“A wizard is never late, nor is she early, she arrives preci…”
Oh shut up Helen, you knew I was going to wear my leopard print and you wore yours today just so I would look like I’m copying you! Our friendship is so over!
It’s been a while since I’ve studied it, but IIRC skeletons of early humans show in general more traits we view as masculine, like stronger chins and a more jutting brow line, even in female skeletons. It was even more pronounced in male skeletons, but this is still pretty mild sexual dimorphism even among great apes (think male vs female gorillas, for example).
Though, even being 9000, they would still be considered a "modern" human, correct? Having evolved roughly 300k years ago, I would think their traits would be far more similar to our own then "early" versions of our species
Early might not be the right word, I think I’m mixing it up with pre-agricultural hunter gatherers (I think I’m forgetting a term here, but it’s hot and I’m tired).
Also it seems to have taken a bit for human ethnicities and morphology to stabilize. We absorbed a lot of other humans in Africa to the point that it unironically messed up a lot of early data cause early scientists didn't think fucked to extinction was a valid form of human expansion.
this feels like one of those shrink wrapped dinosaur situations. like they arent doing a good job estimating how her soft tissue would have been distributed at all. why are her eyebrows so low, why are her cheeks so lean, why is there so much tissue below her lips, why is her hairline so high and with a bit of a widows peak? it feels like they put a mans tissue distribution on a womans frame completely uncritically and called it good.
edit: i think the harsh drop lighting theyre displaying this under is making it way worse too. it might not look quite as bad with softer more diffuse lighting.
Yeah this looks completely wrong to me... Like sure, they would look very different, but they wouldn't be indistinguishable from men. Even from an evolutionary perspective that's just silly.
Even today we have women that have "facial bone structures we associate with masculinity" as they describe. It's not like we are working blind and trying to reconstruct a dinosaur or an extraterrestrial. Though maybe for some scientists, women are similarly rare.
I looked up some examples of "masculine women faces" online in 2 minutes. Even though they look "masculine", they clearly don't look like Gigachad or whatever this reconstruction is.
I can actually see Myself in a romantic/queerplatonic, non-physical relationship with a bi man. But not a straight or exclusively gay man. I went on a date with a man once, we both had a good time.
High fashion models aren’t meant to be facially attractive. That’s what Victoria secret is for. High fashion requires a body as canvas (so be very very thin). A fierce look and walk.
Yeah, it’s that old “Cleopatra lived closer to modern day than the building of the pyramids. Ancient Egypt had archeologists who studied ancient Egypt” thing.
The name Pelasgians (Ancient Greek: Πελασγοί, romanized: Pelasgoí, singular: Πελασγός Pelasgós) was used by Classical Greek writers to refer either to the predecessors of the Greeks, or to all the inhabitants of Greece before the emergence of the Greeks. In general, "Pelasgian" has come to mean more broadly all the indigenous inhabitants of the Aegean Sea region and their cultures.
It depends on what you mean by "existed". They're the ancestors of Greeks, and they lived in what is now Greece, but didn't call themselves that name. As a Greek, to me they're "Greek by ascent", so the distinction is a bit trivial.
Well it would be like calling native Americans 'New Yorkers' because they lived in the same area. There was definitely no New York and no Greece back then so makes no sense to call them that.
The analogy isn't quite right. It's more like, hypothetically, if those native people were left relatively undisturbed and not displaced. Then, hundreds of years later, their descendents are now a large proportion of New York. I would probably call them New Yorkers, yes. I don't know much about Native American history, so let me know if I'm off the mark somewhere here.
I say "relatively" because Greek people had a lot of… let's say… neighbourly troubles, and it got very "complicated" for a long time. But we still call the people living there Greek, even if their bloodline DNA is very mixed bag now. I did an Ancestry thing out of curiosity, so I should know, even though my family and I are 100% born there.
I'd say the analogy is good. We can look at other countries. There was a time when Rome was all over Europe. But we aren't going to call the Romans in present day England the English? There's hundreds of years of breeding taking place with Saxons, celts, norse, etc.
I'll raise a counterpoint then: how many independent countries are now known as "China"? The difference is that the Roman Empire fell apart, and everyone kind of reverted to their original culture or became something new. Same thing happened in Greece after the centuries-long Turkish occupation and war crimes complicated events.
The analogy is very messy now and it doesn't make sense anymore ^😂^. But I guess the end result is that it's not so simple at which point one nation ends and another begins. Real history is messy and once you actually look into it, it's not a simple thing at all.
In the first place "Greece" wasn't even one thing, it was a messy collection of city-states and alliances that kind of got along sometimes. I think many places in the world was like that back then, actually. Then Alexander the Great happened and a lot of the world was Greece. Then it wasn't. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
So yeah. You can make things as complicated or as simple as you feel like.
Level 1 complicated: it's a 9000 year old ancient Greek skeleton
Level 2: it's an ancient skeleton found in what is now known as Greece
Level 3: it's a Pelasgian skeleton
I wouldn't call level 1 "incorrect". I would call it "simplified". People who know Greece didn't exist 9000 years ago will already know the truth. Everyone else won't really care. But I know many people here on Lemmy are "semantics enthusiasts".
it's a 9000 year old ancient Greek ancestor skeleton would be correct. I get the triviality of arguing over semantics, but this is a science post where the semantics do actually matter, even if they are adjacent to the actual thing
Details matter. Especially if were going to talk about a reconstruction of a person from a given time period. That 9000k old recreation of a teenager isn't going to look anything like an actual teenager from ancient Greece.
When historians and scientists show recreations of the cavemen in Lascaux cave, they aren't wearing berets, eating baguettes, and no one refers to them as 20k year old French people.
Wrong, in those years people also reached the age of today's people. The myth that they had a lower lifespan was due to the high mortality of newborns and a violent society that lowered the average general age.
This guy right here, his name is Ötzi. He died around his 50s. 5000 years ago. In the high Alpes. No, not due to old age. He was actually murdered. He was not considered ancient, just old. It's speculated he was already crippled due to past wounds - both fresh and old, and yet he was fine and rocking at the altitude of over 3000 meters... until someone penetrated him with an arrow.
No that isn't a counterargument to your theory, as a single special example is never enough to discard any statement. I don't need to, because it's already well documented how wrong this perception of aging is. I just want to show you just how durable people were even in the truly ancient times.
There are several historic persons which lived more than 80 Years. The people then was genetically identic to the people today and with the same life expentancy, same as today, this depends naturally on their life style. The average lifespan of the people in WWI also was less than 30 Years.
Yeah, one thing I've learned about human genetics is that the markers for skin color are wonky and unpredictable.
I just feel like it'd be safer to assume she was a lot darker given the recency of African diaspora, but again I am far from an expert so I could be totally off.
Here we go again with the random shitting on the Greeks.
Bet the girls in England looked way better than this 9000 years ago, nothing like cro magnon apes no no they didn't eat fleas out of each other's backs where'd you hear that
I've noticed a trend lately - not sure how far back this goes - but it appears to me that aspects of the Greek civilization are very often attributed to the Romans and mentions of the Greeks are often reduced to derogatory memes (like how easy it is to be Socrates because there was only a bunch of people alive at the time and other such bs) and of course let's not forget how gay everyone was (as if that's a bad thing but whatever).
Couple that with misconceptions about Alexander the great and how he was supposedly a Slav and Macedonias weren't Greek blah blah, the fact that the Turks are trying to claim that everything that now lies in modern day Turkey is "theirs" etc etc, the claims from Christians around the world that Christian ideas are the basis of the western civilization and morality in general as if they didn't just appropriate everything from past religions and belief systems... Anyway rant over.
Hah I'm not worried mate it's all good, I just find it interesting how certain interest groups can change narratives from one day to the next.
Btw this misrepresentation extends to all the non-English speaking peoples, who are basically excluded from the internet.
98 Comments
sns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 144 pts · 48d
9000 is a really fucking old teenager.
itkovian@lemmy.world · 36 pts · 48d
That's like being Gandalf of all teenagers.
panda_abyss@lemmy.ca · 22 pts · 48d
“A wizard is never late, nor is she early, she arrives preci…”
Oh shut up Helen, you knew I was going to wear my leopard print and you wore yours today just so I would look like I’m copying you! Our friendship is so over!
anomnom@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 47d
Is was leopard skin back then.
Tikiporch@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 48d
They rounded down, she's actually 9017 years old.
sns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 48d
Just so Republicans can feel it's okay to want to rape her.
Ariselas@piefed.ca · 11 pts · 48d
and she looks really good for 9000
nightwatch_admin@lemmy.world · 79 pts · 48d
I think someone mixed up the storage, and they accidentally recreated John Travolta from the Battlefield Earth movie?
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 34 pts · 48d
It’s been a while since I’ve studied it, but IIRC skeletons of early humans show in general more traits we view as masculine, like stronger chins and a more jutting brow line, even in female skeletons. It was even more pronounced in male skeletons, but this is still pretty mild sexual dimorphism even among great apes (think male vs female gorillas, for example).
FUCKING_CUNO@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 21 pts · 48d
Though, even being 9000, they would still be considered a "modern" human, correct? Having evolved roughly 300k years ago, I would think their traits would be far more similar to our own then "early" versions of our species
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 48d
Early might not be the right word, I think I’m mixing it up with pre-agricultural hunter gatherers (I think I’m forgetting a term here, but it’s hot and I’m tired).
tomiant@piefed.world · 5 pts · 48d
Yeah but we started fucking Neanderthals way later and there were plenty of inbred diasporas with little outside contact.
vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 48d
Also it seems to have taken a bit for human ethnicities and morphology to stabilize. We absorbed a lot of other humans in Africa to the point that it unironically messed up a lot of early data cause early scientists didn't think fucked to extinction was a valid form of human expansion.
AnchoriteMagus@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 48d
Why did you have to remind me?
brap@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 48d
I hear you, I had blissfully forgotten all about that.
tomiant@piefed.world · 1 pts · 48d
SIX fingers...
If anyone missed the RiffTrax version of that movie it is one of the better ones. You can still find it on the privateer gulf.
bampop@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 47d
This is from the movie about the making of Battlefield Earth with John Travolta played by Val Kilmer
0ndead@infosec.pub · 0 pts · 48d
First thing I saw
applebusch@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 60 pts · 48d
this feels like one of those shrink wrapped dinosaur situations. like they arent doing a good job estimating how her soft tissue would have been distributed at all. why are her eyebrows so low, why are her cheeks so lean, why is there so much tissue below her lips, why is her hairline so high and with a bit of a widows peak? it feels like they put a mans tissue distribution on a womans frame completely uncritically and called it good.
edit: i think the harsh drop lighting theyre displaying this under is making it way worse too. it might not look quite as bad with softer more diffuse lighting.
Zarobi@aussie.zone · 18 pts · 48d
Yeah this looks completely wrong to me... Like sure, they would look very different, but they wouldn't be indistinguishable from men. Even from an evolutionary perspective that's just silly.
Even today we have women that have "facial bone structures we associate with masculinity" as they describe. It's not like we are working blind and trying to reconstruct a dinosaur or an extraterrestrial. Though maybe for some scientists, women are similarly rare.
I looked up some examples of "masculine women faces" online in 2 minutes. Even though they look "masculine", they clearly don't look like Gigachad or whatever this reconstruction is.
::: spoiler example photos
:::
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 14 pts · 48d
All three are beautiful. And in other news, I'm a gay enby.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 47d
I'm a sidelined former passionate Ally, can you explain to me how an enby can be "gay" and not "pan?"
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 2 pts · 47d
I'm not into men, and I'm less into women than I am into enbies close to My gender. There are plenty of enby genders I'm not into, too.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 46d
Ah okay that makes sense.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 2 pts · 46d
I can actually see Myself in a romantic/queerplatonic, non-physical relationship with a bi man. But not a straight or exclusively gay man. I went on a date with a man once, we both had a good time.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 43d
IKnowSomeOfTheseWords.goodburger
gergolippai@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 48d
well they always taught us in history class how greece was the hi mark of ancient culture.
very_well_lost@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 48d
slow clap
ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 48d
SpruceBringsteen@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 48d
Funny, if you cut the hair I'd say it's Val Kilmer.
sik0fewl@piefed.ca · 3 pts · 48d
If you don’t cut the hair it’s Madmartigan.
LetThereBeNick@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 46d
And if you give her a normal hairline she might resemble a teenager
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 47d
Today, some women have very masculine features. You can find some of them on fashion show runways, for whatever reason.
This, by chance, is a skull with such features. This doesn't mean all women then had masculine features, the same way not all women today do.
RagingRobot@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 47d
Or maybe the scientist just sucks at portraits
architect@thelemmy.club · 5 pts · 47d
High fashion models aren’t meant to be facially attractive. That’s what Victoria secret is for. High fashion requires a body as canvas (so be very very thin). A fierce look and walk.
ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 47d
Idk about this team tbh. Avgi is certainly not impressed.
samus12345@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 47d
percent@infosec.pub · 3 pts · 47d
groucho@retrolemmy.com · 0 pts · 47d
They should have stopped at Bottom middle, the one between Special Agent Albert Rosenberg and guy in bar bathroom that wants to fight his reflection.
blackbrook@mander.xyz · 17 pts · 48d
Did Carrot Top forget to take his thyroid medication again?
Insekticus@aussie.zone · 4 pts · 48d
No no, that's Simply Red after a full-blown bender. He just hasn't got to his hairbrush yet.
OpenPassageways@programming.dev · 15 pts · 47d
This is what the Trojan War was fought over
groucho@retrolemmy.com · 3 pts · 47d
The face that launched a thousand ships.... away from it.
Luisp@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 10 pts · 48d
All the cast of Odyssey should look like this
luthis@lemmy.nz · 12 pts · 48d
The Odyssey is much, much closer to now than to 9000 years ago
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 13 pts · 48d
Yeah, it’s that old “Cleopatra lived closer to modern day than the building of the pyramids. Ancient Egypt had archeologists who studied ancient Egypt” thing.
luthis@lemmy.nz · 1 pts · 47d
That's still very odd to think about
DarkCloud@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 48d
Is this mislabeled for comedy purposes? Or was that the genuine reconstruction aim?
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca · 9 pts · 48d
40% Heath Ledger 40% Val Kilmer 20% Rocky Dennis
TIEPilot@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 48d
You're tearing me apart Lisa!
Thatuserguy@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 48d
You're tearing me apart
Lisa!Holy Roman Empire!matelt@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 47d
I did naht hit her!
samus12345@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 47d
JoMiran@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 48d
Mother
Tell your children not to walk my way
Tell your children not to hear my words
What they mean
What they say
Mother
luthis@lemmy.nz · 4 pts · 48d
Yeah i can see that a little bit too
tomiant@piefed.world · 8 pts · 48d
OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 48d
MTG dyed her hair?
luthis@lemmy.nz · 8 pts · 48d
Um guys.. I don't think Greece existed 9000 years ago.
Zarobi@aussie.zone · 13 pts · 48d
https://www.delphimuseum.gr/2025/02/greek-history.html?m=1
It depends on what you mean by "existed". They're the ancestors of Greeks, and they lived in what is now Greece, but didn't call themselves that name. As a Greek, to me they're "Greek by ascent", so the distinction is a bit trivial.
luthis@lemmy.nz · 4 pts · 48d
Well it would be like calling native Americans 'New Yorkers' because they lived in the same area. There was definitely no New York and no Greece back then so makes no sense to call them that.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 14 pts · 48d
Columbus: What a curious continent! Ahoy native person, where might I find some gold and child slaves?
Indigenous New Yorker: I'm walkin' 'ere!
luthis@lemmy.nz · 4 pts · 47d
That needs to be a Bill and Ted style time travel movie asap
Zarobi@aussie.zone · 3 pts · 48d
The analogy isn't quite right. It's more like, hypothetically, if those native people were left relatively undisturbed and not displaced. Then, hundreds of years later, their descendents are now a large proportion of New York. I would probably call them New Yorkers, yes. I don't know much about Native American history, so let me know if I'm off the mark somewhere here.
I say "relatively" because Greek people had a lot of… let's say… neighbourly troubles, and it got very "complicated" for a long time. But we still call the people living there Greek, even if their bloodline DNA is very mixed bag now. I did an Ancestry thing out of curiosity, so I should know, even though my family and I are 100% born there.
13igTyme@piefed.social · 4 pts · 48d
I'd say the analogy is good. We can look at other countries. There was a time when Rome was all over Europe. But we aren't going to call the Romans in present day England the English? There's hundreds of years of breeding taking place with Saxons, celts, norse, etc.
Zarobi@aussie.zone · 1 pts · 47d
I'll raise a counterpoint then: how many independent countries are now known as "China"? The difference is that the Roman Empire fell apart, and everyone kind of reverted to their original culture or became something new. Same thing happened in Greece after the
centuries-long Turkish occupation and war crimescomplicated events.The analogy is very messy now and it doesn't make sense anymore ^
😂^. But I guess the end result is that it's not so simple at which point one nation ends and another begins. Real history is messy and once you actually look into it, it's not a simple thing at all.In the first place "Greece" wasn't even one thing, it was a messy collection of city-states and alliances that kind of got along sometimes. I think many places in the world was like that back then, actually. Then Alexander the Great happened and a lot of the world was Greece. Then it wasn't.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯So yeah. You can make things as complicated or as simple as you feel like.
Level 1 complicated: it's a 9000 year old ancient Greek skeleton
Level 2: it's an ancient skeleton found in what is now known as Greece
Level 3: it's a Pelasgian skeleton
I wouldn't call level 1 "incorrect". I would call it "simplified". People who know Greece didn't exist 9000 years ago will already know the truth. Everyone else won't really care. But I know many people here on Lemmy are "semantics enthusiasts".
luthis@lemmy.nz · 3 pts · 47d
Level 1 is definitely wrong.
it's a 9000 year old ancient Greek ancestor skeleton would be correct. I get the triviality of arguing over semantics, but this is a science post where the semantics do actually matter, even if they are adjacent to the actual thing
13igTyme@piefed.social · 1 pts · 47d
Details matter. Especially if were going to talk about a reconstruction of a person from a given time period. That 9000k old recreation of a teenager isn't going to look anything like an actual teenager from ancient Greece.
When historians and scientists show recreations of the cavemen in Lascaux cave, they aren't wearing berets, eating baguettes, and no one refers to them as 20k year old French people.
shortypants@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 48d
Looks like every bass player I’ve ever known.
swab148@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 48d
I feel called out
nuko147@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 48d
If this is a teenage girl, how the hell the grown up men looked like? I mean my masculinity is already hurt by this image alone.
justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -3 pts · 47d
not to long ago you were "ancient" with 40
Zerush@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 47d
Wrong, in those years people also reached the age of today's people. The myth that they had a lower lifespan was due to the high mortality of newborns and a violent society that lowered the average general age.
ddplf@szmer.info · 13 pts · 47d
This guy right here, his name is Ötzi. He died around his 50s. 5000 years ago. In the high Alpes. No, not due to old age. He was actually murdered. He was not considered ancient, just old. It's speculated he was already crippled due to past wounds - both fresh and old, and yet he was fine and rocking at the altitude of over 3000 meters... until someone penetrated him with an arrow.
No that isn't a counterargument to your theory, as a single special example is never enough to discard any statement. I don't need to, because it's already well documented how wrong this perception of aging is. I just want to show you just how durable people were even in the truly ancient times.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 47d
Well yeah and back then everybody was ancient
Zerush@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 47d
There are several historic persons which lived more than 80 Years. The people then was genetically identic to the people today and with the same life expentancy, same as today, this depends naturally on their life style. The average lifespan of the people in WWI also was less than 30 Years.
ekZepp@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 48d
Would
ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 48d
I can suddenly see why you would fight a war over Cleopatra or Helen of Troy if this is the average local option.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 47d
I'm no anthropologist but wouldn't her skin be a lot darker? This feels like people making depictions of Jesus look like a modern European person.
fossilesque@mander.xyz · 7 pts · 47d
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 47d
Yeah, one thing I've learned about human genetics is that the markers for skin color are wonky and unpredictable.
I just feel like it'd be safer to assume she was a lot darker given the recency of African diaspora, but again I am far from an expert so I could be totally off.
Ougie@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 48d
Here we go again with the random shitting on the Greeks.
Bet the girls in England looked way better than this 9000 years ago, nothing like cro magnon apes no no they didn't eat fleas out of each other's backs where'd you hear that
justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 47d
random shitting? so it's not related to the scientific research that was done in Greece and not in England?
Ougie@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 47d
I've noticed a trend lately - not sure how far back this goes - but it appears to me that aspects of the Greek civilization are very often attributed to the Romans and mentions of the Greeks are often reduced to derogatory memes (like how easy it is to be Socrates because there was only a bunch of people alive at the time and other such bs) and of course let's not forget how gay everyone was (as if that's a bad thing but whatever). Couple that with misconceptions about Alexander the great and how he was supposedly a Slav and Macedonias weren't Greek blah blah, the fact that the Turks are trying to claim that everything that now lies in modern day Turkey is "theirs" etc etc, the claims from Christians around the world that Christian ideas are the basis of the western civilization and morality in general as if they didn't just appropriate everything from past religions and belief systems... Anyway rant over.
Canigou@jlai.lu · 3 pts · 47d
Nice rant. Hope you're feeling better. Have a big web-hug my friend 🤗
Forester@pawb.social · 1 pts · 47d
It sounds like you need to make some lemonade pour in the ouzo and not worry about mallakas
Ougie@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 47d
Hah I'm not worried mate it's all good, I just find it interesting how certain interest groups can change narratives from one day to the next. Btw this misrepresentation extends to all the non-English speaking peoples, who are basically excluded from the internet.
ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org · 5 pts · 48d
It's OK, she's actually a 9000-year-old shapeshifting dragon.
SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 48d
Hair is such a big part of how people see attractiveness. Can somebody put this through a better hairstyle in a face app filter and post results?
matelt@feddit.uk · 4 pts · 47d
Anyway, how is your sex life?
jeanofthedead@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 47d
You’re my favorite customer!
webp@mander.xyz · 3 pts · 46d
Does group perception of beauty change over time?
DrBanjo@reddthat.com · 1 pts · 46d
Are we sure its not Danzig?
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 48d
Mac@mander.xyz · 1 pts · 48d
What's her skincare routine?
hefty4871@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 47d
"Oh hi Mark" just makes me think of Severance and there's no way Patricia Arquette looks like this!
suff@piefed.social · 1 pts · 43d
Why such a high hairline!?
GiuseppeLasagna@mander.xyz · 1 pts · 47d
This is Andrew W.K…
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 3 pts · 47d
No, I'm certain it's John Travolta from Battlefield Earth.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 47d
No, no, John Travolta wasn't from Battlefield Earth, you're thinking of Keanu Reeves. John Travolta is from The Matrix.
themaninblack@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 47d
wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 48d
Hirsute, indeed.
garbage_world@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 48d