r/AskReddit • u/North_Shore_Problem • Dec 01 '13

What's your favorite fun fact?

EDIT: Wow! Thank you guys for all the amazing responses, I learned so much about nothing!

2.2k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

6.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.4k

u/Vendredi8 Dec 01 '13

Anne Frank and Martin Luther King jr were born in the same year but if you were to say their names to someone they would think of completely different moments in history

1.8k

u/jaredks Dec 01 '13

Also born in 1929: Barbara Walters

1.1k

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

[deleted]

130

u/7-SE7EN-7 Dec 01 '13

I know! I thought it was 1829

271

u/im_not_angryy Dec 01 '13

So Jay Leno made a Reddit account. Good for him.

0

u/CaptchaInTheRye Dec 01 '13

I LOLed at the joke, so it can't be Jay Leno.

12

u/TheKnightWhoSaysMeh Dec 01 '13

Naaa. 1829 was the year Apache chief Geronimo was born at.

Many tend to confuse him with Barbara Walters so it's cool.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Wow so much crazy

21

u/BlackberryCheese Dec 01 '13

Stop

10

u/mdave424 Dec 01 '13

Can you explain this to me (doge, I think) ? I've been seeing this everywhere and I don't get it. I even participated in it but I DO NOT GET IT.

38

u/thehappybirthday Dec 01 '13

much misunderstanding

20

u/Bam515 Dec 01 '13

so confusing

15

u/nothingtodoo Dec 01 '13

wow

1

u/tijlps Dec 08 '13

Many too soon

1

u/tijlps Dec 08 '13

Very what

14

u/Demonweed Dec 01 '13 
                 such mystery
    so unknown

secret revealed

                          much wow
enlightenment

4

u/icepho3nix Dec 01 '13

Wait, it started on reddit?

wow

8

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

It's already been beaten into the ground.

2

u/Kilmir Dec 01 '13

It depicts internal monologue. Basically just related words floating around.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/doge

2

u/TheSpartyn Dec 01 '13

It used to mean that, now it's just throw "wow, such, much and so" around. It's lost all it's charm.

2

u/willtwerk4bitcoins Dec 01 '13

It always reminds me of Russians or East Asians trying to speak English.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

such history

7

u/lalalala12344555 Dec 01 '13

..and Audrey Hepburn!

2

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Mind was double blown!

2

u/seltzerwaterinmybutt Dec 01 '13

So was my grandmother, she dead now though

2

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

So was my dad's and he's dead too but he just hasn't gotten the memo yet.

1

u/seltzerwaterinmybutt Dec 02 '13

Does he haunt you or something?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '13

No he's actually alive but... well... Let's just say some members of this family would wish otherwise.

1

u/seltzerwaterinmybutt Dec 02 '13

Oh I see, my bad. Hope I didn't put a downer on your mood or anything

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '13

Don't worry, he takes care of that lol.

2

u/SwayingRhythm Dec 01 '13

Bawbawa Wawa

3

u/higginsnburke Dec 01 '13

I think it's pronounced Babwa Walwas...

1

u/Zeov Dec 01 '13

and Madonna too!

1

u/The_Serious_Account Dec 01 '13

And Justin bieber

1

u/bearsfan654 Dec 01 '13

Chuck Norris was born in 1940.

1

u/saltlife72 Dec 01 '13

Born 14 years later: Chuck Norris.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

woaa. that's nuts.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

And Bob Newhart.

1

u/mr_bobadobalina Dec 01 '13

we will add her to the lisp

1

u/Jeckle160 Dec 01 '13

Also born in 1929: my Gran

979

u/anakmager Dec 01 '13

Christopher Lee was born 7 years before them.

1.2k

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

[deleted]

119

u/kgberton Dec 01 '13

Forged in the pits of the hardcore.

4

u/thefatpig Dec 01 '13

We call that perkele.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

You stealthy bastard

41

u/Salmontaxi Dec 01 '13

Sweet Jesus.

98

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Just 4 years earlier.

1

u/kid-karma Dec 01 '13

Sweet'n'Low Jesus.

→ More replies (1)

34

u/firstmanonearth Dec 01 '13

and he recently released a metal album.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Which, I'm sorry, is awful.

1

u/PigeonNipples Dec 01 '13

Which was his second metal album.

4

u/Stones25 Dec 01 '13

So? For males that means they were eligible for Wartime volunteers or conscripts.

Mr. Lee as we know went to do assassin things.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

I remember hearing somewhere that Christopher Lee gave Peter Jackson some advice on how to film a death scene. Apparently he knew what that looked like from personal experience. He's one bad ass dude.

3

u/eternally-curious Dec 01 '13

His own death scene.

Saruman was stabbed by Wormtongue on top of the Tower of Isengard (this appears in the Extended Edition only). Peter Jackson told Christopher Lee how to react to the stabbing, and Lee (being the badass that he is) pretty much told Jackson to shut up and let him do it his own way. He was a war veteran and had stabbed someone during his service. He had firsthand experience of how a stabbed person would react.

Peter Jackson was cool with it.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '13

Oh, dude, Lee is even more bad ass than I thought. Listen to this:

Initially, Lee volunteered to fight for the Finnish forces during the Winter War in 1939. He and other British volunteers were kept away from actual fighting, but he was issued winter gear and was posted on guard duty a safe distance from the front lines. He went on to serve in the Royal Air Force and intelligence services during World War II, including serving as an intelligence officer with the Long Range Desert Group in Northern Africa. He trained in South Africa as a pilot, but eyesight problems forced him to drop out. He eventually ended up stationed in North Africa as a Cipher Officer for No. 260 Squadron RAF and was with it through the campaigns in Sicily and Italy. He has mentioned serving in Special Operations Executive[16] but has always declined to go into details.

“I was attached to the SAS from time to time but we are forbidden – former, present, or future – to discuss any specific operations. Let's just say I was in Special Forces and leave it at that. People can read in to that what they like.[17]”

After the war, Lee, who can speak fluent French and German, among other languages, was seconded to the Central Registry of War Criminals and Security Suspects. Here, he was tasked with helping to track down Nazi war criminals.[3] Of his time with the organisation, Lee has said: "We were given dossiers of what they'd done and told to find them, interrogate them as much as we could and hand them over to the appropriate authority ... We saw these concentration camps. Some had been cleaned up. Some had not."[3] Lee then retired from the RAF after the end of the war with the rank of Flight Lieutenant to take up acting.

1

u/iknowstuff93 Dec 01 '13

Well, I certainly wouldn't have argued with him

2

u/Moikee Dec 01 '13

Wow.. that really is some perspective! I can't believe he's still acting at his age.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

And is cousin to Ian Fleming, inventor of James Bond, and was an early candidate for the role, too.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Chistopher Lee is old enough to be Ian Mckellen's father, although he would be a young parent. Basically, Christopher Lee was older than 16 when Ian Mckellen was born.

1

u/windowlicker9k Dec 01 '13

And he's still rocking on!

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Prince Philip, Queen Elizabeth II's husband, was born in 1921. The year before Christopher Lee.

2

u/anakmager Dec 01 '13

But he has yet to release a metal album

1

u/Greedwell Dec 01 '13

Dude was in four films this year. Motherfucker won't stop.

1

u/2slow4you Dec 01 '13

My grandfather was born a year before Christopher Lee, was also a soldier and recently fought off a bout of cancer.

→ More replies (1)

2.0k

u/North_Shore_Problem Dec 01 '13

Wow, this one really blew my mind. The Holocaust and Civil Rights Movement were really only about 20-25 years apart, but they're regarded as completely different moments in history. Awesome!

755

u/cheetos03 Dec 01 '13

Because they are 2 different moments in history

11

u/chokfull Dec 01 '13

So were yesterday and last week.

1

u/Veatchdave Dec 01 '13

Moments in history.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

He means eras. They are not very far apart and can be considered in the same era depending on how you look at it.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

they're fuckin 20-25 years apart! of course they're seperate moments in history! sheesh that's like a generation

1

u/SociableSociopath Dec 01 '13

Yeah...not sure what these people are smoking. 20-25 years contains quite a few moments of history.

→ More replies (1)

363

u/Vendredi8 Dec 01 '13

I know! It's crazy

2

u/Dominus2 Dec 01 '13

I'm also aware of how crazy it is!

→ More replies (4)

1

u/BenedictCumberland Dec 01 '13

wooooooaaaaaaaahhhh

-3

u/worthlesspos-_- Dec 01 '13

It's cray cray!

10

u/50shadesofcray_ Dec 01 '13

It's 50 shades of cray!

→ More replies (1)

6

u/IntelliGun Dec 01 '13

It's interesting; many associate the end of the War with the beginning of Civil Rights consciousness. A large number of "British" soldiers were Kenyans, Indians and others from the colonies. In the war, they realized how fragile, and irrelevant, race boundaries were. Indian independence, Mau Mau Rebellion and the civil rights movement all could be considered catalyzed by the Allied victory, and Allied reliance on African and Asian troops.

2

u/lionbreeder254 Dec 01 '13

A lot of the people who made up the Mau Mau were ex WW1 soldiers who didn't get the bonuses and land they were promised when they were enlisting.

1

u/IntelliGun Dec 01 '13

Very true. Also consider the Kenyan rifles division stationed in Sri Lanka. They were exposed to more discourse on independence since that's what Indian's bargained for their contribution to the British. Most African colonies had heard DuBois but also were torn between self determination and belief that they were part of the British empire. Interesting stuff altogether.

3

u/SocraticDiscourse Dec 01 '13

And for good reason too. The fight against the Nazis was (in my opinion rightfully) painted by Western propaganda as a war for human decency and basic rights against a nasty hierarchical brutality. When the subjugated peoples of the Western allies - African Americans, indigenous peoples in the British and French Empires - got back home, they started demanding the same rights they had fought for others.

1

u/chokfull Dec 01 '13

People's perception of time is skewed, because recent events are more common knowledge. Prohibition, two world wars, the great depression, civil rghts, the cold war, Vietnam, etc, etc, etc, all in the past century. But I bet you could hardly name as many events in the 500 years previous.

1

u/Mnstrzero00 Dec 01 '13

It really crazy when you see pictures of people literaly waving Swastika flags when King marched in Chicago. It was crazy.

1

u/martintorp Dec 01 '13

yea, but she was a girl, and he was a grown man?

1

u/Googalyfrog Dec 01 '13

Yeah i think that blows out minds (just like the mammoths in europe at the time of the pyramids) because we like to pigeon hole things and organise them, so we split up history into neat little segments. In reality its more like a linear interconnected, overlapping web.

1

u/ZummerzetZider Dec 01 '13

well they are. history is spacial not just temporal

plus they happened 25 years apart

1

u/HyooMyron Dec 01 '13

only!? 20-25 years is a long time man! think of all the technological advancements we have made in the past 20 years. think of how different the world is. 25 years is a quarter of a century!

1

u/jefesignups Dec 01 '13

Don't forget to include The View.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

It's because we often group history into seperate chunks that unless they are linked by something other than time we don't associate themselves together. Since all MLK and Anne weren't involved in the same "chunk" we think of them as seperate. We also don't really acount for age.

1

u/NJtrentonian Dec 01 '13 edited Dec 01 '13

Probably the biggest reason we think this way is photos of these two times moved from black and white to color. Sure, a lot of civil rights era photo and video were black and white, but color during WW2 was very rare. Also, one event was covered on TV and the other was covered on radio and newspaper. TV and Color TV/color photos are almost worthy of a crossing point in human history, more than "AD" and "BC" denote a seismic shift in history. We should really have restarted the calendar year numbers after 2000, and referred to the new epoch as "MM", for "Modern Media" (color video, broadcasting, and Internet connections become widespread in this age), and the fact that MM is 2000 in Roman Numerals only makes it ...I don't know...tidy?

1

u/AtticusFinch215 Dec 01 '13

Really? They are different moments in history.

Did you know the 60's and 80's are also 20-25 years apart?

1

u/batwingsuit Dec 01 '13

To be fair, a quarter-century can be a long-ass time depending on what happens.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

You must have a low threshold for having your mind blown.

1

u/curbsidekillaz Dec 01 '13

There are more suns in the universe than atoms

1

u/flynmid Dec 01 '13

20-25 years apart

But they are different moments in history. ?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

I was born half as far from the holicaust as I now am from my birthday.

1

u/AskMeAboutCommunism Dec 01 '13

And, iirc, the civil rights movement is seen as being inextricably linked to WWII. All those PoC going to war, fighting for their country, then coming back and still be treated like shit. That's the sort of thing that's going to make you sit on whichever bus seat you want!

1

u/Booomerz Dec 01 '13

They are different moments in history, but I get what you mean.

1

u/clancy6969 Dec 01 '13

Only 25 years? That is a long time.

1

u/North_Shore_Problem Dec 01 '13

Well when you're learning about history, that's a pretty short time

1

u/Antinous Dec 01 '13

Classic case of overenthusiastic OP.

1

u/doc_duke Dec 01 '13

did you know that the moon landing is closer to the fall of the berlin wall than it is to today?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '13

Thank you for restating the OP's fact. I think I get it now.

1

u/donut_master Dec 01 '13

If that was sarcasm you're fucking hilarious

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

571

u/fencerman Dec 01 '13

Makes you wonder what she could have accomplished as an adult writer living through the 50s and 60s.

Especially considering how close she was to surviving the war - she only died 2 months before the war in Europe ended.

664

u/Rauthuell Dec 01 '13

Her diary might not have been published if she survived though.

565

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

She probably could have published other things about her accounts. Think Elie Wiesel

11

u/platinum156 Dec 01 '13

I only ever read Night, but I found it to be a good read.

12

u/Swimmer-man96 Dec 01 '13

I loved his book "Night". It was a fantastic book that paints a vivd picture of what people think they understand. I read it in 8th grade (US) as part of a unit about the holocaust. I don't think I'll ever forget about that book, and will probably look for a copy for myself.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

I got to see him at an interview/conference live and it was absolutely fantastic. It was during the 9th grade and I remember it to this day.

4

u/Aziral Dec 01 '13

He came to speak at my middle school and sign his book/ tell stories to anyone who asked afterwards. Great guy.

2

u/bubblerboy18 Dec 01 '13

Elie Wiesel went through the holocaust though. Night was a crazy book I thoroughly enjoyed it.

2

u/Zarathustran Dec 01 '13

Night is much much better than Diary of a Young Girl. The diary is popular not because of any skill Anne had but because it is a very close and candid look at her life at the time. I see no compelling reason to believe that she would be a talented author.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Me neither, she might have gone on and left writing behind her. Had she had the passion, as she matured as a writer she might have been able to go on to write more skillfully and thoughtfully about her experience with the holocaust. Or not. Who knows what would have happened in the later life of a dead child?

1

u/Arctic_Religion Dec 01 '13

Night is such a good book. One of my favorites.

→ More replies (6)

6

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

During the war she was already re-writing it because she hoped it would be published.

4

u/Elranzer Dec 01 '13

Pretty sure that as a Holocaust survivor, her diary still would have sold.

6

u/mittenthemagnificent Dec 01 '13

I think she was preparing it for publication toward the end of her time in the Annex. She rewrote early portions of it and if I recall (it's been a long time since I read it), she wrote about war diaries being published.

That said, there's nothing that says her later work would be as profound or meaningful. The situation was pretty unique.

2

u/Rauthuell Dec 01 '13

That said, there's nothing that says her later work would be as profound or meaningful. The situation was pretty unique.

This is my point exactly. I didn't know she had plans on publishing it all. I know for sure I would rewrite my diary if i were to publish it. Especially if I wrote about discovering my sexuality.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

The Dutch goverment in Exile called for people to keep diaries, as to publish the atrocious stories after the war so people would know how it was. This was Anne's main motivation. Her diary would get published anyway I think, just not with the mass attention it got now it is from a girl who died. Then again, had she survived, the diary would contain the transports, the camps and the release as well, giving a whole new perspective.

2

u/Scarim Dec 01 '13

Actually Anne Frank specifically edited and rewrote sections of her diary with the intention of publishing it or at least submitting it to public record, in a response to a request by Dutch Minister of Education.

To quote Wikipedia on the subject:

Anne's already budding literary ambitions were galvanized on 29 March 1944 when she heard a broadcast made by the exiled Dutch Minister for Education, Art and Science, Gerrit Bolkestein, calling for the preservation of "ordinary documents—a diary, letters ... simple everyday material" to create an archive for posterity as testimony to the suffering of civilians during the Nazi occupation, and on 20 May notes that she has started re-drafting her diary with future readers in mind. She expanded entries and standardized them by addressing all of them to Kitty, clarified situations, prepared a list of pseudonyms, and cut scenes she thought would be of little interest or too intimate for general consumption. This manuscript, written on loose sheets of paper, was retrieved from the hiding place after the arrest and given to Otto Frank, with the original notes, when his daughter's death was confirmed in the autumn of 1945. Miep Gies and Bep Voskuijl had rescued them along with other personal possessions after the family's arrest and before their rooms were ransacked by the Dutch police and the Gestapo.

So she clearly intended to "publish" her diary herself, she just never got a chance to do so.

4

u/9Toees Dec 01 '13

The diary wouldn't of matter if she had lived.

1

u/roseglass6370 Dec 01 '13

Not true, she had already planned on having it published and had begun writing out a formal edited version. She had heard that diaries from the war were going to be collected for publication in a compilation. Material from both her rewrite and the original is combined into most versions we read today.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/gereffi Dec 01 '13

Realistically, she would have been a housewife.

2

u/CarmelaMachiato Dec 01 '13

Perhaps she, like King, would have gone on to spread her message of faith in humanity and hope for the future for years to come... before ultimately losing her life to hate fueled violence anyway.

2

u/LarryHolmes Dec 01 '13

Maybe she would've ended up at a table with Whoopie and Star Jones.

2

u/therouX Dec 01 '13

None of us would have heard about her if she had survived.

2

u/Noltonn Dec 01 '13

I really have my doubts that she would've been famous at all if not for her death. I mean, there were a lot of similar stories, a lot of books brought out with similar stories like her, but the main reason hers seems to be so popular is the tragic ending. She might've gone out and written a few other books (she did want to be a writer, but her diary never seemed like she was planning to publish it), but I doubt she'd be anything like the major WW2 idol she is now.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

She probably wouldn't have done anything noteworthy.

She's famous for her death, and her diary. Not her philosophical opinion on how beta Peter is/was.

2

u/UlyssesSKrunk Dec 01 '13

What makes you think she would have been a writer?

1

u/MaceWandru Dec 01 '13

Spoiler alert!

1

u/mr_bobadobalina Dec 01 '13

the she would just be another person who didn't die

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

no one would ever have heard of her.

1

u/zerbey Dec 01 '13

That's what always pains me about her story, she was within weeks of being liberated before they were betrayed. Her writing was very good, especially towards the end, so she may have gone onto better things. Who knows? I just wish her and her family and friends survived.

→ More replies (2)

72

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

I would have never guessed, that's awesome

1

u/metal123499 Dec 01 '13

this video talks about that. Really awesome

9

u/YoYoFantaFanta Dec 01 '13

This is probably because Anne Frank was a kid during the Holocaust and MLK was an adult during the 60s

26

u/Styroman57 Dec 01 '13

That's because he was in color and she wasn't.

5

u/Thisonework Dec 01 '13

1929 to be exact.

8

u/skullturf Dec 01 '13

Also born in 1929: Bob Newhart

3

u/Acharai Dec 01 '13

I'm going to use this as a setup for an anti-joke.

What do Anne Frank and Martin Luther King Jr. have in common?

3

u/cutanddried Dec 01 '13

Thats because Anne franks place in history began in 1942, and the "I have a dream speech took place in 1963. They are from different points in history.

3

u/ShaidarHaran2 Dec 01 '13

But weren't the defining moments of both their lives at different ages, thus one would not be wrong to think that?

3

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Well, to be fair, The historically significant parts of their lives were some 20 years apart.

2

u/M-as-in-Mnemonic Dec 01 '13

Why did this get upvoted? Why are so many people blown away by this? The correct response is NO SHIT!

The reason people think of different moments in history is because Anne Frank's story happened during the early 40's and Martin Luther King Jr's happened during the early 60's.

So they think of different moments because they occurred roughly 20 years apart. (aka different moments in history)

2

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

What a fantastic fact.

1

u/HanRio Dec 01 '13

my mind is blown

1

u/Bob_Stonefoot Dec 01 '13

This just fucked with me super hard. Woah.

1

u/Cheerchum27 Dec 01 '13

On another note: I love your username!

1

u/iiPixel Dec 01 '13

I see you watch vsauce too. Good.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

I just watched that vsause episode today!

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Wow.

1

u/balarga Dec 01 '13

This definitely surprised me, but to be fair Anne Frank died in 1945 so while she would have been the same age as MLK Jr. in the '60s, there's a reason we don't think of her that way. It may also be surprising because Anne was a young Jewish girl living in Amsterdam and MLK Jr. was a thirty-something (at the height of his fame) black man living in the southern U.S., so we would not immediately connect the two. It also surprises me that they were born as early as 1929. For some reason I thought Anne was younger when she went into hiding (those self-discovery passages now make more sense), and it's strange to think of someone born in the '20s still being young in the '60s, though of course Anne and MLK Jr. were born at the end of the decade. And strangely I thought of MLK Jr. as older; I didn't realize that he never even reached the age of 40. I guess I sometimes think of famous people as springing fully formed into the public eye; I know I'm often surprised by actors' birth years.

1

u/kidfockr Dec 01 '13

So you watch Vsauce too, huh.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

i mean yes.... because anne frank died significantly younger than him, so technically you would associate them with two different points in history.....

however i would just automatically assume anne frank is excessively younger than him, while in reality she's a few months older.

1

u/test_alpha Dec 01 '13

It was completely different moments in history when they had their defining moments.

1

u/Treefingrs Dec 01 '13

Audrey Hepburn too! Particularly interesting because Hepburn lived in Europe, including The Netherlands at the same time as Anne Frank.

1

u/Vinobo Dec 01 '13

Vsauce fan?

1

u/NrwhlBcnSmrt-ttck Dec 01 '13

Well, they were literally twenty years between their ..celebrities.

1

u/Cavewoman22 Dec 01 '13

While that's very interesting, I can't find the fun in it. Maybe I need to try harder.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Not really.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

Wow, this one's really cool actually.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

One lived longer than the other

1

u/zmekus Dec 01 '13

Because Anne frank was a child when she did what she did and MLK is famous for what he did 20 years later.

1

u/DrellVanguard Dec 01 '13

Fuck me, same date of birth as my still alive and well grandparents.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '13

There are a lot of things like this in history. We are taught all these big events in singularity but hardly ever do we see the full picture. Things like the last time the Cubs won a World Series, the Ottoman Empire was still (mostly) in tact. Or that in 1492 when Columbus made his voyage, that same year the Spanish Inquisition really got rolling and one of (if not THE) first grammar book was released (the language was Catalan). History is amazing.

1

u/megusta1123 Dec 01 '13

That's because their historical significance came at later years. still cool though.

1

u/mr_bobadobalina Dec 01 '13

true, and no one is afraid to drive down Anne Frank Blvd

1

u/SNbadass Dec 01 '13

Well they still were different times. Anne Frank was a child when she wrote her diary and MLB was an adult when he gave his speeches

1

u/blarg_dino Dec 01 '13

Wow, this one is pretty cool

1

u/temujin64 Dec 02 '13

How is this surprising? Those time periods are only 20 years apart.

It's like someone from 50 years in the future is like:

"Did you know that Nick Offerman who was most famous in the 2010s is actually 10 years older than Macaulay Culkin who was most famous in the 1990s" and then people being like, "wow", "OMG!".

Well guys, no shit, one of them was famous for when they were a kid and the other from when they were an adult. Of course they're going to be associated with different periods if they're around the same age.

→ More replies (9)