This was shown to me by somebody on Discord and this is apparently part of a review of the game? And... what... just... what... Everything about this is so cringe. Like, why even mention Claris just to imply that they would admit to lusting over her if she was of legal age? That's so creepy, even as a joke.
And everything about Tillis is just so weird. Like they call her a cool and strong female lead, but then there's that weird tangent about how hot she is that their Art Editor is drooling over her and just... why... why anything. xD 90s gaming mags were certainly something...
Also, the internet would very much prove this writer wrong about people not being hot and bothered for Amy Rose >_>
As for the picture itself, all I can think of is "We have Asuka Evangelion at home."
(Review of Burning Rangers from Sega Saturn Magazine #31)
Transcript of text:
Burning Ranger: Raunch Factor 10
It's about time that the Sonic Team produced a strong female lead for one of their games. After all, no-one's really got all hot and bothered about Amy Rose from the Sonic games (insert your own hedgehog-based "prick" gag here). And as for the "budding" 15 year-old Claris in NiGHTS... well, we're not saying anything. Not until we've cleared it thoroughly with our legal people.
The advent of Burning Rangers brings an end to this sad, sordid tale. Tillis is cool. In fact, our very own Art Editor, Mr McEvoy has this very image on his desktop at work. When we think he's staring at his latest layout for the mag, he's actually drooling feverishly at the picture you're looking at on this page. The words "pervert" and "colossal" spring to mind...
36 notes
·
View notes
@elgringo300 - I don't want to put you on the spot, but this comment is inaccurate in ways that make it a good history lesson. While I'm not a history expert either, I'm interested in the history of early Christianity, and it's a good bit more complicated (and fascinating!) than most people realize.
TLDR: "Roman" and "Christian" were never mutually exclusive categories. The religious fate of the Roman Empire and the rise of Christianity are one and the same.
There are two things you have to understand here:
The story of early Christianity that you get told in church has some gaps in it.
The story of the Fall Of The Roman Empire you get taught in school is often based in older scholarship. It's also often taught by people who don't understand the scale and timing of the events that happened. It's inaccurate to how historians understand the past.
Full disclosure- I'm tired and too lazy to cite sources. I'm also simplifying things dramatically because this is a tumblr post. If you see a tumblr post claiming that everything you know is horse hockey, you should do your own research before you incorporate it into your belief system- and that includes this one.
We good? Moving on.
SO. The story of early Christianity a lot of people learn goes something like this: "Jesus came, taught his followers how to live a good life, died, was resurrected, and went back to heaven. His apostles and followers tried to tell all the world what happened! But the evil Roman Empire tried to stop them and martyred any Christians they caught. Christians persevered, until the Empire collapsed under its own weight, and people were free to be Christian. And then, because Christianity is obviously the Right Way To Live, it spread to the whole world."
...And, well, there's a couple chunks missing from that story. For this post, the part we're concerned about is the bit between "Christians were martyred for their beliefs!" and "Rome fell".
The thing you have to understand about Roman religion is that Romans didn't think about religion the same way we do. In a monotheistic world where religion is usually a set of moral and cultural precepts, it can be hard to imagine a polytheistic world where religion is about the gods. The state religion in Rome- the one the Romans used law and custom to enforce- was about Making Deals With Gods (and ancestors, and heroes, and at certain points the Emperor), asking for their protection and giving them worship and offerings in exchange.
The Romans genuinely did not care what gods you worshiped in your own home. They might make fun of you if you worshiped weird provincial gods; they might be disgusted or angry if you said your gods asked you to break Roman laws. But they did not care what you believed in the same way that most American Christians today care.
What they did care about was whether or not you did the customary sacrifices and offerings that went along with the state religion. The best way to think of it- and this is a dramatic oversimplification- you know those evangelicals who are 'okay' with people not being Christian, but insist that no one is allowed to be gay because gay people make God send hurricanes at them? It was a bit more like that than the people who think that no one can be a good person without being Christian. The Romans were genuinely concerned that the gods would get pissed off if you didn't propitiate them, and no one wanted that.
Generally, if the Romans conquered an area where people were monotheists? An area like, say, Judea? They did not care if you did not believe in their gods. As long as you did the state religion's sacrifices and rituals? They'd be totally cool with you. Hell, they might even try to worship your monotheistic God along with all of theirs. (Remember Paul's sermon at the Temple of Diana on the Unknown God? Yeah.)
The trouble is, monotheists do not, as a rule, like acknowledging gods that are not their god. So there was always some... friction between Rome and Judea. Judea was an outlying border province full of people who were not always cool with the Roman state religion. People who could and did quite violently rebel against Roman rule. People who would get angry and rebellious if you tried to force them to acknowledge that your gods even existed, much less tried to force them to worship. Some emperors decided the best way to handle this was to exempt Jews from following the state religion; it saved everyone from a lot of bloody guerilla warfare. Some emperors decided the best way to handle this was to crack down and use Jews as scapegoats for every bad thing that happened to the Empire.
And for the first hundred years of Christianity's existence, people thought Christianity was just a weird form of Judaism. Legally, socially, and politically, Christians by and large got treated the same way. They were a freaky religious minority in an outlying province. But as long as they followed the rules and made the correct sacrifices at the correct times? Generally, they got ignored. If they refused to make those sacrifices? It depended on the whims of who was enforcing the law. Sometimes, they got ignored. Sometimes, they had their property confiscated. Sometimes, they got fed to lions. It really depended on who was running the show.
So how did we get from "Christianity is a freaky minority of an already strange religious minority in the border provinces" to "most people in Europe are Christian"? Well, there's two pieces to this.
FIRST: because Roman state religion was mostly dedicated to propitiating the gods, and because Rome tended to culturally integrate its provinces rather than enforcing its own customs upon them, mystery cults thrived. A lot of different religions sprung up that promised enlightenment, a higher state of consciousness, or everlasting life. And a lot of people bought into them, because the Roman state religion wasn't very spiritually fulfilling. Think of it like... your weird auntie who goes to a megachurch but swears by tantric yoga, or TikTok witches who say they can talk to angels. I don't know as much about mystery cults in Rome as I'd like, but there were three very popular ones:
Mithraism, which was from the East and which was popular among soldiers.... Sol Invicta, which I know very little about except that it existed... and Christianity, which was popular among common people, women, and slaves. (Incidentally, I could go on about early Christianity and women's lib for hours. Don't get me started.)
Either of these cults- or any of the smaller ones, really- could have wound up taking the place in society that Christianity did. People really want to believe in something bigger than themselves, and Strange Wisdom from Far Away is always going to find a foothold among people who want to believe.
So. Plenty of Romans became Christian. And the early Church's missionary efforts meant that people in Rome, Greece, Egypt, and even farther-flung places converted, because they took the "go ye to all the world" thing seriously. Eventually, a Roman emperor named Constantine converted to Christianity... and began using the state power that had enforced the Roman state religion to spread Christianity. He returned property that the state confiscated, he passed laws banning Christians from having to do state sacrifices, he protected missionaries, and a lot more stuff like that.
Because it was now safe and legally protected to be Christian? Because Christians now had special legal privileges? And because missionaries, emboldened by the Emperor himself, got even more intense in their proselytizing? Christianity spread like wildfire. Plenty of Romans converted. Plenty more stopped thinking of Christians as weird freaks and started thinking of them as their friends and neighbours. And people in the second category might not convert, but their wives and children might.
Here's the last piece of the puzzle. How much time do you think elapsed between Constantine converting to Christianity and the commonly accepted "Fall Of The Roman Empire"? Was it ten years? Twenty? Fifty?
Try closer to a hundred and fifty.
A hundred and fifty years in our past, Queen Victoria was still reigning over England (and brutally conquering New Zealand), Japan was doing the Meiji Restoration, the Mary Celeste was very busy going missing, and Susan B Anthony was casting her first vote.
Think of all the changes that have happened to the world since 1872. Change happened slower in the Classical era. But it still happened, and there was still a very long time for it to happen in. There was plenty of time for people to convert to Christianity before Rome fell. Plenty of people did, because it was popular and safe to. And as time went on, Christianity lost a lot of its rebellious nature and became a religion that was backed up by state power, palatable to people with power, and generally ... well. As someone commented on my religion post, any religion can go bad if it gets in bed with an empire.
And for most people- especially people who weren't in Rome and the parts of the Empire near to it? The "fall of Rome" was a slow process. Rome fell in part because of a bunch of economic crises and a plague, more than anything else. So it wasn't like The Walking Dead; the apocalypse was a very slow burn.
You got less news, less food, less luxuries. You got less people coming from distant provinces, and more strongmen trying to push you around. You got fewer soldiers protecting you, and more bandits. Your grandchildren would realize that they were living in a very different world than you were, but you might not realize just how much things have changed in the moment.
....So yes. Even accepting your premise that Christians put the world back together after Rome fell- which is a huge misunderstanding in its own right, to be clear- most of the Christians in question also thought of themselves as either Romans or as the heirs to Rome's Empire. Look up the Donation of Constantine sometime, or the history of Carolingian France, or the Byzantines. Hell, look at the history of the Holy Roman Empire (which, as we all know, was none of the above).
Like I said, this is all a simplification, and anyone who knows more about the history than I do, please feel free to elaborate. But yeah. Until, like, the Protestant Reformation? Most people did not see "Roman" or "Christian" as in any way contradictory. The reason we do now is largely due to Catholics focusing on martyrs, English religious wars and anti-Catholic sentiment, and Edward Gibbon. It's ahistorical. It's just not true.
If the Roman Empire had (somehow) become atheist, had given atheists special religious privileges, and had encouraged atheist proselytizing? Most people in the former Roman Empire and its descendants' colonies would be atheists. If the Roman Empire's state religion had remained a polytheistic muddle? We'd all be worshiping Jupiter and Juno. If the Roman Empire's state religion was Mithraism, we'd all be worshiping Mithra. Because people respond to incentives, and "the Empire is nudging you into converting" is one hell of an incentive.
357 notes
·
View notes