You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 03, 2016, 07:50:36 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Will feminism really bring women happiness?  (Read 9176 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rhapsody

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #275 on: March 14, 2013, 11:54:05 PM »
I thought Constantinople was wrecked by the crusaders. I mean, the fourth crusade (1204) was all about politics and led to the single worst sacking the city ever experienced during the byzantine age (a thousand years, right up to 1453).

Even the first crusade made people in Constantinople hold their noses when the Frankish and German warriors made a stopover in their city. The emperor juist wanted them forwarded east as fast as possible.

THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS "Istanbul (Not Constantinople)"

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #276 on: March 15, 2013, 12:11:55 AM »
Ahkay, didn't know that one.  :-)  Let's backhand with this one...

Stefan Andersson, Catch The Moon, Music Video

Something about the lyrics that feels in place, both when it comes to Constantinople getting it by the Turks and this thread.

Offline Bandita

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #277 on: March 15, 2013, 09:55:13 AM »
lol.  I seem to have hijacked the thread into a historical debate. 

I won't argue that most of the nobility who went crusading were looking for something, either eastern lands or spoils of war, or most importantly, status back home.  That's why they generally tended to go, conquer, and go home again.  But on the other hand, there were TONS of believers who stayed behind, who really were convinced that the crusades were their salvation, their only hope.  The Knights Templar are a good example, as were the other orders who formed back then. (knights of St. John, knights of St. George, etc.)  And yes, the pope was motivated by lots of things, but he would have had no excuse to make war if Jerusalem were not a holy land, and also he had to be able to justify any act through the Bible, and had to search for ways to allow leaders to conduct a religious war.  That said, the leaders of the lands of Europe were fighting a 'Holy' crusade.  And if you look at the descriptions by Muslim leaders of the crusaders, they were filled with religious zeal.  Not my descriptions, I'm getting this from the readings I'm doing for my medieval history class. 

And while it is true that it was not purely a 'Muslim' thing, it wasn't really an 'Arab' thing.  The writings by people such as the abbot Suger and others make it clear that they are fighting 'infidels' and 'pagans.'  *read Jews and Muslims, because, again, the Jews definitely got it good in the crusades, much like every other time period.*  Perhaps the Pope and some of the nobility were going for spoils, but that didn't mean it wasn't a religious crusade. The readings by the Muslims who wrote about it made it clear that the population of Muslims were highly cultured, and that the Europeans were backwards idiots who were driven by religion.  Most of those who stayed actually appreciated the cultural aspects of the region, things like music and medicine and math.  They just wanted to drive out the 'pagans'. 
  Good example of the artistic/cultural appreciation of the Europeans, a crusader learning to play the guitar from a Muslim. (Image care of wikipedia)  And one last side note, the fact that the Jews got targeted really tends to uphold the fact that it was a religious war, and not a cultural one.  If they were only targeting Arabs, those Jews who were a different ethnic background wouldn't have been targeted, but they were, due to their religious make up.  It wasn't anti-Arab war, it was Christians vs. Non-Christians war.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2013, 10:00:33 AM by Bandita »

Offline Kythia

  • Noooo-one Fights like Kythia no-one bites like Kythia
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Gender: Female
  • No one chain smokes Marlboro lights like Kythia
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #278 on: March 15, 2013, 12:05:59 PM »
Sorry, I'm a little confused now.

Quote from: Bandita
Yes, but to separate culture from religion is like separating a broken yolk from the white.  It can't be done.

then

Quote from: Bandita
And one last side note, the fact that the Jews got targeted really tends to uphold the fact that it was a religious war, and not a cultural one.

I'm confused as to whether you think the crusades were a religious war not a cultural one or whether the two are indistinguishable.  Your second post seems to be arguing for the two being seperate, your first for them being different sides of the same coin.

 

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #279 on: March 16, 2013, 01:10:11 AM »
Bandita that is a very poor assumption.  Jewish people tend to be very insular and keep their wealth inside their group.  Attacks on Jewish communities could easily be regarding culture and seeking wealth.  In fact one of the common problems, culturally, between Jewish people and Western Christian nations was over loans.  Many loans were taken out to fund crusades and a lot of wealth changed hands to the Jewish people.  Since Jewish people tended to keep wealth inside their families and communities, as they do even now, there was a great centralization of money in those communities.  Jewish people were often attack for that reason.  Very little to do with religion.

Offline Bandita

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #280 on: March 28, 2013, 03:25:49 PM »
Sorry, Kythia.  That was a little confusing, I admit.  But what I was trying to say is that the crusaders were attacking a people for their religious beliefs.  You can read that as 'attacking a culture for its religion.'  In fact, the crusaders were attacking (at least in the first couple of crusades) several cultures for having 'the wrong' religion. 

And I wasn't making assumptions. I was mostly parroting back the things I've learned by reading historical accounts, I didn't write it, some guy in the 12th century did.  Jews also were not really that insular, more that they were driven out by other cultures repeatedly.  But in some parts of Europe, they were esteemed members of society in that era, it really depended on where you look at.  Italian Jews were different from German Jews.  (pre-Germany or Italy, of course, but those areas)

Anyhow... Yeah.....

Feminism.... n stuff.


Offline Hyena Dandy

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #281 on: March 29, 2013, 03:39:44 AM »
Woah, I was hoping to talk about Feminism, and somehow I'm in the middle of the Crusades.

Um...

Venice were dicks?