February being an "odd one out" of the months with fewer days than any other month was sort-of intentional based on Roman superstition -- February was the worst-luck part of the year, the crappy part of the winter everyone hated, that people still tried to ignore
-
Show this thread
-
Like, it was bad luck to *say* it, and you would try to avoid scheduling during February, hence they tried to minimize how much "February" there was in the year ...Which is why it's kind of funny we decided to make it Black History Month, like SNL pointed out
1 reply 1 retweet 35 likesShow this thread -
That's why it's kind of funny and perverse that English people invented Valentine's Day and tried to link it to the "Roman tradition of Lupercalia" They didn't know what they were talking about, the Februa/Lupercalia (which February is named for) had nothing to do with sex/love
4 replies 1 retweet 30 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @arthur_affect
Where does the Catholic feast day of Saint Valentine factor in?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ShieldingC
St. Valentine was martyred literally a thousand years before English people came up with the "Valentine's Day" tradition, and no one said anything about him having anything to do with sex/romance/marriage before then, so it also doesn't really factor in
1 reply 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @ShieldingC
There was a whole thing on Twitter last year where some Christian lady tried to argue Valentine's Day was specifically for het couples because St. Valentine was a Christian who married straight couples when pagan Rome banned it She got dunked on A LOT
2 replies 1 retweet 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @ShieldingC
All of the stories about Valentine being associated with romance are very very recently written, from like the 19th century, greeting-card bullshit The idea that the girl whose blindness he healed in the original legend he was secretly in love with, etc
1 reply 1 retweet 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @ShieldingC
The idea that "pagan Rome" literally banned men and women from marrying each other and having children is so amazingly ahistorical it almost dignifies it too much to even try to argue against it
2 replies 1 retweet 39 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
It's funny because I went to Catholic school and they told us something very similar to this. I don't remember it being Rome or where it was that was supposed to have banned marriage but yeah that lady was probably pulling from something she was told as child.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ShieldingC
It's a distorted version of the fact that Roman *soldiers* (a relatively small all-volunteer force, during the height of the Empire) were not allowed to get married while they were on active duty Because they were deployed in occupied territory for long periods
2 replies 1 retweet 16 likes
And they were really worried about soldiers marrying local women and fathering children who would inherit their citizenship but have no love for Rome So all soldiers' brats were bastards This was, to some extent, a social problem, but not the kind the Christians mean
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect
Yeah marriage doesn't usually deproblematize occupying armies impregnating locals.
0 replies 0 retweets 5 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.