to because I hate driving and I hate the place where the career fair was, but she kept begging and she made herself all cute and her eyes were so big and I haaad to omg. I ended up hitting someone's car trying to park afterwards (but no marks, thank god). I told her about it and when she came back, she walked in laughing and was like, "How did you even do that?? There was so much space!" And I was like, "Idk man lol."
We get in a lot of playful arguments and I'm honestly just in the habit of contradicting everything she says, so one time we were talking and she said something about how she has never been mean to me, and I was like, "Idk about that," and she was like, "What when have I been mean to you," and I was like, "Uuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...." I never came up with an answer, so that night I texted her and was like, "Ur right. You've never been mean to me and I don't think you ever would. You treat me better than maybe anyone in my life. I just have to challenge everything you say cause I think it's funny, but seriously you're like one of my favorite people ever." I know she knew it was a joke, but I just want her to know that I appreciate the way she treats me. She's such a good friend to me.
Another cute thing, she somehow doesn't know what like really basic words mean lol. Like arachnophobe, eloquent, etc, words I don't even know how she's gotten this far without learning. I asked her and she says she doesn't know either haha. It's cute as fuck though cause she's always asking me what they mean, and I'll try to explain them but I'm really bad so I'll just look it up and tell her cause I know she won't do it herself cause she doesn't care that much.
The other day, both my roommates and I donated blood, and I really hate needles. She knew that cause I went on and on about it for like the entire week before. I ended up being the last to start, so by the time I was in the chair thingy, my roommate was almost finished. We made eye contact at one point, and I guess I looked pretty panicked cause she just burst out laughing. She finished and went over to where the chairs were for waiting. After they put the needle in my arm and left, she came over. She asked me if I was okay, and I was like, "I... don't know." She was like, "Just don't think about it," and I was like, "It's all I can think about. I can feel it. It's warm. Why is it warm?!" She was like, "Just watch Tiktok," and I was like, "I'm too anxious to watch Tiktok," so she pulled out her phone and started showing me TikToks until the guy came back and she left. On the way home, she said that my eyes had looked teary and she didn't want me to cry. I love her.
A couple days ago, we were talking and she said she was 5'1" and I was like, "Doubt." I thought she was like 5'3", like she's short but not that short. I have another friend whose 5'1" and I feel like a giant when I stand next to her, but I don't feel that big standing next to my roommate. We decided to measure and we would put it on "the board," which is a piece of paper I made logging all our arguments by date, issue, who won, and what evidence we won by. We only log the ones that are solved indisputably. We measured like five times cause I kept thinking there was no way, but I guess she was right. She still only has her name up there twice, out of seven times, but she claims that's cause we just forgot all the arguments that she's won.
We're in a sorority and initiation is coming soon. The new members (me) were supposed to order dresses for that like a long ass time ago, but I hadn't. She asked me if I had ordered my shit and I was like, "..." She was like, "Oh my god. I hate you," and then immediately pulled up Amazon and started looking through dresses. The requirements for them basically make it impossible to get a cute dress cause they're based on mysogynistic modesty standards from a hundred years ago (they also still have references to christianity in a bunch of their shit, it pisses me the fuck off, but I digress). But yeah, I just thought it was kinda sweet that she did that, cause I'm very irresponsible and let a lot of things fall through the cracks and most people just get mad at me for that, but she stopped what she was doing and helped me get that done.
Sometimes I just have dreams where everyone I love is mean to me for no apparent reason, and so the other night, I dreamt that some family members were harassing me about all my life choices, basically saying that I'm lazy and everything I've ever done in my life is just proof of that, and when I tried to defend myself, they all ganged up on me and made me feel like the bad guy, like I should feel ashamed of myself and I'm always so mean to people, that's why nobody likes me, etc, etc. I'm telling you these dreams get pretty brutal. Anyways, there were a few other scenarios, I can't remember all of them, but one was that my roommate was leaving for a long time and she gave everyone hugs except me. I thought it was hilarious that that made it into the dream so I texted her and was like, "Um I just had a dream that you were leaving and you gave everyone a hug except me. Wtf," and then I told her what I just wrote here. She said she'd never leave without giving me a hug, and I was like, "Promise? If you do, I get your desk," and she was like, "I promise." So if she leaves, I either get hugs or I get her desk which is way nicer than mine, so either way I win.
Yesterday, I had an appointment with this lady that was honestly just a bitch to me the entire time. Like I'm not even gonna sugar coat it. She was horrible. I had already been having a rough weekend and day, and that just fucking broke me. I started crying and cried for like two hours straight. She and my other roommate gave me hugs and comforted me. Back at the beginning of the year, I had tried to come up with a time that I had felt cared about, and I couldn't think of one. It kinda fucked be up tbh, but that day I felt cared about and it meant a lot. I texted them each that night and told them that. I'm so glad I have them.
That afternoon, my other roommate asked what she should dress up as this year and I was like, "You should dress up as ______ (idk why I'm even censoring her name, like I give so much detail anybody who knows us would know who tf I'm taking about, but whatever lol). You could wear a t-shirt with the sleeves rolled, jeans, cuffed (lol and she thinks straight), and boots or vans..." She acted like she was offended and claimed she hasn't worn a t-shirt in like two weeks, and my roommate was like, "Weren't you wearing one at _____'s the other night?" And she was like, "Oh yeah fine but other than that." Anyways, now I think I'm gonna dress up as her for Halloween.
Last thing, she found out that I don't like feet, which is ironic because I talk about them all the time, but when people touch me with their feet, I HATE it. She was trying to get me to do my homework, and I wouldn't because I have the attention span of a goldfish and I was just on one yesterday. I tapped her shoulder with my toe, and she retaliated by aggressively touching me with her feet a bunch. I covered myself with her blanket and was like, "You're gonna get the blanket dirty you'regonnagettheblanketdirty," but that didn't stop her. Long story short, we ended up holding feet. It was really romantic. Personally, I'd prefer to hold her hand, but that was a step in the right direction I guess lol.
Anyways, thank you guys for reading these. I know that was a lot. A bunch of people followed me after my last post, so I guess this is a thing people actually wanna hear??? I think we should make a subreddit specifically dedicated to gushing about wlw crushes, cause there's not enough of that here, but yeah chances are, I'll probably be back in like a week with more mushy stuff. If this gets annoying, lmk. I probably won't stop, but it'd be nice to know lol
submitted by taat50 to actuallesbians [link] [comments]


2020.10.14 04:37 Hero3239 A N.I.C.E Finale. Finale to the N.I.C.E series part two.

A N.I.C.E Finale. Finale to the N.I.C.E series part two.
The battle between Zenith-420 and Tyler wasn’t progressing in anyone’s favor. Zenith would begin launching a barrage of needler rounds to which Tyler would deflect with his superior sword skills. The violet needles would land in the grass and nearby trees before exploding in a mini supercharged explosion. Tyler even cut one in half to show off, but it backfired for him as it caused the needle to explode in his face. Though he didn’t take that much damage from the micro explosions. Zenith’s fruit cannon wasn’t any more effective. All the Wampa fruit he launched at Tyler was more of an annoyance than an actual threat. The beard was treating it like a game of real-life fruit ninja. When Tyler would try to attack Zenith, his sword slashes would be blocked by bouncing off Zenith’s titanium alloy plating. He was stunned. His sword should have cut through the armor like butter. After all it was a well-known fact that the glorious Japanese katana could cut through an M1 Abrams armor like it was rice paper. So why didn’t it happen now? Zenith must have been cheating. No matter he would just have to gather his chakra and he would be able to land a decisive blow. He would try to leap back and then bring his blade close to start channeling his chakra but that would be interrupted by an orange and blue tornado coming at him. Tyler would use his sword to block the tornado attack. Sparks flew as his blade grinded against the forces of the tornado and soon both he and Zenith were thrown back.
This wasn’t good. Tyler needed his chakra to use the ultimate ability his grandfather taught him to use in a battle for love. He would have to call in for back up. With a raise of his phone he called a number that was on speed dial.
“Hello?” came a very cwc like voice on the other side of the phone.
“Christian. I need your help to guard me so that I can gather my chakra for my ultimate attack. You owe me for the last artwork I got for you.”
“Very well. I’ll be right over there.” Was all that was said before a click signaled the end of the phone call.
Zenith-420 and Tyler would continue their little stalemate until Tyler’s backup could arrive. On to the field came an exceptionally large and rotund man who looked to be in his near 40s. His hair was a very greasy black ponytail, and he had a hood and cape that covered the top of his head. His outfit consisted of khaki cargo shorts, flip flops, and a very stretched out blue and red shirt that many called “the classic.” His BO was like that of a thick fog as it coated the battlefield in his stench. Zenith’s helmet could filter out the smell thankfully, the girls and the cultists however were not so lucky. With every step Christian Lucas Roger took, a puddle of grease and ax body spray was left behind. Walking next to him was an abomination that could only be described as if a deranged, Geneva convention violating scientist had tried to fuse a wolf girl, a Pikachu, and Sonic the Hedgehog together. It had the body and head of sonic, a Pikachu tail, electric pouches for the cheeks, abnormally large breasts like your typical anime girl, Sonic’s legs, and on the top of the head were two different ears. A Pikachu antenna for the left ear and a standard wolf girl ear for the right. It was covered in patches of white and yellow fur and had bright blue eyes. She wore a blue dress shirt and white skirt. The abomination looked like she couldn’t be any older than 16.
“Go Lumichu. Awoo to the extreme!” Christian Lucas Roger ordered as he tipped his fedora towards Rebecca and Stephany.
“You got it my sweet older daddy!” Lumichu said in a stereotypical airheaded fashion.
Christian Lucas Roger was the neckbeard that made other neckbeards say that he’s weird and they would ostracize him. He didn’t care, however. He figured he would be exceedingly popular online as an artist. He would sit down and log on to his art account, WernLord-44. He would make a comic series around his original character DO NOT STEAL, Lumichu and himself going around and fighting all the haters. In his most recent comic, the two of them were going on a date at Starbucks. It was mediocre in terms of plot. The art itself looked like a kindergartener drew it with their nondominant hand. Though some of the background looked good and that was because it was traced. Looking at comments on his comic, Christian Lucas Roger became enraged. How dare these people accuse him of tracing! And how dare they call him a creep! He hated that word. He would go on arguing with these commenters about how they were slandering his name. He even had artists who had the audacity to come and say he stole their work. How preposterous! He would engage in the act of arguing with them and insulting their art, but he pushed them too far this time and was given a lawsuit for copyright infringement. He began to mope and vague post on his account about his troubles when he got a dm from a watcher of his. They offered to help him with his legal troubles if he helped the watcher at a later date. Christian agreed and what followed was Tyler helping Christian by hooking him up with the family lawyer who got him out of the suit scot-free.
“What even are you?” Zenith-420 asked.
“I’m Lumichu!” The abomination stated with a forced giggle. “I’m a soniwolfchu. Over there is my creator and lover, Christian Lucas Roger. He says we need to help his friend rescue the girl you big mean trolls have kidnapped. Daddy says that she is his sweetheart from the ground up.”
Zenith shuttered a little after hearing this…thing describe herself and even describing her relation to this Christian person. Still he had a mission to accomplish. If Lumichu was going to help the enemy then he would just have to stop her too.
“If you are going to aid the enemy then I must stop you, abomination.” Zenith replied before taking aim with his fruit launcher.
“I’ll stop you with my soniwolfchu powers before you can stop me! Awoo!” She howls summoning a wave of lightning to attack.
Christian was watching his creation attacking Zenith with pride. Meanwhile, Tyler was off in the corner away from the fighting, and the smell. He brought the blade close and began to channel his chakra.
“I must use my ultimate technique past down by my grandfather and master. My master warned me about using this technique and to never use it ever, but I must. They have my girlfriend! I’m sorry master but I must go all out.” He said to himself.
In the fight between Trudy’s forces and Hero3239, it was very one sided in Hero3239’s favor. His chainsword and bolt pistol were chewing through the elite elven warriors. They were forced to engage at such a close range, a range they were not well prepared to battle in. They would charge at Hero3239 to attempt to attack and stop his advance, but they were failing. They were more like cannon fodder than an elite fighting unit.“This is the war you make elves?” Hero3239 taunted as he continued his advance through the elite warriors.
Claule looked on becoming more and more worried. Her forces, her subjects, her friends were losing a battle against a warrior they had never faced before. She looked to Trudy for guidance. Trudy was focused on Hero3239 as he made his way close, but she didn’t seem to be doing anything. Claule had no idea what Trudy was doing. She wanted to question it, but she couldn’t. It was as if a magical force was keeping her from speaking her mind. She could only wait to jump to Trudy’s defense if this strange warrior were to get too close. The elven army had sent more of their heavily armored units to go fight him.
“Yes! Yes! You will need heavy units to fight me!” Hero3239 taunted once more as he saw the new units charge to meet him on the field of combat.
He engaged these new units and once again they fell to his blade. The only true difference was that it took a little longer to take them down, but they fell just the same. Soon the elven army was no more. It was only Trudy and Claule. Claule felt rage burn through her for her fallen comrades but Trudy only had a smug smile. She wanted to question why Trudy was smirking, but she found herself not being able to again. She could only turn to see the approaching hostile solder and, as if her body were moving on its own, she drew her special elven sword. It was a family heirloom past down her family line. She ran at the sci-fi soldier and the two began to lock swords. Hero3239’s chainsword and her mighty elven blade clashed, sparks sent flying as the chainsword’s multiple blades grinded against the elven blade, but the blade wouldn’t break. They pushed forwards towards each other, staring into each other’s eyes.
“Can you not see that Trudy is using you?” Hero3239 stated. “The girl you’re trying to ‘save’ rejected Trudy’s advances. She’s not being held captive.”
“Silence demon.” Claule retorted. “Trudy is one of the greatest and most trustworthy warriors of my kingdom. She singlehandedly saved my kingdom from you, chaos vermin. She would never lie to us.”
“I see you are too convinced in her lies to see the truth. Very well.” Was Hero3239’s final words before attacking once more.
The screeching of metal would fill the air around the fight between Hero3239 and Claule. Sparks began to appear more frequently with each slash both took at the other. Claule’s blade was able to make scratches on his armor but that was all. Hero3239’s attacks failed to connect as Claule was too agile. She would make one slip up in one of her dodging attempts that would prove fatal. As she dodged to the right, Hero3239 raised his bolt pistol up and shot her. She saw that his swipe was a ruse and she had just waltzed into his trap. She would fall to the ground and not get up.
With all the battles going on, the cultists knew that the mighty warriors would need assistance to finish off the beards. Cultist simply an observer, dawning the robes of the moon cult and with the logo of an eye with a triangle for a pupil on his back, decided that they would need to summon their all mighty lord Moonhorse as he was the only being that could withstand and contain the cringe that these beards were producing. They needed to gather three magical items. one bottle of Abita beer, a page of bad fanfiction, and printed screenshots of nice-guy rantings. All these items would be easy to find. Simply an observer ordered one to go to the nearest store to pick up the bottle of required alcoholic liquid, some others would pull up Trudy’s fan fic that she wrote and for extra measure they also grabbed the fanfic of a redditor by the name of Villian64618, and the last of the group would start to print out some nice guy rantings that Stephany could provide them with from her time on Tinder. One other cultist would use a magical barrier to keep the stench of Christian Lucas Roger out of their noses. While everyone scoured for their assigned tasks, simply an observer would start to draw out the summoning crest. It was the shape of a horse skull. The gathered materials were obtained rather quickly and were being brought to the correct places. The rantings went on one of the eye slots, the bad fanfic on the other eye slot and now all they needed was to place the beer on the jaw part of the skull. Their little summoning session didn’t go unnoticed, however. Tyler had seen that the cultists were preparing something. It looked like they were trying to summon something. They were going to use Stephany as a sacrifice! He wasn’t so much worried about Rebecca facing the same fate. Just Stephany.
“Hey cultists! Leave my girl alone!” Called out Tyler in his edgy anime voice.
Something was quite different about Tyler. The blade of his katana was glowing a bright red. He started to gather an aura around him that was of similar cover. The ground shook beneath him and soon he took off like a bullet towards the cultist who was carrying the sacred 24 oz bottle of Abita beer. The only one of the space warriors that could do anything was Zenith-420 and he knew what he had to do. He disengaged with Lumichu. She would try to keep him engaged by using her snow wolf powers to freeze him in place but a few needler rounds would stop her and send her flying back to Christian. Zenith ran until he intercepted Tyler’s ultimate move. The Super Ultra Mega Banzai Kamui Death Blow. A vortex of red energy engulfed the sky after Tyler’s blade collided with Zenith’s power armor. All other fighting stopped to see the vortex. Hootsieroll had just arrived back to where they were when Zenith was struck.
The vortex cleared and at first it seemed that both were standing. Tyler was behind Zenith and soon he sheathed his katana. When the guard of the katana hit the scabbard letting out the satisfying click, Zenith fell to his knees and then to the ground.
“I…may have died a virgin but…at least I wasn’t a cheater.” Zenith said as he fell to the ground.
“Battle brother Zenith! No!” Hero3239 cried out. He was going to charge away from Trudy, but her magic stopped him then pushed him away and into the ground.
Tyler looked over his fallen foe. One less person trying to stop true love from happening. Good riddance. Still, he had to stop the cultists from preforming their ritual. He didn’t have enough chakra to preform another attack like that and he wouldn’t have enough time to charge up again since his beloved might be sacrificed. He would have to just make do for now. His assault was going to continue but he felt something dig into the back of his trench coat. It was a grapple. He was suddenly pulled backwards. Words of rage drilled into his ears as he was being pulled backwards.
“Noooooo! You will pay DEARLY for my battle brother’s life!” came the words from Hootsieroll as he dragged Tyler to him.
Hero3239’s attention was brought back to Trudy. She had pulled him back from engaging with Tyler. Her mistake. He began to charge at her. His chainsword revving with malicious intent. Though something was very wrong. Every swing that looked like it was going to connect had somehow missed. Every shot that should have connect was off by a little to either the right or the left. It was as if the fabric of reality was changing around Trudy in an attempt to protect her. Like the universe couldn’t let Trudy be injured at all and she knew this. She had the biggest smuggest grin on her oily face as she saw Hero3239 keep swinging and missing.
“What sorcery is this?!” He yelled as his chainsword missed its 30th swipe.
“You can’t hurt me. I’m the main protagonist.” Trudy gloated. “Everyone knows that the good guys will win. And I will get Rebecca to see that I am the warrior queen she needs in her life. She and I will live in my kingdom and rule for eternity.”
Hero3239 didn’t have a witty remark to make. He just needed to stop Trudy. That was all.
Tyler faced a rough landing at the feet of Hootsieroll. His Peacekeeper was glowing a light blue as it hummed with life, ready to unleash a devastating blast of energy shot. Tyler thought that this was the end. He had failed his grandfather. And Stephany. Before Hootsieroll could fire his weapon, he was blasted away by a cold wave. Tyler opened his eyes to see Hootsieroll being thrown away. Lumichu. Finally, someone useful. She looked over to Tyler and gave a thumbs up before looking back at her creator.
“Did I do good my sweet older daddy?” She asked with yet another airheaded giggle.
“Yes, you did snookums.” Christian said.
Hootsieroll had collided with a tree and fell slump against it. Looking up he could see Tyler, the abomination, and some stranger all talking with either other. His Peacekeeper had been dislodged from his grip and thrown away somewhere into the forest.
“Pilot we have a Titan ready for you. All you have to do is call it in.” came a voice into Hootsieroll’s comms.
“Drop it.” He said looking near the three hostiles.
“Copy that pilot. Standby for Titanfall.”
Soon a low rumbling could be heard causing Tyler and his makeshift team look around for the source. Lumichu was the first one to spot the cause of the rumbling. It was in the air and rapidly approaching them. Lumichu grabbed her master and moved him out of the way while Tyler used some of his reserve charka to teleport out of the way. With a deafening thud came a cloud of dirt and debris. When the dust settled, kneeling where Tyler and the gang were, was a giant mech with a shotgun and sword. Its frame was rather skinny with the legs looking like metal pipes with little armor. It seemed that this Titan favored speed over armor. Lumichu tried to get closer to see if she could get the mech for her master but as soon as she stuck a hand into the dome shield that surrounded the Titan, an immediate burning sensation covered her hand and she pulled it away. It seemed to be a defense mechanism. Soon came the familiar sound of Hootsieroll’s grapple latched onto the Titan and before any of them could stop him from reaching his Titan, he was already in the dome shield. The canopy of the titan opened allowing Hootsieroll to enter. Once he was in, it closed and then stood to its full height and grabbed the sword on its back.
“Transferring controls to pilot. My sword is yours.” Said the Titan’s A.I
“Thanks Ronin. It’s time to start swinging.” Hootsieroll said as he made the titan turn to face the three.
Lumichu was the first one to try and attack the great metal giant. She was charging up a lightning and snow duo attack to keep the Titan from moving but before she could even call out her attack, Hootsieroll used the Ronin sword like a giant fly swatter and knocked the abomination away and into the ground. She didn’t seem to get up after being knocked into the ground.
“My sweet snookums Lumichu! You’ll pay for hurting my sweet creation you cuck!” Christian Lucas Roger roared. “Soniwolfchu powers!”
Christian had soon turned into Nickochu and he and Tyler began to attack the Titan that dare stand in their way.
With all the beards finally distracted, the cultists wouldn’t have to worry about being stopped anymore and could complete the ritual. It would have been devastating had Tyler been able to stop the cultist who was carrying the final piece of the summoning ritual. That Albia beer was the last bottle at the store, and they wouldn’t have been able to get it anywhere else. The final cultist had placed the beer in the mouth section of the horse skull shape and cultist simply an observer began to chant in a language lost to time. A bluish glow illuminated over the summoning crest. The fanfic pages turned to ash along with the prints of the entitled rantings of very unsophisticated gentle sirs. The auburn liquid in the bottle seem to flow out little by little as if being consumed. The changeling was working! As the chanting continued, the glow became brighter and brighter. It soon turned into a beam of light that shot into the sky like a beacon. The beacon caught the attention of all on the battlefield.
“No.” Tyler gasped out in horror. He had forgotten all about the ritual. “Stephany!”
Trudy looked at the light, shrugged, and went back to toying around with Hero3239. She didn’t know that the beam of light would be her doom.
The beam soon faded and descending from the stary sky was The Dark One, the Mooncult’s benevolent narrator and savior, Moonhorse The Horse. He had arrived not a moment too soon. Trudy had thrown Hero3239 near the cultists with her Mary Sue powers. Nickochu and Tyler had taken out the Titan’s legs with one clean cut, forcing Hootsieroll to eject. He would land near Hero3239. It was very apparent that the two were facing fatigue from combat.
“We need to think of a new strategy.” Hootsieroll said. “This isn’t working.”
“I have more fury to SHARE with the enemy! We must fight on battle brother!” Hero3239 said.
The two would look to see Trudy, Tyler, Nickochu, and the injured but determined Lumichu start to close in on them but all would stop to look up to the arrival of Moonhorse.
“Remember my children. It’s not about the fedora on the outside but the fedaura on the inside.” Moonhorse spoke in a manner that had all the wisdom of a sage.
His words were truly those to live by. His gaze shifted from the cultists to the edgy samurai beard, the god complex leg beard, an omega level threat neckbeard turned abomination, and the omega level threat’s wet dream made real. He frowned while he looked at them. This must have been why his followers called him from his home in the stars. The amount of cringe that these four produced was ten times more than what the Earth was capable of handling. He knew what had to be done. The beards had looked up to see this horror floating over their girls. The cultists must have called this being here to stop them and take the girls as sacrifices. They couldn’t allow that to happen!
“I will cut you down demon! The power of Stephany and my love will stop you!” Tyler yelled out triumphantly.
“Yeah. I’m gonna stop you and get Rebecca back. You won’t be able to withstand my magical might.” Trudy smugly said.
Moonhorse did not reply. He simply raised his arm towards the sky and shifted the moon so that it would be fully visible in the stary sky that night. A powerful light began to glow from the moon’s surface and before any of the neckbeards or the abominations could attack, a powerful blue beam of energy fired from the moon and struck the beards. Moonhorse had summoned his moon lasers to cleanse the Earth of the beard’s cringe. Tyler, Christian Lucas Roger, and Lumichu had all vanished after the beam collided with their physical forms. Trudy, however, was resisting the might of the moon laser. Her Mary Sue powers were protecting her, but they were failing.
“No. This is impossible! I’m the main character here! I’m supposed to beat you guys! I’m supposed to get the damsel and save the day! Me! I’m supposed win! It’s not fair!” She whined. Soon her Mary Sue powers gave out and she too was gone.
Jason had come out of the woods just as the Moon laser vanished.
“Ne…Never fear…my…m’lady. Your white knight…is here… to save the day!” Jason choked out between breaths.
It was very apparent that Jason had just finished running through the forest to get back to where everyone was based on how out of breath he was. His sword had been dragging behind him as he stopped to catch his breath. Moonhorse surmised that he must have been here with the other neckbeards given how outlandish his attire was and how he spoke to someone in the group. He shot some moon lasers from his eyes at the very tired white knight. He too vanished from the Earth. Cleansed of his cringe. After a few minutes of nothing happening, Moonhorse returned to the moon station dubbed the ‘Moon Herd Barn’ there he would read more stories about neckbeards and offer advice on how to deal with them. The cultists had left after a job well done and now Rebecca and Stephany were finally free from the tyranny of the beards.
…except none of that actually happened. What really happened was that Stephany and Rebecca met up with Jason, Tyler, and Trudy as originally planned. The person they brought was the biker with the cross-country touring cat named Mr. Whiskers. Stephany explained everything that was going on and he told her he would bring a couple of his friends to help protect them. So, when they met. The biker brough three intimidating friends and they stood behind the girls as they told the three beards that they weren’t going to accept their ridiculous demands and that they were going to the police. The three beards, so deluded and enraged by being rejected yet again, decided that if they couldn’t have the girls no one could and attacked. The bikers quickly leapt into action and pinned the three beards down until the cops could arrive. Rebecca called them and they soon arrived to arrest the beards.
Epilogue
The three beards had once again found themselves in jail and awaited their court case. Because Jason and Tyler had been here before for similar behavior, they were not granted bail and had to wait in the county jail. Trudy was granted bail however and so she was still to go around but her parents kept a watchful eye on her. Trudy lost a lot of her things like her computer, her figure collection, and her phone. There wasn’t much she could do until the day of the court case. When the beards’ day in court came it had mixed results. Stephany and Rebecca had to come in and testify about everything that had happened to them by the three beards for each individual beard. It was taxing but the girls would pull through. With overwhelming evidence mounting against them, Trudy and Jason were sentence to forty years in jail. Tyler had almost evaded this same fate, but the shadiness of his lawyer had finally caught up to him. It was found that the lawyer was using falsified evidence and this time he didn’t have enough favors to call in to cover it up. He used up any favors he had trying to pull up the sinking ship that was Christian Lucas Roger. They had to do another trial and there Tyler meet his fate and was found guilty just like the other two beards and was sentenced for forty years.
The veterinary clinic had seen a return of clientele after it was found that all the reviews posted were lies and Stephany could go back to aiding the numerous pets that came in without any of the owners fearing for their pet’s safety.
Generic coffee shop saw more business with their proximity to the vet clinic and as such worked out a deal with the vet clinic. Generic coffee shop would be able to put ads with coupons around the vet clinic’s lobby and in exchange workers at the vet clinic were able to get discounts on their orders.
Generic office complex soon became bankrupt and had to dissolve as a company. They couldn’t afford to continue on selling generic brand items for offices anymore. The CEO stepped down from his position. The workers from Generic office complex were hired by a new company, however. Generic office company 2: electric boogaloo. Many hopped on to their new contracts though some did not. One thing everyone could agree on was just how stupid this company naming scheme was.
Rebecca and Stephany would soon get married after surviving such a horrible ordeal over the past few months. Their wedding wasn’t that big. It was just a few family members from both sides, some friends, and the biker gang that helped them out. Everyone was ecstatic for the two newlyweds. There was singing, dancing, and even a photo gallery where everyone could photograph the moment with silly little props. Rebecca and Stephany would go to live in Rebecca’s house. Life was grand. If you were to ask the two if they had to go through it all over again, they would tell you yes. Sure, it wasn’t a very pleasant experience, but they did end up finding each other and they learned a lot of valuable things along the way. The two would live happily ever after for the rest of their days.
And so, ends the tale of some genuinely nice people and some not so very N.I.C.E people.

Reference images for character outfits.

Zenith-420's armor

Hero3239's armor

Hootsieroll's armor

Hootsieroll's Titan
submitted by Hero3239 to MoonhorseStories [link] [comments]


2020.10.13 18:52 Noenoeshuri A new instance of inexcusable Kurdish lies and historical revionism being spread against the Assyrians. Please read and share.

So apparently yesterday, October 12th, was Indigenous Peoples day. On that same day, this article about Kurdish Christians in Syria was published. The main writer of the article is "Vice Chair Nadine Maenza of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF)." This means that she is to be held to a high standard. Another article about her, an interview by the Washington Kurdish Institute, was reposted to SyriacPress, a news outlet run by the Dawronoye, the Assyrians who work with the PKK and the AANES in Gozarto. In the interview she describes how the KRG and AANES are amazing for religious minorities, but she clearly doesn't know her history.
Christianity has a long history in Kurdistan. It reached the region as early as the fifth century when the Kurdish royal dynasty of Adiabene converted from Judaism to Christianity.
The only source for all this false information is:
Mehrdad R. Izady, The Kurds: A Concise Handbook (Dep. of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University, 1992).
Mehrdad Izady is a half Belgian, half Kurdish ""historian"" who claims that Adiabene is a corruption of some ancient Kurdish tribal name. This is false. The name Adiabene is clearly of Syriac origin because it is spelled with a ܚ which does not exist/is not even pronounced anymore in the modern Eastern Assyrian dialects (and Adiabene corresponds to northeastern Assyria), let alone in some ancient Iranian dialect which would've developed into Kurdish. Here is Mark Gewargis' post about Mehrdad's ridiculous claim. Despite it being so clearly wrong, this dog is "highly educated" and has taught at Harvard among other things.
The rest of the article is just insane and says or implies that Kurds were already in our land in large numbers in the early middle ages and that many of them converted to Christianity back then. Yet, none of these numerous Kurdish Christians survived but all magically assimilated into our population (or rather, into "Nestorians" and "Suryani Christians"), and somehow they have a connection to a miniscule amount of Kurdish converts to Christianity from the 21st century.
Do I even need to go over how we and Armenians were the majority in many of these regions only a few centuries ago, let alone in the early middle ages, and how our culture and language were clearly dominant in the region because Erbil (Arbela), Zakho, Hakkari (Akkare), Hasankeyf (originally named Kefa in the late Roman period, evidencing that Assyrians dominated the region at the time, later named 7esno d Kefo "Stone fortress"), Mardin (Merdhe) and Amid (called Amed by the Kurds, their beloved "capital of northern Kurdistan" which contains Kurdified and Islamised Assyrians and Armenians from the genocide) are all originally Akkadian, Aramaic and/or ancient non-semitic names passed down from the Assyrian period? Or how Assyrian churches and monasteries are dated as far back as the 2nd century and are built upon ancient Assyrian pagan temples reliefs, such as in Gzira, Mardin, Amid and many other places? If that information were able to make a difference, these insane lies would not have been able to spread in academia and among the Kurdish nation which does not even have one government to brainwash it. Tell me what is worse, Turks who have actively been indoctrinated by their government, or Kurds who lie and deceive despite having free access to information and not being constrained by a single ultranationalist government that has been brainwashing it's population for an entire century?
The article has been retweeted by a supposed representative of the AANES in the US.
We can not have peace with Kurds until they actively work against such misinformation, but we all know that won't happen. The only way for Kurds to be proud of their nation is by lying that they are indigenous and have a rich history in the region, but they are too stubborn to give this up. The constant lies and deceit are not and should not be a surprise. If a Kurd can sit back while seeing his countrymen spread such horrible misinformation, with at most posting a Tweet about how sad and wrong something is and then immediately going back to celebrating Kurdish pride, he is not our friend.
In 1171, the Kurds attacked Bartella, as well as Mar Mattai Monastery. When the people of Nineveh heard this, they joined forced to fight back and succeeded. However, the monks at the monastery learned of another encroaching attack and agreed to sign a peace treaty with the Kurds to avoid more bloodshed. They paid the Kurds 30 golden dinariis with the agreement. As soon as the Kurds received the gold, they gathered a larger army of 1,500 and attacked the monastery, causing a crack in its wall. They entered and killed 15 monks, while the others escaped.[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartella
In 1185 the Syrian Orthodox Patriarch Mor Mikhael Rabo wrote of Turkoman nomads who used to be attacked by Kurdish bandits in the mountains of Assyria and Armenia. These Kurds lived by plundering or murdering Turkomans on their way between summer and winter residence with their flocks. The Turkomans had enough and attacked the Kurds who started hiding inside the Assyrian and Armenian villages. The local community was suffering hard of the fighting. Finally the Turkomans killed 30.000 Kurds, according to Mikhael Rabo.
Indigenous to the entire region stretching from SW Iran to Malatya and beyond, huh?
Thereafter, there is no mention of the Kurdish presence until about the time of the Emirs of Gziro (Jazireh Bohtan) between 1300 and 1855; in total 37 Kurdish Emirs, according to patriarch Afrem Barsom’s book ”Makethbonuto d Turabdin” (Turabdin’s history). Some of these emirs are known for their cruelty against Assyrians; Sharaf Beg (1505-15), Mir Shamdin, The blind Mir Kor (1808) which is known as ”the barbarous Emir”. In 1831, he massacred all the Assyrians in Alqush on the Nineveh Plains, 1833 the Yezidis in Shigor (Sinjar) where he killed three thousand able-bodied men. Women, children and old people were at the time not counted to the victims because they were regarded as part of the war booty. The same year, Mir Kor massacred several villages in Turabdin; Esfes, Arbo, the monastery of Mor Malke, Zaz and Bote.
https://www.assyriatv.org/2016/07/kurdish-massacres-assyrians-history/
In 1369, another Kurdish attack on the monastery damaged many manuscripts. During the 19th century, Kurds looted the monastery numerous times.[5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar_Mattai_Monastery
and in the 1490s all the monasteries of Ṭur ʿAbdin were laid waste by a confederation of Kurdish tribes.
https://gedsh.bethmardutho.org/Tur-Abdin
Shemʿun was tortured then killed on 6 Apr. 1740 by ʿAbdal Agha, a local Kurdish warlord, for refusing to grant a matrimonial permission for the Agha’s Syr. Orth. servant who wished to marry a close cousin, an act prohibited by the canon law of the time.
Assyrians were their Christian slaves, not brothers. When the Ottomans gave Christians more rights in the 19th century, the Kurds who ruled them were angered and started oppressing them more.
https://gedsh.bethmardutho.org/Shemun-II-Basileios
The Kurdish Agha Nedjo, had in his youth grown up among the Assyrians and they had raised him as a son. When Seyfo broke out, he attacked the Assyrian family who had taken care of him first. The lady of the house asked, "Nedjo, my son, don't you recognize us?" He replied coldly, "That was yesterday, today is another day." While the husbands, fathers and brothers were killed in Fero Caves outside Arnas, the women were forced into slave labor or were murdered.
http://www.aina.org/news/20120806194815.htm
Constant treachery. But these Kurds were just brainwashed by the Ottomans huh? No, they simply continued doing what they were good at: enslaving and murdering people for their own benefit, as they had already been doing for 900 years when the Assyrian genocide broke out.
And what about the massacres of Bedr Khan which resulted in the deaths of over 20.000 Assyrians in Hakkari, Gzira and even Tur Abdin in the 19th century? The assassionations of Mar Benyamin and David Jendo in the 20th and 21th centuries? Everything I've posted here is only a tip of the iceberg. If I had to point out every single massacre of Kurds against Assyrians and destruction of Assyrian heritage, every single betrayal, every single assassination, every single lie spread about the Assyrian nation, I'd be here all day.
The point is very clear. A supposed indigenous population does not
- spend it's entire history ethnically cleansing another indigenous population while being nomads and semi-nomads, then claim that the region was known by the name of their nation as far back as 2000 years ago
- use names from languages of other nations for nearly all of their settlements
- not have any written history until after the middle ages
Here is a quote from Ephrem Barsom, Syriac Orthodox Archbishop and Assyrian nationalist who represented us at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919/1920. This was one of his demands from the western powers:
After the removal of the Turks, the Kurds will not be allowed to take their place. "The Kurd is a barbaric Turk. The Turk is a civilized Kurd,"
It is evident that Kurds have been a violent, uncivilised, nomadic and tribal people from the beginning of their history. We can only live peacefully alongside them as long as we are their servants and allow them to erase our history, it's all profit for them. If one still wants to argue that they are an indigenous population that descends from some succesfull ancient empire, they might need to check their mental health. We can not have peace until Kurds admit this and repent. Notice the double standards: People rightfully talk shit about how evil Turkey is all the time to the point where racism against Turks is tolerated, but don't you dare to call out the Kurdish nation for what it is. Ephrem Barsom summed it up perfectly. I don't hate people for being Kurds, but lies need to be called out and the lack of history and civilisation among Kurds, particularly in the past, is used as an argument for them being non-indigenous as they love to lie, not to hate on them. Although it is hard to remember all of that when even the peaceful Kurds perpetuate this bullshit and support their nation.
And I want to add, since it is relevant to the article as well: Amin to those Kurds who genuinely converted to Christianity, amin. May all Kurds (and Arabs, and Turks and whoever else) follow them in the future.
submitted by Noenoeshuri to Assyria [link] [comments]