This thread is permanently archived
So apparently people have a very weird view of Vikings
| Who cares about history or facts?
| Like, people genuinely lose their mind when you talk about real Vikings. You know, the traders and farmers from Scandinavia that generally didn't give a shit about who you were attracted to, what you identified as or what skin tone you had.
The one's who spent a lot of their time socialising and trading wares down in Turkey. The one's who were very short and often chubby because being slim during Norwegian winters was a death sentence at that time.
| >>806230
Apparently nobody. Apparently, to the majority of people, Vikings are some fantastical, aryan, Christian ideal ass motherfuckers who exterminated everyone else.
Like, damn. Vikings aren't fantasy characters written in 1940s Germany. A lot of them were more chill than what people are today.
If you could do something useful and help out the village, you were a sibling, and you'd protect eachother to the death.
But, no. Apparently they were Nazis.
Pisses me the fuck off.
| Can we also talk about how a group of short, chubby little misfits pulling up and destroying their enemies with no fear of death is way more raw than some Marvel super hero?
Like, when they fought, that shit was just, raw. Not idealised or some LotR elf shit, but just real as fuck?
That's how it actually was, and it's way cooler than this twisted ass view people seem to have of them.
Like, have people never learned Viking history? Like, ever? Anywhere? Like, damn. Just read.
| >>806233 For what? I need some useful knowledge like how to fix things or how to do my work properly, not Vikings history.
| >>806236
If you think an anon board is the place for knowledge about getting your life together I've got bad news for you...
| Some people have small brains and just latch on whatever stereotype of a foreign culture they first heard of. I appreciate it when folks like you call them out, at least.
| >>806247
I think you're in the 0.1% of people who actually appreciate that.
You have no idea how many times I've encountered foreigners online who get straight up aggressive about it. Apparently someone from the culture they hold stereotypes about correcting them is too much for their little brains to handle.
Even when I'm not correcting anyone and just talking about something Viking related, if they don't know that and it doesn't fit their little headcannon, they throw a tantrum.
| Basically, I'm glad.
| Big Nordic son of Odin daddy can come plunder my pussy anytime he wants
| Thanks for ranting about vikings, it was interesting
| But vikings did raid England and stuff.
| Also, Norwegian winters are not that bad??
| >>806232
>Vikings aren't fantasy characters written in 1940s Germany.
I'm not sure if this is a "local man discovers the corporate media complex supports authoritarianism" moment.
| >>806278
You'll need a proper climatologist for this, I can only tell you that temperatures a thousand years ago were ~1.5°C lower than they are now, on average.
| No, antifa chud... You are not a Vikingr...
| >>806270
I'm glad.
>>806274
Yeah, no shit. They had plenty beef in England. But they mostly traded. I mean, Viking at that time was a title simply given to anyone who travels overseas. So majority was trading, despite the plenty raids.
>>806278
1. It was colder back then.
2. The houses back then weren't exactly cold resistent, and no modern ways of heating. They couldn't just go inside and suddenly be all warm, and had to travel for weeks straight in the snow. That's pretty bad.
| >>806274
Yep, and quite often. The northernmost Scottish islands were basically unsettled because of Viking raids, for example. They also kept slaves(trälar) and kidnapped those children from Vinland and probably many other places.
Norwegian berserkers were notoriously known for baiting people into legal duels, only to kill or maim their opponent and legally acquire all of their possessions.
We Scandis had our fare share if dickbags too just like any other civilization.
| >>806312
Oh we had plenty bad people for sure. I am not denying that in the slightest. I'm just annoyed that the general view of the Vikings and their culture is so, like, Hitlerfied, and that talking about anything they did other than the raids and violence is something people get unironically mad at.
There are tons and tons of battles and raids and shady shit to talk about though.
| >>806296
Not discovers it. Just annoyed that people blindly believe everything they see in the media. Which isn't new for me either tbf, but it still fucking annoys me. I'm mildly annoyed a lot of the time basically.
| >>806315
>I'm mildly annoyed a lot of the time basically.
Big same. We should hang out and rant about how annoying the world is to one another.
| Fun fact in Japan they call buffet-style eating as "viking" バイキング due to how they ate when they first arrived in Japan
| For some reason, 4channers would try to deny with all their hearts and souls the original vikings. They are still thinking vikings were like the modern stereotype of vikings.
Welp, it's not a surprise 4chan is retarded.
| Imagine talkin about vikings like if they were a progressive role model. Sure, Vikings didn't care about who you fucked, but be the one getting fucked and then exile is ready for you. Homosexuality was still frowned upon if you were the bottom. Also let's not forget that even the farmers and fishermen had slaves and many rould ofter r*pe those slaves.
| >>806328
Partially true. They do call it that, and it is because that style of eating was inspired by Scandinavian buffets, specifically Swedish. But, Vikings never set foot in Japan. When it comes to Asia they didn't go farther than the middle East.
That style of eating was introduced in Japan less than 100 years ago, and the name is partially because it sounds cool and partially to honour the roots of it.
At least that's what I've read and heard.
| >>806329
It's far from just 4channers. It's normal ass people too. It's a very common perception.
>>806333
I'm not talking about them as progressive role models at all, but go off.
| That's a very interesting thread, anon. Could you tell me a bit more about vikings? I'm genuinely interested. How exactly did they looked like? How did they lived, how did they treated their woman and children? The berserk and Ulfrheðinnár were real?
| >>806350
Looks wise, usually pretty short. Kinda scruffy. Honestly a bit like how dwarves are portrayed in high-fantasy media, but not exactly. Basically just modern day Norwegians but way shorter, way more stacked and also chubby if they had the food for it.
Women and children didn't exactly get the best treatment sadly, but not the worst either. Like, there were plenty strong women who could fight evenly with and had the same respect as men, but rape was fairly commonplace.
| It was better than during medieval times. That's when it went complete oppressive patriarchy mode.
Treatment of kids was, well, eh. Harsh environments, so they usually had to be hardened, work and hunt and sometimes fight at a very young age. A lot of them did get love of course. We weren't heartless. But probably some abuse and that's obviously not the best conditions for a kid to grow up.
Raising of kids isn't what I've read the most about though, so can't answer very nuanced.
| >>806350
And, kinda. Vikings wearing skins of animals as symbols of pride and being excellent fighters was very much a thing, if that's what you're referring too.
I do recommend doing some research on your own as well though. I'm not encyclopedia. I know a fair amount, but I only know what I know. So if you're curious, try searching it up and stuff. Look at a couple different genuine sources. Take notes, compare notes, and you'll eventually end up with a pretty good picture.
| >NOOO, OUR ANCESTORS WEREN'T BADASS SUPER-MUSCULAR CONQUERING WARRIORS WHO FUCKED THROUGH EVERYTHING IN THEIR PATH, NOOO!
>Instead look at how fascinating they were, fat, hairy merchants, just like me, te-hee!
| This dude keeps callin em short, but they were only short when compared to modern times norse folks. They were still fairly tall when compared to the other civilizations of the time
| >>806370
You really do be out here looking like a Redditor.
>>806392
Congrats on having common knowledge! I'm sorry about the whole not understanding what I'm talking about though.
I'm complaining about modern portrayals of Vikings. The 6'4 slim, Aryan, elf-looking motherfuckers who do nothing but murder everyone and everything.
So when I say that they were short, I'm talking about compared to that fantasy. Not compared to the world average 1000 years ago.
You following now?
| >>806394 "how were real vikings?"
"They were short"
That implies no comparison, it says "short" not "shorter". It implies they were considered short.
I don't fuckin know how tall 6'4 is, but having Vikings represented as 180cm tall is probably kinda accurate to how they were perceived by the people of the time when compared to modern day height. You don't see people complaining because romans are portrayed as 175cm lads when at the time they were probably like 160cm or shorter
| My main problem with media's representation of vikings is with the armour. You always see barechested lads, i want more chainmail
| >>806398
Okay buddy. I write stuff literal. If you want to find non-existen implications in that and try to convince me that that's what I meant, that's not really on me.
Sorry for saying 6'4. I assumed you were American, and Americans don't understand good metric systems. It's 190cm.
Okay? I'd be complaining about that if I was talking about inaccurate portrayals of Romans, but I'm not.
| >>806399
Chainmail was extremely expensive. Only the boujee Vikings could afford it. The vast majority just wore thick tunics.
I agree that the bare chest stuff is dumb though. Some thing with the horned helmets. I die a little inside every time I see that shit.
| *Same things
| B-but we was still kangs, right? Muh pharaohs
| This whole thread is stupid
| U mad cause people believe vikings were crazy ass killers ok whatever
| Dont you have real problems to be pissed off?
| >>806412
>Some thing with the horned helmets.
>look back at all the other issues and descriptions. You've ranted about
Friend, you're like 3 decades behind. Modern portrayals of vikings in media aren't anything close to what you're angry about. Not in America anyway. Maybe you Europeans are watching different things, but aside from Marvel which, you know, is depicting the comic book versions of gods, nothing in western media particularly embraces aryan descriptions.
| >>806457
I know y'all have mostly dropped the horned helmets. That's just a glaring example.
But y'all having completely dropped that weird white supremacy based depiction of it? Doubt.
I've got American friends who's brains deteriorated hearing about this shit. Not just Americans either. Just foreigners in general, and even locals.
Like, sure, not every depiction is blonde and blue eyes anymore. But the majority of media still depicts Vikings based on the Christian adaptation.
| >>806411 im not saying that's what you meant it to mean, i'm saying that's what the text itself was implying. News flash, things you write can have a different meaning than what you intended if you aren't specific with your words choice
| >>806503
I can't tell if you're even more autistic than me or just painfully neurotypical, but either way it's really fucking annoying.
This isn't a grammar thread, and I explained to you exactly what I meant after you replied the first time. Get over yourself and just drop it. The only thing you're achieving is embarrassment of yourself.
| >>806512
Hörrö, that was uncalled for. How about you get over yourself, take a walk and calm your ass down.
As pissed as you are about random people not sharing your view of your heritage, you yourself is without any doubt romanticising your heritage too. It's just annoying having to point it all out and correct your weird assumptions. You believe whatever you want to believe, but don't be an ass about it.
| >>806594
Anyone else wanna explain to this g/u/rl how this reply has nothing to do with what she responded to? I do not have energy to waste rn.
| Op, you are a bit autistic
| Love it
| muh rape
muh plunder
muh pillage
| >>806609
Thank you.
>>806615 >>806616
Sure am. Level 1 autism, and this board keeps giving me more and more XP.
>>806618
Congrats! They did do that! I'm glad you started in your homework. Good g/u/rl <3
| LEAVE EM VIKINGS ALONE
| What's your problem? You're not 100% correct in your description of Vikings, but apparently you're above being criticized for the same thing you criticize others of doing...
I had some degree of respect for your rant before you started lashing out on people for literally no reason, for pointing out things you most certainly said and did. Come on g/u/rl don't be like that
| >>806625
The conversation you replied to was literally just someone saying that I was wrong when calling them short because they thought I was comparing it to average height back then when I was comparing it to modern portrayals heights. I explained it. They got upset and then they bitched about that for the rest of the thread.
That's all the bitching I've done except for the 2012 4chan "humour" replies earlier.
| If you want to talk about things I'm not correct on or add on more information then just do that. I'm happy have more conversation about Vikings, and I'm not some perfect history book or pretending to be.
But acting overly dramatic over me being mean to some g/u/rl who was being petty and passive aggressive for no reason is not how to start a conversation.
So if you want to talk about stuff I'm getting wrong or add on info, just do that instead of acting like that.
Aight?
| >>806629
Sir, you're the only one here who got upset. That guy was sincere, and I thought your attitude was uncalled for and over the line.
Everything else is a misunderstanding from your part
and it's a pain in the ass to explain it for you, and per my earlier post it's also a pain in the ass pointing out all your factual irregularities. No one enjoys doing shit like that. Just get over yourself and stop acting out. You're not doing yourself or anyone else here any favours.
| How gay were the Vikings? I think its unfair to suppose our current understanding of identity is in anyway similar.
Like yea the greeks were supa gey, but they were toxic masculine pedos.
| >>806631
If you don't want to explain, then don't, but then I'm not gonna understand it. Saying "just get over yourself" is not gonna change anything, because I literally am incapable of understanding what to get over or stop doing or what I'm doing wrong without any explanation.
Expecting an autistic person to automatically understand social stuff or what they're doing wrong is like expecting a stranger to be happy when you slap them. It might happen, but it's 1/1000000, you feel?
| >>806635
Yeah. I mean, the categorisation was different. It was kinda just split into "top or bottom". If a man fucks a man, then that's fine. But that means the man who got fucked was the bottom, and bottoms are seen as weak.
So, like, it wasn't as much homosexual or straight relationships as much as it was there are tops and there are bottoms. Regardless of gender, the tops were seen as strong and bottoms seen as weak.
So, toxic masculinity affected the subs, but not the doms.
| >>806629 ya know, if you replied "mb i meant compared to how they were depicted in media", the discussion would've been over already. But because you seem to keep trying to indicate that the way you wrote that was in line with what you meant, you keep exacerbating the problem. The way you wrote, it implied something different from what you meant it to imply. People can't read mind through the internet, you gotta be precise with your words.
| >>7789f5 interesting that>>03b477 sounds similar to what the Greeks were upto in terms of dynamics.
In a certain sense it's kinda like how the military has always had homo tendencies as a means to express dominance.
It's of no relevance but look up Spanish military uniforms. Not sure if spanish or gey.
| >>806714
Oh fuck...
Those are hot...
Holy shit. Fuck the military, but if they looking like that, I wanna FUCK the military. Why did you have to say that? This threads getting moved to /d/ now. Shit.
This thread is permanently archived
| I'm Norwegian, got them Viking roots, and one thing that pisses me off a lot is the weird ass view people in other countries (and even some people here) have of Vikings.
People seem to think that Vikings were exclusively a bunch of Aryan, slim, straight cis men who killed everyone and everything and did nothing but raid and plunder.
Like, have people never looked into Viking history? Do people take movies and shit as fact? Are people's views on Vikings based off of fucking Marvel?