• NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 hours ago

    The French invented sex. Before then people would just sort of split into two small people who’d then have to grow back to full size, and it was very boring and not very je ne c’est sais quoi.

  • jaybone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yeah, it never occurred to anyone ever to stick their tongues in each others mouths until it was documented in ancient India.

    • 0ops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Anon didn’t say that it started in ancient India, just that the fact that it happened in ancient India proves that it didn’t start in France

    • shawn1122@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      We generally attribute discoveries to whoever documented it first. It’s almost laughable to attribute it to the French based on a kissing style that was widespread there in 1923. Surely people were doing this before then.

      It’s not an unreasonable assumption that people were doing this before ancient India but then the question should be why didn’t the ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Roman’s and Greek document on it then?

      • x00z@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 hours ago

        That’s the thing. France and Belgium call french fries “frites” and “frieten”, which just translates to “fries”. It’s other cultures that gave them (wrong) names because of how they got to know them.

      • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Arabic numerals came to Europe from India via Arabia. The Sine function does too, but it’s name is garbled and doesn’t mean anything.

        Venetian blinds came from Persia via Venice.

        Spanish Flu was everywhere, but everyone at the time was lying about it due to being at war, except for Spain.

        Many First Nations peoples are known by what other peoples called them (often pejorative names) rather than their name for themselves.

        Words usually aren’t authoritative declarations of truth, but rather snapshots of what was a useful distinction to someone somewhere a some time. Did the French think their style of kissing was a unique cultural phenomenon? Will Skibidi be known about in 500 years? No one documents graffiti, was it “discovered” by Pompeii?

        We live in a truely unique age, where nearly any question can have a relavent answer of some kind in moments. We can see people streaming everyday things from around the globe, or find the best research about what we know about ancient people’s daily lives. Is any of this worth carving into a monument though? How many copies of an archeological journal are going to survive the ages vs copies of Game of Thrones? I’d say there are countless things about our lives we think are special to today that even prehistoric people did, it just isn’t notable enought to build monuments to or copy manuscripts of.

      • Shard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 hours ago

        We barely document how we wipe our asses or shower because it’s such a mundane, day to day thing.

        Writing was limited, so I hypothesize that people would focus on important things like tax collections, kingly births or even that cunt Ea-Nasir. Less so on kissing or things they would find mundane.

  • bouh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s funny how France created all its neighbours! Britain, Russia, Italy, Spain! And proceeded to go into mortal wars with most of them!

  • cmder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    So yeah why does the american/english don’t do more research about origins and call everything french ?

    • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      It’s because deep frying was not very common in the U.S. Immersion in hot fat was considered a French style of cooking, so they’re French style fried potatoes. I think “fries” instead of “frieds” is dialect that caught on nationally in the U.S. in the 70s.

    • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon? The son of an Irish immigrant? He’s not the kind of guy who’d let facts get in the way of an opinion so we’re probably pretty solid saying that in front of him. If he did run his mouth, then I got your back, blud.

      • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        I think they might’ve been referring to the left-right political spectrum. I believe the terminology comes from the seating layout of their post-revolution government.

        • Mubelotix@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          In the first days, it wasn’t left against right but rather bottom vs top. People went on top if they agreed more with the people that lived in the mountains in ancient Greece, and called themselft mountainers. They were more radical and aspired to direct democracy. People at the bottom wanted a more monarchical/centralised government. They ended up winning but we keep thinking about how great democracy could be if mountainers could emerge again

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      A full revolution takes you back to where you started.

      Also, cinema was invented by the French. Kind of cool IMO.

      • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Also, cinema was invented by the French. Kind of cool IMO.

        And then reinvented (with the Nouvelle Vague that went against “the Hollywood way” and largely contributed to revitalizing the entire industry)

  • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Britain is the land mass that includes England, Wales, and Scotland.

    William the Conquerer was the first Norman king of England and never had power over Wales and he was mostly successful in gaining homage from King Malcolm III, but never king over the lands.

    Edward I about two hundred years later almost pulls it off, but doesn’t quite get a firm grip on Scotland. James I in the early 17th century holds the crown for each of the lands. In 1707 they formalize the relationship with a treaty.

    So… No the French did not found Britain.

    • yesman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 hours ago

      The Anglos, Saxons, and Jutes were all tribes from what we’d call Germany. The Romans paved the first roads of London, and taught the Pagans about Jesus. And Rome was cosmopolitan, so it was a lot more than Italians in that army. England has also suffered under Danish/Scandinavian conquests small and large. The King Cnut was not a misspelling. His nephew, William is a Scandinavian settled in France.

      So… as far as “blood and soil” goes, Britain, and her people, were always more of a group project.

    • Im_old@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Also Normans were descendants of viking settlers. So French didn’t technically fund England either (yes, I’m being pedantic for the sake of the joke).

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      You could, however, accurately say that a French family founded the modern British monarchy. That much is still true. The UK royal family can still trace its lineage directly to William the Conqueror.

      • Leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        The Normans were Vikings - the then Frankish King, Charles, gave them land in north France if they agreed to shut the fuck up and stop murdering everyone in sight. They become known as ‘Northmen’ which contracted to ‘Norsemen’ which contracted to ‘Norman’.

      • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s not just the royal family, other descendants of the french conquerors are also on average wealthier than the descendants of those that had been conquered.

        One pretty striking statistic: “Furthermore, Norman descendants also enjoy other privileges, including attendance at the best universities. In a recent study that examined the enrollment at Cambridge and Oxford over the last thousand years, it was revealed that at certain times, Norman names were 800% more common at Oxford than in the general population, and more recently, were at least twice as likely to found in that institution’s enrollment.”

        https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/10/last-1000-years-families-owned-england/

  • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is not the French claiming ownership of stuff, this is shitty naming on the part of Americans who thinks all european food is from France. Or who really wouldn’t know the difference between Europe and France to begin with.