this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
160 points (98.8% liked)

History Memes

3311 readers
688 users here now

A place to share history memes!

Rules:

  1. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.

  2. No fascism, atrocity denial or apologia, etc.

  3. Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.

  4. Follow all Lemmy.world rules.

Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Klear@quokk.au 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

These paintings eventually evolved into the Bear Holding a Shark we know today.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Klear@quokk.au 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The email, the email, what what the email!

The HR reference had slipped my mind, thanks!

[–] Klear@quokk.au 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Oh, goody. I was expecting the video to raise a lot more questions that it would answer =D

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

Just good memories!

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 13 points 11 hours ago

“Ladies…”

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

As a vegan I appreciate pictures of men holding fish. It's a nice way to filter out men who glorify violence against animals.

[–] CybranM@feddit.nu 3 points 3 hours ago

I don't understand why people find your comment controversial. Its totally fine to skip people youre unlikely to agree with, similar to if someone had a certain red cap, easy skip.

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Unlike many i don't mind people leading with their particular belief system, it's a similar filter.

If your identity is based around a certain belief system in a way that you feel the need to include it in any conversation I can safely assume that there's little original thought or non-dogmatic identity in there.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de -3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

You can't imagine someone having moral ideals except if they are inserted in a blind dogmatic belief system?... That's kinda weird

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Thats not what I wrote.

One can have morals without reminding people of having that particular moral stance. One can have faith without ventilating it constantly.

But if you feel the need to berate people how they are wrong according you your moal framework and craft your core identity out of adhering to the moral ruleset it encomapasses, even dragging it into conversations that have nothing to do with it, you might have trouble of connecting with people outside of your particular dogma.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Did I berate someone though? I just said that the fish thing is a useful sign to filter out people. I literally ignore these people. I don't interact with them because we clearly stand on different moral grounds. I said nothing about being better let alone berating people, I think you're just projecting?

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 1 points 3 hours ago

My comment was not directed at you personally, just that there is an overlap in filter mechanisms.

What I described can apply to multiple convictions.

The same would probably apply if someone based their entire personality around a singular idée fixe or even a particular antagonist.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 8 points 11 hours ago

Something fishy is going on here...

[–] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 5 points 10 hours ago

Just a fisherman's résumé.