re: 1,000-Year-Old Remains May Be Of A Highly Respected Nonbinary Warrior

quote:

---

the remains of an early medieval warrior thought to be female may have been nonbinary.

---

No, they Weren’t retarded back then.

And you can easily tell male from female through bone structure

Wow. Just read through the Journal paper. They sequenced the DNA, and got hardly any usable reads. Since the grave had brooches, they wanted to test the DNA to determine the sex.

When the DNA analysis was so bad, they then decided to look for alternative possibilities such as an XXY male with Kleinfelter’s. The original analysis came back with a less than 1% probability of that being true. So the invented a new analysis method to make the model fit their hypothesis. Lol.

quote:

---

Highly Respected Nonbinary Warrior

---

In another year facebook will cancel anyone who doubts this.

Three things I can guarantee about that person 1000 years ago:
1. Nobody called it “non-binary” in whatever language was spoken.
2. Everybody called it a name that we’re not supposed to use in whatever language was spoken.
3. Whether a very masculine female or a very feminine male, that person’s death was probably unpleasant. People don’t like what’s different, and 1000 years back there was no political correctness.

quote:

---

1,000-Year-Old Remains May Be Of A Highly Respected Nonbinary Warrior

---

This type of horseshite is what happens when you let progressives take over your education system.


(And I know the resident OT progressive will downvote this post. But it won’t change the fact I’m right and you can’t refute it)

Hard to reconcile this “discovery” when it’s understood that being called an Ergi (the Old Norse term for homosexual) was so offensive that, unless it could be proven as true, could lead to all-out violence among the parties involved, as well as the complete subjugation of the accuser’s assets and estate if it was a false accusation.

Does that sound like a society that openly celebrated something like a queer, non-binary chieftain?

quote:

---

Hard to reconcile this “discovery” when it’s understood that being called an Ergi (the Old Norse term for homosexual) was so offensive that, unless it could be proven as true, could lead to all-out violence among the parties involved, as well as the complete subjugation of the accuser’s assets and estate if it was a false accusation.

Does that sound like a society that openly celebrated something like a queer, non-binary chieftain?

---

100 percent. Everything back then was about family norms. If you did well, then as a man you honored your family. Had 5 little warriors? You honored your family as a woman. From the top of Norway to the middle of Germany and in between this was the norms for the Germanic society. Anybody called an ergi or angr would drop the gloves immediately and nobody would bat an eye.

The tomfoolery these “researchers” are trying to justify now as normal is just absurd. Gender roles were well defined and dictated society norms. Bring that shite to an ancient Viking, Saxon, or Frisian village you’d be laughed out of town.... if you were lucky enough to live that is.

Gay indians were looked at as spiritual. Their opinions were valued because it was thought they could see things through the eyes of a warrior and female. They had their own names for them and thought of them as gifts from their gods.

They also were horrible at decision making and rationalizing things. Lightning struck a Natchez tribes village so they threw 3 new born babies into the fire as sacrifices to appeal the gods.

Next they'll tell us it's an African viking