Interesting. It’s kind of interesting, but in the battle of Blair mountain, there’s definitely some hints that there were already communist and anti-communist sentiments at work. I wonder if the red bandanas were a nod to communism.
A citation from 1893 provides a definition as “poorer inhabitants of the rural districts … men who work in the field, as a matter of course, generally have their skin stained red and burnt by the sun, and especially is this true of the back of their necks”.[12] … By 1900, “rednecks” was in common use to designate the political factions inside the Democratic Party comprising poor white farmers in the South.[14]
Coal miners
The term “redneck” in the early 20th century was occasionally used in reference to American coal miner union members who wore red bandanas for solidarity.
I mean to have an actual citation from 1893 that provides a written out definition is huge. These things are around for a good bit before making their way into documentation.
Reading through the talk, many people say coal and then provide links that come far after 1893.
The Wikipedia article doesn’t link to a 1893 citation. It links for a single paywalled article to make that claim. This sounds like an urban legend loop that seems to make sense until examined.
This was an extension of that. Unionist coal miners didn’t have red necks (because they work under ground) so they would wear red handkerchiefs to show solidarity with farm hands.
This is the history that capitalist removed from history books. That and white washing The Black Panthers, American Indian Movement and The Rainbow coalition.
I am talking about being bigoted against "rednecks" who are mostly no more racist than everyone else. I grew up in redneck territory and support those who reclaim it as a label of pride.
I hate lawns so much, but there’s no other option unless you go for a townhouse/condo, which are more expensive in my area because of the great location. Why would anyone want to use and pay for extra water, then mow and trim every other week, for a patch of grass that doesn’t provide any benefit as a plant.
While not what one would think of when they think of songs that survive hundreds of years from now, the only song I can think of that’s not a folk song that’s both archived and hummable (and actually has a tune, so that excludes pop songs)… is the Pokémon theme song. Go up to anyone and say in tune that you wanna be the very best and someone’s gonna ask “like no one ever was”.
i have this thing where when i’m focused, but switching tasks, i’ll click my tongue but it’s always the tune of nick nick nick n’nick nick nick o lo dea onnn
Happy Birthday has the kind of universal recognition you’d be looking for. Maybe in 300 years there’ll be a lyrical shift towards something more interesting. I know multiple versions of Greensleeves. The Cuckoo is the other song that I can think of with a long history. The wiki article doesn’t fully capture it. I’ll stick something in here later.https://…wikipedia.org/…/The_Cuckoo_(song)
Oh look, it’s me! I found out a few years ago that I have De La Chapelle syndrome. I’m actually a trans woman though and not a guy, so I consider it a bonus rather than a downside since it made me have very little testosterone growing up.
Gender being a social construct makes defining it very wonky. This question the right is always asking to ‘‘define what a woman is’’ is really easy to fuck up. Is it chromozones? There is FAR more than two chromosomal makeups, in advanced lab classes that learn to test for chromosomal makeup, students are forbidden to test themselves, any classmate, and any family, because it’s almost certain that one of those people will not be XX or XY, it’s not that uncommon. So chromosomal sexing necessitates more than one gender, or rather fluid gender identity. It’s it the sex organs? Oh no, you won’t like this one, is it functioning sex organs or just any? What do we do with intersex people? They can’t fit into one category by definition, then there’s men who have kids, who think of themselves as men, who find out they have a uterus! And its mentrating! What to do what to do. There’s a lot of men with half testicle half ovary sex organs, are they men? Well not if we go by sex organs now you need a bigger section of category because sex organs don’t fit into two columns, it’s far more complicated. So what do we do! general anatomy? Modern human biologists have a lot of data saying there’s such a thing as a male typical brain, and a female typical brain, how fun! Maybe that will work, sure, but now you have to accept there literally are women trapped in male bodies and vis versa. So again, you need to be fluid with your gender definitions.
Every single metric biological data can provide all point to the same truth, there are not two simple columns where humans can be neatly placed that won’t cause a lot of people to be miserable, misunderstood, or maligned for not fitting either concept.
Basic biology is clear. We are a VERY complicated species.
So let’s just look at anthropology. Did any human civilizations NOT have two genders? Yeah A LOT of them. And even today we have examples. Anciently, Hebrews had 9 genders I think? Jesus mentions 5 genders. He dosen’t seem to have any problem with them existing either. Well… it looks like we’re not the first people to find out that binary gender isn’t the only option.
Last time I looked there wasn’t anything particularly associated with being queer, but the sample set of people who both have this and know that they do is pretty small so who knows! Could be, and we could just be missing the data. Or they could both be correlated with some other factor
en.wikipedia.org
Newest