Humanities desk
< April 6	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 8 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 7[edit]

Why don't I EVER hear of soldiers bringing women home from Iraq and Afghanistan?[edit]

In World War II, it was quite common for G.I.s to bring women home after the war, marry, and have productive lives thereafter.

Why don't Afghan or Iraqi women EVER come home with soldiers from these recent wars? --70.179.161.230 (talk) 02:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Several factors, probably, including wide cultural differences (much greater than between Americans and British or French, certainly), limited circumstances in which American soldiers could become more than very superficially acquainted with women there, prohibitions in traditional Islamic law against a Muslim woman marrying a non-Muslim man, etc. There was a case about five years ago of a few U.S. soldiers in Iraq converting to Islam to marry Iraqi women; obviously that would be a big hurdle which WW2 GIs did not face... AnonMoos (talk) 02:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plus I imagine it's frowned upon by the US military head honchos, fraternisation and all that... 72.128.82.131 (talk) 03:29, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recommended viewing: "Sayonara". -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, US troops in Europe found girlfriends and wives in countries such as France or the UK, which had seen terrible hardship for many years before the Americans arrived in force, and food was scarce, plus their own men were either away at war or dead. The women found them as a way to escape all of that, putting it bluntly (of course, love was involved, I am sure you know what I mean). The American soldiers were allowed time off, and they could go to local places, like pubs, bars, restaurants, cafes, cinemas, whatever, where they could meet local women. Iraq does indeed have these places, but they are certainly not places to meet a woman, especially alone. Afghanistan has fewer of these places, too, and similarly, are not places to go on a date. Also, in both cases, it's not exactly safe in those places for an American soldier to be wandering around town, unarmed, and alone (or with a couple of mates) - most of them stay back at base. Also, remember, the insurgency in Iraq is not even over yet, 18 months after the last US convoy left, and the war in Afghanistan looks to be going on for the foreseeable future, whether the coalition is there or not. Just imagine a slightly more violent reaction than the WW2 British view of the US soldiers stationed in the UK: "Overpaid, oversexed, and over here," just with bombs and local families being targeted. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between World War 2's war brides and today is that the war brides came from the Allies, and not from the Axis nations. Fraternising with the enemy is normally forbidden. I saw a documentary last week on an English squaddie who had a relationship with a German girl, and was so badly beaten by his comrades because of it that he suffered brain damage. So it won't happen in the same way (or if it does, it will be very, very rare). --TammyMoet (talk) 10:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but that is utter nonsense. According to the war brides article you have linked there were 20000 American soldiers in WW2 who married German women. I understand something different under "very, very rare". 109.153.20.62 (talk) 22:46, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't read the article then. The "20000 American soldiers" doesn't refer to the number who married German women at all: it seems to refer to the numbers of US soldiers who brought home foreign brides by 1949, so 4 years after the war had finished, and with no mention of nationality. I stand by what I wrote which seems to have been in no way invalidated by the article. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The OP specified 'after the war', Tammy. Forgive me if I misunderstood your clarification of '4 years after the war'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:14, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excerpt of transcript of a HoC meeting in 1951: "Since 1947, permission to marry a German woman has been given to 7,342 [British] soldiers … in 1950 and 1951, 12 men were refused this permission. Three hundred and five cases of soldiers who have married without permission since 1948 are recorded." KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So Iraqis and Afghanis are U.S. enemies? I thought they were the ones the Americans wanted to liberate. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:49, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That ambiguity is part of the difficulty with not only "winning" the wars, but finding war brides as well. It is the characteristic of modern war that the line between ally and enemy is a fuzzy one, more so in Iraq and Afghanistan than even in Vietnam. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Liberate? Hehehe. Surtsicna (talk) 14:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Monobrows? μηδείς (talk) 18:52, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that Iraq and Afghanistan quickly became guerrilla warfare. There's no way to really know if the person you're talking to is friend or foe. So, it's better not to get too close to anyone as a soldier. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:21, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Though that happened in Vietnam, too. But again, I think there are broad cultural differences between Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan, and the nature of the wars were very different. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sports affiliation with political parties[edit]

Is Bangladesh the only nation whose two main soccer rivals gets support from or affiliation with two main rival political parties in the nation? Mohammedan-BNP and Abahani-Awami League--Donmust90 (talk) 04:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)Donmust90[reply]

There have always been rumours that Real Madrid C.F. benefited from Francisco Franco who gave favour to the club, apparently ensuring the signature of Alfredo Di Stéfano. Beyond that a more current one would be Silvio Berlusconi's ownership of A.C. Milan. I don't know if this is what you mean? The only other thing I can think of that's remotely similar is clubs and their religious links - e.g. Rangers F.C. and Celtic F.C. with one (Rangers) being Protestant and the other (Celtic) being Catholic. ny156uk (talk) 07:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it is as simple as there being a deliberate, overt political connection with most sports teams. Sports teams tend to be associated first with a geographical region; that region contains a people who have certain commonalities, culturally speaking (they may have the same religion, belong to the same socioeconomic class, same ethnic background, etc.) That may lead to people who have the same, or similar, political loyalties rooting for the club. That connection may then spill over as the fan base grows to a more national appeal. In the U.S. for example, the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland Raiders play in the same metropolitan area; Oakland is a poorer city, lower socioeconomically, more working class, whereas San Francisco is a more upper-middle class, richer, urban "elite" sort of city; and the fan bases of those teams tend to reflect that. Crowds at 49ers games tend to be more subdued, "classier", etc. Oakland is known for rowdier, more crazy fans (see Raider Nation and the "Black Hole" at the Colliseum). That difference in fan base may extend beyond the metro area, as you find Raiders or 49ers fans outside of the Bay Area that identify with one team or the other based on the perceptions of the team culture. And that sort of difference may also extend to people's political lives as well. --Jayron32 17:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Ny156uk. I am talking about political parties linking with football/soccer clubs. I also learned that Likud of Israel has links with Beitar Jerusalem. Also, Jayron is also right when it comes to teams having fans with different backgrounds such as Oakland and San Fran rivalry. Any other clubs or teams that are linked to political parties or different backgrounds? Another thing is that Bnei Yehuda is supported by Mizrahi Jews who are Likudniks and nationalists.--Donmust90 (talk) 17:59, 7 April 2013 (UTC)Donmust90[reply]

Some of the sports clubs in present-day Israel were founded in the early to mid-20th century by Zionist ideological movements in Europe that sponsored youth movements and political parties, many of which morphed over time. You can tell by their names and read about their history. The connection between sports and politics needs to be studied on a per-case basis; avoid drawing conclusions based on superficial similarities and outdated information. -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:41, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the news recently, Sunderland A.F.C. have longstanding links with the labour movement, and until a few days ago had prominent Labour MP David Miliband as its vice-chairman. It's not nearly so strong a connection as that in Bangladesh. In Europe, links between sporting clubs and the labour and communist movements were common before World War II: see Socialist Workers' Sport International and Red Sport International for more information. Warofdreams talk 11:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if Red Star Belgrade fit the bill here? --TammyMoet (talk) 14:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC) And the two teams of Bucharest, Steaua Bucharest and Dinamo Bucharest, both had State links: Steaua with the Army and Dinamo with the Communist Party. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PATRICK BRONTE[edit]

Are there any existing Biographies of Patrick Bronte, father of the Bronte sisters? 86.4.69.158 (talk) 14:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search on Amazon gives us biographies by Dudley Green and John Lock (which are referenced in our article on Patrick Brontë), and one by Coreen Turner which isn't. Tevildo (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In his own words you can also find The Letters of the Reverend Patrick Brontë and Patrick Bronte: His Collected Works and Life. 184.147.116.201 (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, for this, I will need to obtain copies of these Biographies. I am mystified has to how a self taught person, at this period of time, and from such a background, could rise so rapidly through the social stratas so quickly. Also,coming from Ireland during this period, his religion was Anglican and not Roman Catholic?86.4.69.158 (talk) 09:14, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He was presumably a smart boy who diligently applied himself to his studies and took advantage of any opportunities which arose. He likely would have needed some type of scholarship or sponsorship to attend university in England. Not sure about a rapid rise, since he ended up as a clergyman in a somewhat poor and out of the way place, and couldn't really "establish" his children. AnonMoos (talk) 09:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick's father was a Protestant, and his mother a Catholic; he was brought up as a Protestant (see Brontë family). While I'm struggling to find a good source, it appears that the Protestantism was not a recent conversion, and the family was not part of the nobility nor of the Plantation, so it does seem a bit unusual. Warofdreams talk 11:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How to formally request a loan[edit]

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page.

Tevildo (talk) 16:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gold Prices[edit]

A lot of trading occurs on Gold Prices in I - Banks (Markets Division). I am also aware of the London Gold Fixing. I would like to know what determines the hourly changing of Gold Prices on the traders screen ? Who determines it and how is it transmitted over to the traders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.117.110.130 (talk) 16:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I shouldn't have been surprised, but we actually have an article on gold prices. The hourly changes are basically "stocks". I'm not familiar with stock exchanges, nor the rules on valuing gold, so I'll let someone else take it from there. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gold prices are decided just like the price of any equity (G.E., Microsoft, Vodafone) or of a ton of tomato or a barrel of oil, or a government bond: traders (by traders I mean people who need it, and people who sell it) trade it in large quantity at the price they "think" is fair given the current circumstances: their needs for it (urgent, not urgent, just for speculation, for melting into jewelry), their need to sell it (I mean their need to get some cash), the global economy, the planned future production etc. etc. , and the price they traded at is then broadccast for everyone to know. --Lgriot (talk) 09:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To complement that, a fixing is a special period during the day, where all the buyers and sellers are offered the possibility to state their need (qantity to buy, maximum price, quantity to sell, minimum price). Then an algorithm is run on all the buy and sell orders from all the traders, and a happy medium is found. At that point, everyone who was ready to trade at that medium price (or a worse price) get their requested quantity of gold traded, and there is an actual transfer of ownership between the buyers and the sellers. At that point the price as well as the quantity exchanged is made public. --Lgriot (talk) 09:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pyongyang handicap ban[edit]

I have heard, that formerly, handicapped as well as pregnant people where not allowed to be in the North Korean capital of Pyongyang. This ban was to have been in effect until some years ago. Is this true, and is so, which year was the ban lifted? Thank you --Aciram (talk) 21:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found Disabled Not Allowed to Live in Pyongyang (2005), but how impartial or even true it is, I don't know. Marxist-Lenonism doesn't have a good record in this field. The Soviet Union refused to host the Paralympic Games in 1980, on the grounds that there were “no disabled citizens in the USSR”.[1] They had managed to track some down by 1988. Alansplodge (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]