If the Ottomans were in the area for hundreds of years, why aren't there enclaves of Turkish-speaking people? Seems like that happens all over the rest of the world when one country rules another for centuries. Why aren't there Turkish dishes in the common foods (ie in Israel there is a mix of Arab and Jewish foods)? Or other signs of Ottoman culture... thanks!

I have always been perplexed with why he gave the military to a conservative general as a socialist who was under threat, was it incompetence, an honest mistake?

I'm interested in the pre-war development of urban Japan, mostly.

The only example so far that fits the description of Matilda effect is that of Trota of Salerno.

I have been seeing this phenomenon talked about in certain circles. When I do investigate further about them, the only common theme was they weren't as widely recognised as the male scientists (the phenomenon that there are lesser-known scientists is not restricted to gender, but I can see how it can contribute to bias against women in science).

This is a personal "grievance" or "insecurity" of mine, but at the back of my mind, I sometimes ponder whether this means ALL or majority of male scientists took credit from them (this is argued by certain radical feminists, but it's still psyche-gnawing). Is this actually true or not?

That being said, to what extent is it accurate?

I don't want him to look stupider, please provide undeniable facts.

I have a theory that recessions can cause the existing president to be viewed unfavorably. I’m kind of speculating that COVID-19 will be detrimental to Trump’s approval rating, especially because he’s a republican and republicans aren’t known for being generous in unemployment benefits or state subsidies, and the current virus is causing an increase in applications for unemployment benefits in the US as well as companies asking for subsidies to help them pay inactive workers. I would like to compare Hoover and Trump since their terms are both ending on a huge economic recession, but I want to make sure that they are in similar comparable situations. Obviously, Trump is being slandered by the media for the current recession even though it’s largely out of his control, was Hoover slandered by the media for the Great Depression like trump currently?

We've got all kinds of fun buttscaping now, You can have it bleached, waxed, tattooed, stuffed, stuffed with a tail, stuffed with a knobby vibrating steel hook, stuffed with a dude, whatever you like

It's not unheard of in any period of time for people to remove their eyebrows and paint them back on which I think makes 'effort' a moot point in the discussion

I've seen candy green landing strips, wholly improper use of lipstick, body paints are nothing new,

But never have i ever heard of someone putting a splash of color where gram for gram it'd probably go the farthest of anywhere on the body

I am fascinated with mythology and saw a post about the sculpture “The Rape of Proserpina”. Someone in the comments had mentioned that rape at this time was not necessarily referred to as “intercourse against the wishes of one participant” as we do, but as “intercourse against the wishes of one of the participants family/parent(s). (Also, note worthy to mention someone else said it translates to ‘Rapt of Proserpina’ instead of its ubiquitous title that was translated incorrectly; “rapt” is apparently more akin to kidnapping than rape).

This intrigued me, as it seemingly implied that consent was given by the family, not the actual person having sex.

That being said, I was wondering at what point all of our categorizations of sex and how to truly define it occurred? At what point did people-but especially women-have the “right” to say no? And what led to this advancement inciting?

The more I've read about premodern Europe (mostly England and her colonies admittedly) the more I'm surprised at just how central alcohol was to daily lives. Rum rations were considered an essential part of a worker or soldiers pay, and I've read a lot of diary entries from the time basically talking about how shitty their day is and how rum/grog is the greatest comfort they have. Drinking was also bad enough to see mass social movements against it in the early US, but even before then it seems to have been endemic, and frankly it seems like a shockingly high percentage of society would have been considered functional alcoholics today. Is this modern perspective accurate?

From Section 9. of the Confederate constitution:

The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.

Why was this the case? Wouldn't the CSA have wanted such a trade? What was the reasoning for this?

In his early life, Liu Bei have two recorded spouses: Lady Gan and Lady Mi.

Lady Gan was both Liu Bei favored woman and Liu Shan biological mother, so it is no surprise that she received great honor granted by both Liu Bei and Liu Shan.

However, Lady Mi is still Liu Bei first wife and the sister of two of Liu Bei's subject, Mi Zhu and Mi Fang. What could have happened to her that she simply disappeared from recorded history?

I was discussing WWII with a friend. I've often thought the loss of civilian life could have been prevented and that the US had other options, but don't have the greatest knowledge of this point in history. Below are some of the points my friend shared:

• The US made over half a million Purple Hearts because they only had the choice to bomb them or send troops to Japan's shore, but the Japanese would have been prepared to prevent that considering they were already prepared to kamikaze our ships.
• The Emperor didn't want to surrender but his military generals and admirals did. When he said "no" to surrendering, the US bombed them again. After, he agreed.
• It was a necessary evil where 250k vs an estimated million more in a war that would last for 2+ years.
• If the US joined in 1939 when it started, they would have been screwed because the US wasn't producing any planes, tanks, weapons, or ships. They were not ready for a war.
• The US didn't have motivation as a country. Why fight in a war that doesn't apply to them? Until Pearl Harbor, the majority of the citizens could have cared less about the war. After the attack, everyone was on board.

How accurate are these points? Did the US have any other options Japan at the time?

I picked it up recently, because I'm a huge sucker for books describing the historical process of scientific inquiry. From what I've read so far, it's a good read, but there's quite a lot of it that seems a little ... let's call it "ideologically slanted". I know Bernal was a staunch supporter of the USSR, which is why it even got published over here (I'm from Estonia) back in the 1960's. If anyone here has read it, could I get some feedback as to what I should look out for? Thank you!

Monaco is a tiny, extremely wealthy citystate along the french coastline. It even depends on France for its military. How did it manage to keep its independence?

In my opinion, France, UK and Spain

I'm curious to learn more about the general politics and religion during this time period, as I only know the general history of early protestantism

The United States must frequently consider the history of treaties with indigenous peoples when conducting itself. And while I am not suggesting the the violation of treaties was anything but shameful, Has any empire, from the Hsia to the Romans to The British ever treated the indigenous peoples of conquered lands better than the United States treated theirs?