Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

May 1

Western Culture and homosexuality

Hi, i'm trying to find some information for an article in progress but struggling. I know there is something out there but now i need it there's nothing obvious on a Google search I can use. I need something; research or just notable ramblings concerning the accusation of Western Culture either causing or promoting homosexuality. It's for User:Jenova20/List of suggested causes of homosexuality and this is becoming one of the more difficult ones to find accusations/evidence of. I would appreciate greatly the effort put in to find some information on this. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I guess it depends what you mean by "western culture". The idea that "decadent" Western values (i.e. liberalism) promotes homosexuality is pretty commonplace. The likes of Robert Mugabe have made such pronouncements, and you can find it in some Islamists. That;s linked to defense of local traditions against westernisation. Nationalist ideologies etc. The idea that modern society itself promotes "unnatural" behaviour - including homosexuality - date back to the sexologists of the late nineteenth century, and is linked to the debates about "degeneration", loss of of traditional belief, liberalisation etc. If you are referring to an older model of "western culture" derived from medieval Christianity, you could argue that the very concept of homosexual identity emerges from the fact that it is proscribed. Paul B (talk) 14:50, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

From my Internet search for xenoestrogens homosexuality, the first result is

http://www.30bananasaday.com/forum/topics/xenoestrogens-turning-men-into-women.

—Wavelength (talk) 14:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

See "Joseph Nicolosi" and http://josephnicolosi.com/an-open-secret-the-truth-about/.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:08, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Amazing! thank you both very much ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I think this book chapter from the Family Research Council might be helpful (pp. 29 ff). Looie496 (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

See "Homosexuality in ancient Greece" and http://www.banap.net/spip.php?article121.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

A caution... the topic of this article is guaranteed to be controversial. I am not at all sure that a list article is an appropriate way to cover it. Blueboar (talk) 15:21, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Most gay-related articles are controversial. If i show all opinions here in line with WP:WEIGHT I think i'll be fine. That-being-said, if you have anything to add or change then go right ahead or just suggest it for me to do. Thanks for the sources. If you find more then post 'em up ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

See http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110216141118AAAuy5j.

—Wavelength (talk) 17:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I only skimmed your draft, but you appear to be missing the obvious 'it feels good to put your penis into a hole and sometimes anuses are handier' “cause” (practiced by prisoners the world over, among others), as well as the simple 'hey I like this person and I like putting my penis in holes, combine the two?' cause (alternatively, the 'no religion taught me this was wrong' cause). No idea what these would be summed up into one or two words as in academia. :) ¦ Reisio (talk) 04:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm gonna play the dyslexic card and say i don't understand that. Can you reword or explain? Sorry ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 10:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't want to speak for him, but he seems to be saying "Some people men have sex with men because a) it feels good and b) they don't live in a society where people seem to care." That is, it isn't caused so much as "not prevented". --Jayron32 12:25, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

For female people, this is often much more widely accepted even in fairly conservative societies. Indeed, they may even be allowed to marry men! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

So corrected. --Jayron32 13:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Ahh, i see! Well that's all useful stuff for me to add =D Thanks a lot and keep it coming if you find/think of more ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Note an important point Reisio seemed to be refer to that Jayron32 did not is that of Prison sexuality and other cases of where Men who have sex with men for access and similar reasons, i.e. Situational sexual behavior. Note in such cases it may not be be that it's generally socially acceptable, simply that it's possible and the risk isn't so great as to stop it, in fact it isn't uncommon that those involved may not wish people to know or to speak about. However while there may be some merit to mention this in your article, as your article appears to be homosexuality as a sexual orientation, not as a behaviour. Nil Einne (talk) 15:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

The article in progress is a list of claimed causes. Prison and situation are clearly missing and i'll add them right away. All i need is some decent sources now. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Our articles Homosexuality in Japan#Ancient Japan, Homosexuality in China#Traditional views of homosexuality in China and LGBT history should dispel the notion that something Western might have in some way determined or prevented someone’s idea of appropriate sexual orientation. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, i'm aware that it's a bullshit explanation that Western Society/Culture = Gay but it's for an article and my opinion isn't a source. Thanks for the links, i'll knock through 'em over the weekend ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Distant members of the Princely Family of Liechtenstein

What are the status of the descendants of Prince Eduard Franz of Liechtenstein in Liechtenstein? They are dynasts and bear the title prince but are they recognized by the reigning prince or given a pension by the government? It seems they mostly live in Austria and Germany. Are they consider foreign royals in those countries?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 22:02, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Austria and Germany are very much republics today, and AFAIK, neither has any government recognition at all of any privilege of royalty or nobility; that is there are no heritable privileges associated with title or ancestry recognized by the governments of either country. --Jayron32 02:49, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Foreign royals too?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 02:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

How do you mean? Like does the government give special privileges to foreign royals? Why would they? --Jayron32 02:58, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Just to give some references, both Austrian nobility and German nobility give some good information on the abolition of privilege and of the non-recognition of nobility by those countries today. It seems that there is still considerable "social" recognition in the sense that formerly rich and famous noble families are, well, still rich and famous and being so tend to live the sort of life and have the sort of social privilege that, say, members of the Social Register in the U.S. may, you know the "jet set", playboy, ultra-rich lifestyle, that sort of thing still exists in Austria and Germany. What doesn't exist is any sort of legal distinction that sets such a class apart. So yes, socially, formerly noble families in those countries still live a very different life than the average office worker or school teacher. But there's no official government recognition. It should be noted that it isn't just Liectensteiner nobility that run in those circles either. Aga Khan IV, the Nizari Imam and one of the richest private individuals in the world, who is married to a German princess and whose step mother was Rita Hayworth, is also part of the European noble social scene, as was his father Aly Khan. --Jayron32 03:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Tracing new world's black population

From what part of Africa do each community of American (as a continent) black population come from? OsmanRF34 (talk) 23:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Some Brazilian slaves came from Portugal's colonies of Angola and Mozambique. Otherwise, slaves could come from many parts of Africa, but coastal West Africa was the main area where slave ships loaded. Caribbean Lukumi/Orisha religious practice shows significant influences from Yoruba culture, in current day Nigeria etc. AnonMoos (talk) 23:31, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

So a "cross-colonizer" supply (Portuguese supplying the English or the other way round) was also possible? Are there historical records of how many slaves left Africa, at what ships, and so on? OsmanRF34 (talk) 00:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

There's some good information at Atlantic slave trade. There's a map and tables and percentages and all sorts of good data and everything that shows where most slaves bound for the Americas came from; though it doesn't explicitly say where each slave went to. It is likely that such records may not be available or even possible to produce; though we know where most of the slaves came from, there isn't likely a one-to-one correspondence between a land of origin in Africa and a land of arrival in the Americas. But otherwise, that article's actually in pretty good shape. --Jayron32 02:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

"Cross-colonizer trade" was considered a bad thing according to the prevailing economic philosophy of Mercantilism, and the English desire to trade with Spanish new world colonies was a continual source of friction. For this aspect of the slave trade, see Asiento. AnonMoos (talk) 03:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

And note that populations have moved around considerably over the past few centuries, so you're likely to find a wide mixture of ethnic origins everywhere now. StuRat (talk) 03:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Hence "African American" rather than "Yoruba American" or "Ashanti American" or whatever. Because of their intermingling in the New World, which would not have happened in their native lands to anything like the same extent, if at all, their individual ethnicities have been largely lost. Imagine if all we knew about Italian Americans, German Americans, Hispanic Americans etc was that they were "European Americans". -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

For many Americans, "European" is about all they know of their ancestry. And the European immigrants (like the slaves) also interbred much more in the Americas than they would have in their natal lands. My point is, for people (like me) who can rattle off ~6-10 European countries of ancestor origin, "European American" is probably the best title there is (apparently "White American Mutt" is deprecated). I suspect that, compared to USA, Europe has less people that are e.g. of Irish and German and Russian and Polish and English descent, but I'm not sure how USA would compare to Australia or Canada in that regard... SemanticMantis (talk) 19:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, more to the point, you can rattle off 6-10 European countries. Most people with European ancestry can identify at least some, if not most, of the countries from whence their ancestors arrived in the New World. There are much fewer African Americans who can do the same with regard to where in Africa their ancestors came from at all. --Jayron32 21:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Most European countries are quite ethnically diverse now, although its mostly a recent and urban development. Not on the scale of the US, Canada, Australia etc however. 100 different languages spoken across the UK Alansplodge (talk) 12:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Most European countries have been ethnically diverse for a long time, excepting the relatively recent influx of non-European immigrants. People at all strata of society moved around Europe for centuries. Sometimes, the land underneath them moved, i.e. consider that places like Alsace (Germany to France and back and forth a few times), Savoy and Nice (Italy to France), Silesia (exchanged between Bohemia (Czech), Austria, and Poland many times), etc. One can find historically significant figures from many European countries who themselves, or their families generations before, had come from a very different part of Europe or other parts of the world, i.e. Patrice de MacMahon, Eamon de Valera, Cardinal Mazarin, El Greco, Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester, not to mention all the mass settlements of Vikings, Normans, etc. in various parts of Europe, movements of individual families from place to place, immigration has always occured to some degree. The notion of ethnic groups as relatively "static" homogeneous people of a consistent identity since time immemorial is, and has always been, a fiction. --Jayron32 05:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's all a fiction Jayron. Cheddar Man is the remains of a 9,000 year-old male found in the west of England. In the local village of Cheddar, out of 22 people sample for a Y-DNA genealogical DNA test, two schoolchildren were found to be an exact match. Countries like Norway had a remarkably homogeneous ethnicity (with a few ancient minorities like the Sami people) before the 20th century; first and second generation immigrants now make up 14% of the population. Alansplodge (talk) 19:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

There are genetic testing companies which for a hundred to several hundred dollars (US) can in some cases trace your mitochondrial DNA or Y chromosome DNA back to an ancestor who lived in some specific country several hundred years ago, Then you would know for sure that your maternal line was from some specific African subpopulation such as Khoikhoi or Bantu peoples, or that your paternal line was from the Amhara people or Igbo. They can give percentages of your ancestry from other world population, representing all your other ancestors besides mother's mother's mother's mother or father's father's father's father etc. Edison (talk) 04:02, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2

"Sexual attraction"

Inspired by this RefDesk question, I have some follow-up questions. Does anybody know the cause of sexual attraction in general? Also, what is the difference between "sexual attraction" from other forms of attraction or other forms of affection or something that is agreeable to one's tastes? When people say "I am sexually attracted to..." what does this mean? Is this related to sexual desire, or is it just an affectionate emotion for another person? Is this why some people like to identify their boyfriends/girlfriends as different from their other regular friends? Maybe the boyfriend/girlfriend is the "best friend", while the other friends are merely friends and a bit distant from the individual. Sneazy (talk) 14:01, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Did you try Sexual attraction? Good luck in your quest for an answer ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

If by "cause" you mean the efficient cause -- the mechanism in the brain that causes males to move toward females or vice versa -- then no, we really don't understand that well at all. We know some of the brain areas that are involved but have little idea how they work. If you mean the final cause -- the function that is served by having males move toward females or vice versa -- then I would say we understand that reasonably well. Looie496 (talk) 14:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Moral Constructivism vs Semantic Meta-ethics

According to the book "The Normative Web", moral constructivism, or at least a new version of it, belongs to moral realism. However, it is widely known that constructivist moral theories do not discuss meta-ethics in terms of semantics. Instead, it focuses on substantial meta-ethics.

According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "For some constructivists, lack of interest in semantics is motivated by the conviction that the semantic task with which metaethics is mostly preoccupied is positively misguided (Korsgaard 1996a; Korsgaard 2003; Street 2007, 239). The philosophical issue worth worrying about is normativity, and this is not something that we can explain solely on the basis of semantics. Rather, explaining normativity requires philosophers to engage in other sorts of philosophical investigation, for instance investigation into the idea of autonomy and rationality (Korsgaard 1996a)."

I believe that Korsgaard defended constructivism by dismissing the practicality of semantics in meta-ethics. She affirmed the belief that moral constructivism does not need to have a semantic position.

My questions: 1. Are there any other moral constructivists who criticize the dominance of semantics in the study of meta-ethics? Who are they?

2. Do moral constructivists agree to call themselves realists or anti-realists? Or, would they rather support the view of Korsgaard? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua Atienza (talk • contribs) 19:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Option 3: They have no idea what you're talking about. Can you suggest some links? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

He has given lots of references and elaborated quite a bit. Why don't you just not respond if you don't know anything about the subject? This is a relatively advanced question in philosophy, and is not the sort of thing you can just "wing" based on two Wikipedia articles. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree with Bugs. These are "floating abstractions": words divorced from evident connections to concrete meanings. If the OP wants a serious answer he should do the research himself, since he already has the references, and is looking for an interpretation. If he wants our opinion, which we do, but do not do, (but do), then he should give examples and links. μηδείς (talk) 01:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I think the OP's problem is quite different. They're hung up on the taxonomy of philosophical systems. It would be more helpful in studying philosophy to understand what each philosopher is saying than it is to pigeonhole everyone into a category or assign labels to it all. --Jayron32 04:00, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

This is not a baseless question, even if it does show confusion: I might respond more if I have the time tomorrow. Joshua is dealing with "textbook" metaethics, and the main lines in the debates are pretty well established, and he is just trying to see where those lines are.

Quick answers: 1. Yes: Most Kantians. 2. Realists. Korsgaard is a moral realist, and I don't see any reason why she would reject that label. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 05:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

US military things named after Confederates

I note that USS Robert E. Lee (SSBN-601) and the M3 Lee tank were named after CSA general Robert E. Lee, and USS Stonewall Jackson (SSBN-634) (and the two USS Stonewalls that preceeded it) after Thomas Jackson. Were/are other notable US military items (ships, bases, units, equipment classes) named after other CSA figures? [I thought I was onto something when I found USS Forrest (DD-461), but no] When those two submarines were named, both after noted rebels, was there any substantive complaint that it was inappropriate to name US military units against officers chiefly famous for fighting against that same US military? [Yes, I'm aware that both Jackson and Lee were formerly US Army officers, and that the US has made great efforts to heal the wounds of the civil war.] 87.114.11.184 (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

M3 Stuart tanks. A Liberty ship isn't exactly notable, but there's SS James Longstreet. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Note that the Lee and Stuart (and I believe many others of the time) were names given by the British and then adopted by the Americans (who officially used numbers), which may have helped gloss over the issue. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:45, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Grant and Sherman are the only other ones that I can think of. Alansplodge (talk) 08:13, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Various forts, many listed here, more recognizable ones being Fort Bragg and Fort Hood. "Although naming forts and camps after distinguished military veterans from both the U.S. and Confederate Armies had become a common practice, it was not the official policy until the publication of a War Department memorandum dated 20 November 1939."[1] (I'm not sure that Braxton Bragg "distinguished" himself in quite the right way, though.) Clarityfiend (talk) 22:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Andrew and Clarityfiend, that was very informative. 87.114.11.184 (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Did anyone die in the Tunguska event?

For the longest time that I can recall, the Tunguska Event article claimed that precisely zero people died in the impact. At some point, this source was used to add the claim that a single death was caused. Clearly, Earthsci.org is not going to be doing any original investigation, so I'm wondering if anyone can help dig up other references, better references, as to whether anyone actually died. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It might not be very clearly known, considering that the main investigations came years later... AnonMoos (talk) 23:38, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It is worth noting that Earthsci.org writes "One older man at about this distance was reportedly blown about 12-15m into a tree" - 'reportedly'. They aren't saying it happened, only that it was reported to have happened... AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

This article, today, mentions for the first time I have ever heard someone dying. μηδείς (talk) 01:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

It's neither here nor there as far as our article is concerned, but I've always found it hard to swallow that no humans died (1 being functionally equivalent to 0 here). The area was and still is very sparsely populated, but 2,150 sq km is like a circle of radius close to 30 km. Not a living soul for 30 km in any direction is taking sparseness to extremes. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 11:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

"Taking sparseness to extremes" could just about be the motto of Siberia. Looie496 (talk) 05:20, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but it's not like Antarctica. According to Demographics of Siberia, Siberia as a whole has a population density of 3 people per sq km, but it fluctuates wildly, between 41 in Chelyabinsk Oblast down to 0.1 in Koryak Okrug. Let’s assume the Tunguska region had 0.1 people per sq km in 1908. That means that in 2,150 sq km, there would have been 215 people. Given the force of the blast, it’s not at all surprising that they were all totally obliterated, and given the huge area, it’s not at all surprising that nobody’s ever found any remnants of their housing. But that's not the same as saying there was nobody there.

I think we’d be on safer ground saying that “no evidence of any deaths has been found”, or “evidence of only one death has been found”, rather than “there were no deaths” or “there was only one death”. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 05:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

You're assuming a smooth distribution. Two cities 100 miles apart will give a large area including them a small per acre population that will be a statistical illusion. There was a story in the last few months of a small religious refugee family that had lived in the region with no human contact for forty years. μηδείς (talk) 06:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Which region? Tunguska? Anyway, a cite for that claim would be good, since that's even harder to swallow than what we're talking about. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

See Lykov family. --Ghirla^-трёп- 10:21, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Ghirlandjo, we cannot be too careful about what Jack swallows. μηδείς (talk) 23:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for keeping one eye out for my welfare. Your concern is both gracious and fellatious. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 00:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

What might be a better or alternative search strategy is to run if any bodies were recovered. I understand it was a year or two later but if the predators were also killed then some bodies may have been recovered. Then again think of the most rural, most remote part of Canada or the U.S. and then multiply that times 10, needles in a very massive haystack IMHO, add to that the prevailing 1900s and 1910s attitude by the Church and Tsarist government--as wrong as it is--that native Siberians were not really worth counting in the first place and you get an idea of how impossible the task might be and why no one has really spent much time trying to find out during that era. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 08:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. That just strengthens my argument that it's wrong to say "nobody was killed". If they didn't even look for years later, how would they know? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 09:17, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

No disagreement with that, I liked the earlier statement to the effect that no evidence or none recovered, or 1 reported etc. Sign me up for the Wikipedia expeditionary taskforce to Siberia to uncover the real story ;-). ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 06:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

mizrahi supporting and in left wing parties in Israel

Is Amir Peretz the only Mizrahi/Sephardi Jew that is a left-wing politician?--Donmust90 (talk) 23:25, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Donmust90

You are as capable of going to Category:Israeli politicians and reading all of the articles as any of us are. --Jayron32 23:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, our article doesn't specify what soccer team he roots for? μηδείς (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

May 3

Engels' contribution to sociology

what were the contribution of Fredirich Engels to sociology field? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.59.13.192 (talk) 09:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like homework to me. Try here: Freidrich_Engels (I assume your spelling was a typo.) 196.214.78.114 (talk) 11:10, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

As was yours. It's Friedrich, people. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

It does sound a bit like homework, but to put you on track, the books that sociologists would most often cite would be The Condition of the Working Class in England and The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State. The name is Friedrich Engels, sometimes anglicised as Frederick Engels. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't know anything about Engels' contributions to the description of industrial society, but in anthropological speculation he followed many of the ideas of Lewis H. Morgan and similar figures, including the idea of an inevitable linear progression from "primitive promiscuity" or hetairism to matriarchy to patriarchy, etc... AnonMoos (talk) 09:24, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Grenade-resistant

Is there grenade resistant suit available? --Yoglti (talk) 09:43, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

It depends on what kind of grenade you are talking about, and how close you are. Most grenade fatalities are believed to be caused by fragmentation, which may be stopped by standard modern body armor. However, the degree of body armor you would need to survive a fragmentation grenade would depend heavily on what type of grenade it is, and how far you are from the grenade when it goes off. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

To provide a reasonable protection against both offensive and defensive grenades, something like a bomb suit would be needed - preferable one that also has gloves and/or mittens. A less cumbersome option would be to induce someone else to fall on the grenade for you - with modern body armour such an act can be survivable. WegianWarrior (talk) 10:45, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

May I suggest the use of a Unmanned ground vehicle instead, or a tank if you must be present. Dmcq (talk) 11:42, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

... or you could invent one of these. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

May 4

Antonio Ferrante Gonzaga, Duke of Guastalla

How was he burned alive exactly?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 01:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

According to the Italian Wikipedia version (run through google translate) it appears he had been hunting on a cold, rainy day, and when he got back to the lodge, rubbed himself down with alcohol (perhaps as a linament, maybe he was sore?) and being cold, he moved close to the fire place. That unfortunate combination caused him to accidentally catch fire. Someone who actually speaks Italian may be able to get a better translation. --Jayron32 01:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Anti-Homosexual Novels

Are there any novels that express anti-homosexual sentiments? I mean fictional stories, novels, short stories, novellas, that kind of stuff. Sneazy (talk) 04:15, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

A google search for anti homosexual novels would be a good starting point. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 04:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

"Revolt of the Pedestrians" by David H. Keller is a semi-classic science-fiction short story which still retains some interest, despite being very "pulpy" and over eighty years old. However, it contains a rather strange anti-lesbian sub-plot based on the idea that lesbianism is not just a form of deviant sexuality (a pretty standard view in 1928), but is the deeply pathological manifestation of a very disturbed mind... AnonMoos (talk) 09:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Medieval shipyard

Was a medieval shipyard such that the construction of the ship was done high up on scaffolding and then rolled down into the sea, -OR- was the ship built in a large hole and that hole filled with water when the ship was done? Is there any pictures of such medieval shipyards where they did ship construction? LordGorval (talk) 13:32, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

This picture [2] indicates rolling down but I guess others might do it differently. Dmcq (talk) 13:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The first picture in that series showing galleons being built has them surrounded by big banks of earth, I think that was for easy access and a sound base though. I'd have thought the problems if there was some rain and the hole was filled would be too much unless you were sure it wasn't going to rain for some months. In one case of building a dry dock I know of they had the area protected with a big bank of earth and used pumps to keep the place dry and an electric field between the pump holes in the bank to keep it in place, it was quite deep so not the same problem but that technology wasn't available in medieval times! Dmcq (talk) 14:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Just had a though, they could have used a canal lock type arrangement and built them above the water line that way, so I think it is worth your seeing if there was anything on those lines or something else I haven't thought of. Dmcq (talk) 14:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

• What do you mean by "medieval"? If you mean the usual thing (prior to 1450 AD), then there weren't very many large sailing ships. The largest ships, I believe, were Venetian galleys that sailed mainly in the Mediterranean Sea. Looie496 (talk) 15:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

• I mean between the year 1000 and 1400. Yes, I realize they were small sailing ships - but I would imagine merchant ships traveled the Mediterranean Sea in this time period. Yes? LordGorval (talk) 15:45, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I see at Roman shipyard of Stifone (Narni) they did what I said in effect, they had the river fill up the channel in which they built the ship and then the ship went downstream to the sea. Before Medieval times but seems a sensible way of doing larger ships and I think people did sometimes build galleys later to ram and sink pirates. For smaller ones the Norse for instance could pull their ships across land [3] rather than go around by sea! Dmcq (talk) 16:40, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Shipbuilding seems to be Wikipedia's article on this though it doesn't seem to answer your question. Dmcq (talk) 16:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Most medieval shipbuilding would have been on a slipway and launched from there. Trying to build a drydock would be much more involved than "digging a large hole", since nearly any hole near a navigable waterway would fill up with groundwater very quickly. Medieval Viking ships were certainly build on slipways. My (modern) copy of Architectura Navalis (1629) also seems to assume that every type of ship is launched from a slipway. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all the answers. I believe my question has been answered.LordGorval (talk) 10:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Intermarriage in Israel

I realize this question has the potential to be highly controversial, but I'm curious and can't find many sources that aren't blatantly biased.

This article about anthropology says that "over half the Jewish population in Israel believes that the marriage of a Jewish woman to an Arab man is equal to national treason". Our article on Arab citizens of Israel says the same, while this link claims that "75 percent of participants did not approve of apartment buildings being shared between Arabs and Jews".

Are these claims an accurate reflection of Jewish Israeli culture, or is there something that I, as an outsider, am missing? Is there a large divide between Haredim and secular Jews in terms of their opinions about intermarriage? I find it hard to believe that these attitudes would be the norm among well-educated citizens of a 21st century democracy. --128.112.25.104 (talk) 21:56, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Yup, the question IS highly controversial. Blueboar (talk) 22:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Why? HiLo48 (talk) 22:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I won't pretend to have no opinion on the matter, but please trust that I'm not trying to stir up a debate. There's enough of those on the Internet already. --128.112.25.104 (talk) 22:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

See Deuteronomy 7:3, 4.—Wavelength (talk) 00:16, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I've read Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Kings, so I'm aware that the Bible prohibits intermarriage in no uncertain terms. Nevertheless I was under the impression that secular Jews don't take the Bible literally, even if they're religious at all, just like how most Christians don't stone women to death for adultery. --128.112.25.104 (talk) 00:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

[The account of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery is not universally accepted as part of the original Bible.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2013 (UTC)]

They no doubt take over 73 years (and still going!) of fighting seriously.
Anyways, stoning women to death for adultery and whatever is tantamount (since adultery would not actually approach treason in the USA) to (merely) saying adultery is “treason” are quite separate matters. Maybe you should just take a step back and realize that it is journalism based on haphazardly done studies the details of which (specific questions asked, protocols taken, etc.) have not even been disclosed. ¦ Reisio (talk) 06:12, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• How much support is there for gay marriage among the Orthodox? It would offer an in-house alternative to those who Jewish men might otherwise consort with Arabs or seculars. On the other hand gay miscegenation might be seen as weakening Israel's enemies. And what about the rights of Stan? μηδείς (talk) 06:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, that was completely over my head. Was it supposed to be helpful, or just a joke? (I'm not criticizing you, just puzzled about what you're saying.) --Bowlhover (talk) 07:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Breton duke

Who was the last duke of Brittany to speak Breton (not Gallo)? --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 22:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't Brittany a county? Should you ask, who was the last comte to speak Breton?
Sleigh (talk) 06:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

If Brittany wasn't a duchy, why do we have an article titled "Duchy of Brittany"? Gabbe (talk) 08:14, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

This book says "Apart from the colloquial Breton that she spoke with her nurse, Anne, like all upper-class Bretons, was fluent in formal" - so Anne of Brittany for sure. That leaves Claude of France (likely, for similar reasons?), Henry II of France (unlikely) and Louis, Dauphin of France, Duke of Burgundy (even less likely) to investigate. 174.88.10.231 (talk) 13:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't fluent in formal mean fluent in French?
Sleigh (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, especially since that book says "fluent in formal French", specifically. But do we know how different 15th/16th century Gallo was from 15th/16th French? Adam Bishop (talk) 15:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

May 5

open university?

Would I be allowed to apply for a course at the Open University whilst also taking a different course at another university at the same time? Also, how would this work regarding student loan funding, since both have different costs, would I apply for a loan to cover the more expensive of the two?

213.104.128.16 (talk) 15:15, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean by allowed? ... I don't think anyone could stop you from taking an Open University course, if you wanted to take one. The real question is whether you would receive any course credit (towards a degree) for the Open University course at your primary university. That would be up to the university. Blueboar (talk) 17:09, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I mean, as in separate credit towards two different degrees at the same time, from different institutions, are there no restrictions there? 213.104.128.16 (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Who would be imposing such a restriction? Does any university say that if you study at another institution at the same time, you get no credit for your achievements at the university? I very much doubt it. How could it possibly be policed? And why would they care? Whatever you do outside the uni is your own private affair, and that includes being involved with some other educational institution. Their whole ethos is about support for learning, not about creating stupid and arbitrary disincentives. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

As for the loan, it would be in your best interest to contact the Student Loans Company directly. OU courses do qualify for funding as of this year but undertaking two courses at two separate institutions at the same time seems to be quite rare. Nanonic (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd be very surprised and shocked if you had any kind of problem with either the loan or enrollment by either institution, but again there's only 2 organizations that can answer that definitively. It's a free world after all you may do what you please . . . but its a free world if one institution chooses not to accept the other's course credit or loan, no opinion here its pretty much a yes or no by the interested parties. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 06:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

US federal legislation vs. state legislation

G'day. Does a state legislature in the U.S. pass more laws than Congress, and are such bills more often vetoed by a governor than by the president? Recently I read that Jerry Brown signed more than 10,000 bills into law during ten years as governor of California (two terms served 1975-1983). That is more than any president in history, even in times when many laws were passed in the 20th century. And I heard that Ronald Reagan (in his National Convention speech 1984) vetoed more than 900 bills only in fiscal terms while serving as Governor of California. As I pick Ronald Reagen as exemple, he served eight years as governor and eight years as president, may it be that he signed and vetoed a lot more laws in the governorship as in the presidency? Are state legislatures more active than congress? Or does that vary from state to state and only larger states such as California pass so many laws? --85.176.224.153 (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd be curious to know the source you originally read. This is an easily gameable statistic. Structure matters a lot. For instance, omnibus budget bills could constitute thousands of provisions, but if they're passed as one bill that would count for one. Similarly, do Federal Regulations (published in the CFR) count? How about private laws? If it's a simple question of how many times the executive signed his/her name to a "bill" (as the term's understood under the appropriate constitution) then you could count the Statutes at Large for the term you're interested, and the state equivalent. That seems tedious, and not particularly instructive to me.

If it's not just a numbers question though, as for who's more "active", that seems to be a qualitative question that's almost impossible to answer. Shadowjams (talk) 19:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Also keep in mind not every U.S. President had the Line-item veto so that will skew results (presidents before were more cautious NOT to veto a bill because of its "riders", but Presidents with LIV partially veto lots of stuff). Also the differences between state statutes on how their bills become laws differ immensely in some situations, add to that both Presidents and Governors having friendly legislators or one house of the bi-cameral legislatures vetoing a bill by the opposition controlled other house and basically doing the dirty work for the governor or president before it even reaches his desk. The proverbial "Passed by the House, killed in committee in the Senate" etc.

Long answer, short I am sure you could put together some accurate numbers for the Federal Government and some of the larger states but why, its really apples and oranges comparing them or even comparing presidents, take for instance Clinton had a hostile opposition controlled Congress for 6 years, and Reagan an opposition House for 8 (Congress for 2), yet George W. who although capable was not the status of either Clinton nor Reagan I think we can all agree, had a very friendly Congress for 6 years, thus George W. would "seem" better than Clinton and Reagan not because he was, just because he lucked into a very agreeable Congress for the vast majority of his presidency, likewise for Governors or for comparing state vs. state. In short although good for trivia it really doesn't mean anything, and its why most political pundits really don't spend much energy on detailed comparisons other than to score some cheap temporary point. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 06:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Photograph of a 19th-century Bosnian woman

?

The woman on this photograph is supposed to be Umihana Čuvidina, a Bosnian poet. However, I find it somewhat unlikely that she is the actual subject, given that she was born in 1794. The earliest known photograph of Queen Victoria was taken in c. 1845 - by that time, Čuvidina was over 50. Surtsicna (talk) 23:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure that's a photo? The resolution is so poor that I can't whether it might be a painting -- and in a quick web search I couldn't spot anything with higher resolution. Looie496 (talk) 23:18, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

It looks nothing like early 19th-century paintings I've seen. For a start, it is black-and-white. Surtsicna (talk) 23:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

But it could be a monochrome photo of a painting. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I suppose you are right. It could be. The new question is: is it a monochrome photograph of a painting? I very much doubt it, but it is a possibility. If not, can it be a photograph of Čuvidina? Surtsicna (talk) 23:40, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Radio Sarajevo says it's a daguerreotype that is believed to be of her. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't it fairly common for old portrait photos to be "touched up" by artists? So maybe she was 50 but the artists were particularly generous to the age of the subject, just like photoshop, smoothing out wrinkles and the like. Vespine (talk) 03:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Earliest-born known human to be photographed

This is inspired by Surtsicna's question. History of photography shows us a photo of the Boulevarde du Temple, taken in 1838, which is the first photo of human beings. But they're unidentified, and even if we knew who they were, they wouldn't necessarily answer my question, which is in two parts:

Who is the earliest-born identifiable person to have been in a photo, and when were they born? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

And if that person is not notable, who is the first notable such person? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Seems like the photographers themselves, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:1839_photographs. Although Nicéphore Niépce made the first photograph in the world of an engraving of Pope Pius VII in 1822 which was later destroyed in the attempt to recreate it.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 23:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

It's Robert Cornelius according to http://petapixel.com/2012/11/15/the-first-hoax-photograph-ever-shot/ . He was born in 1809.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm not sure those are what I'm after. The key here is not the date of the photo, but the date of birth of the subject. There could have been photos taken after 1839, of people born well before Cornelius. Also, a photo of an engraving or a portrait, or even a cadaver, is not what I'm after. I'm after a photo of a living person. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:01, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Of course he isn't it, but I believe the first U.S. President photographed was Andrew Jackson who was born March 15, 1767, so that would give you a baseline to work from. --Jayron32 01:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Van Buren and Jackson are getting much closer to the ballpark. I suppose there's a natural limit; if the earliest photo of humans was in 1838, then it would be hard to imagine anyone born before 1738 getting themselves photoed. At the moment, we're looking for a birth in the period 1738-1767, and probably closer to the later date. I'm actually surprised this hasn't been nailed down for a Wikipedia article already. Maybe it's there somewhere, but I couldn't find it. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

A random search for a daguerreotype of a really old guy produced Martin Routh born 1755.--Melburnian (talk) 02:11, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow, he was born just 5 years after Bach died and the year before Mozart was born. Fantastic. Any earlier takers? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 02:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

This site mentions Dr Ezra Green (born 1746) as a contender, together with other possibilities.--Melburnian (talk) 03:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

This question was discussed on the German WP back in 2006. Our results can be found here. --Wrongfilter (talk) 06:47, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Google Translate German -> English hasn't been working for me lately ("server failure" keeps coming up), but I get the general gist, which seems to accord pretty much with Melburnian's results. Danke. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

May 6

Alien abduction insurance

What proof the insurance companies want to show that a claimant have been abducted by extraterrestrials? --Yoglti (talk) 07:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

You should buy a plan and then show us the paperwork. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:54, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

A signed confession by the extraterrestrials? Dbfirs 08:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, apparently. According to this blog the requirements for a valid claim include a signed statement from an alien, as well as photographs of the inside of an alien ship and/or alien biological material. Gandalf61 (talk) 08:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Supposedly a London-based firm has issued policies,[4] but I'm not convinced it isn't a joke as the company's name is Goodfellow Rebecca Ingram Pearson. You've got to get a GRIP, you see. Anyway, if you can track them down, why don't you ask them? Clarityfiend (talk) 10:00, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

If someone fakes ones own abduction, constructs a lab interior and make alien suits with humans inside, how will the insurance company know the documents are man-made or extraterrestrial? --Yoglti (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Global Employment in Automotive Driving?

Are there any estimates for the number of people employed as drivers in the US, UK or preferably globally? This would include all taxi drivers, bus drivers, UPS delivery men, private limo, etc. --CGPGrey (talk) 09:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)