The term indiginous wasn’t even used in the English language until the late 1500s, it was literally created for this purpose. Sorry homie, you are wrong, and the English language, by definition, agrees with the timeline of colonization with respect to the definition of native/indigenous people.
Sure, you can use those terms symanticlly to go all the way back in time, but with respect to world history, the “era of colonization” was between the 15th century and 1960. And native/indigenous people were the people that existed in their respective regions before the 15th century. By definition.
Natives are pre-colonization, by definition
Slaves to fashion
I think what you mean to say is “fast food” comes from America.
“In the mid-1700s, “The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy” by Hannah Glasse carried a “Hamburgh sausages” recipe, which was served on toasted bread. In Germany, a meat patty on bread called Rundstück Warm was popular by at least 1869.”
Per Debretts, it has been this way since at least the 1700s, not an “American” thing as you suggest. I’m starting to think this is just another social issue used to divide America, ie propaganda used to control people. And if it is purely preference in etiquette, what are you complaining about? The person sending the letter are allowed to exercise their etiquette preferences as well, right? Or do you also want to control people? Is this all just the fascists on the right vs the facisists on the left? This is how people like Trump rise to populisim, and how freedom and democracy die.
Absolutely disgusting rhetoric you are pushing. My wife is my partner, and vice versa. The prefix works in both directions, with either my surname or my wife’s surname, or even my wife’s maiden name. You are whitewashing slavery with you comment and should be ashamed of yourself!
Absolutely wrong, this is how the language works. I am my wife’s Mr as well, even with her maiden name.
Absolutely not, it applies in either direction, universally. I am Mr (wife) (wife’s maiden name), this is how the language works. Why is this offensive to YOU?
Yes, it is actually!
It is the most correct way. Even if she didn’t take your name, and even if your not married, she is your Mrs. Not sure why this would be infuriating, it’s the language.
Edit: honesty, the replies below are sexist and masogonistic. Yes, the women that you married is your Mrs, it’s the definition of the word. And likewise the man that you married is your Mr, for the same reason. It does not matter whether either party changes their name, it applies either way.
To suggest that marriage is ownership rather than partnership is disgusting, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Did slaves get referred to as Mrs. (slave owner)? No, they did not. Your suggestion is entirely inappropriate, and takes away from the reality that slaves had to live with. Disgusting misappropriation!
Grow up people, you can’t change the language to reflect your personal biases, insecurities and misunderstandings.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
He was ~30 years old when women were finally allowed to open their own bank accounts.
Trump/Pence did nothing more than ride the Obama/Biden economic trajectory, until they bungled their Covid response and crashed the economy, then printed and gave away so much money that inflation ran out of control.
MAGA’ts are not real Republicans. The GOP is an extremist far-right party these days.
according to the concept of settler colonialism, colonizers cannot simply “become natives” as the term “native” refers to the indigenous people who inhabited a land before colonization, and the act of colonization inherently dispossesses and marginalizes those populations, making it impossible for colonizers to truly integrate as “natives” without addressing the historical power imbalance and injustices committed.
Key points to consider:
Definition of “Native”: Indigenous peoples are considered “native” because they are the original inhabitants of a land, with deep cultural and historical ties to it.
Power Dynamics: Colonization involves the forceful takeover of land and subjugation of indigenous populations, making it impossible for colonizers to simply claim the identity of the people they displaced.
Cultural Appropriation: Attempting to fully assimilate into a native culture without acknowledging the historical context of colonization can be seen as cultural appropriation.
However, it’s important to note:
Individual Actions: While a colonizer cannot become “native” in the true sense, individuals can actively work towards reconciliation by learning about indigenous cultures, supporting indigenous rights, and acknowledging the history of colonization.
Complex Situations: In certain contexts, there might be cases of individuals with mixed heritage, where ancestry ties them to both colonizer and indigenous populations, creating complex identity issues.
Facts are important, stop whitewashing history