There are things you can trust Wikipedia on and things you can’t. An article about a popular political figure? Someone might have altered that for their own ends

An article about the derivation of the feudal title “duke”? That’s probably fine

Especially since it matched what I already know to be true from other sources

You can’t trust it when it comes to dates

Anyone interested in the fall of the western empire and the rise of feudalism, Mike Duncan gets into it somewhat in the last episode of history of Rome: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6LHLVXMRj4zOfJd6bHUVmi?

Super fascinating stuff

daily reminder that im cute and ur cute too

xoxo

except jesushand

he's ugly

What about me

ya ur cute

Lmao u don't even know what i look like

ya i do

Ok tell me

ugly

Like a bitch

ha ha ha

I bet your ugly too

nope

im pretty

PROVE IT

nope

🦧

No proof or It ain't real

SHE ISN'T REAL

I’m a helicopter

Same ugh we're twinning

<:honk:583238347124637707>

Y’all kinda gay ngl

Imagine actually using the term asexual

What would you prefer?

You can just say you aren't a coomer

Like just because you aren't controlled by impulse like that doesn't mean you should use a term made up by gays

I mean true

But its the best way to describe the condition

No it isn't doe

I don't get how using a term made up by people that are basically the enemy is a good thing

Explain to me how it isnt?

It's just used by progressives to label anyone who isn't a coomer as something not normal

Not really