Ghenghis Khan Descendants Eat For Free 74
pillageplunder writes "CNN has an article about a London restaurant that is offering diners the chance to see if they are descended from the great Khan (Genghis that is). If you are, then you get a free meal. The article delves a bit into bioarchaeology, with some pretty interesting tidbits of info."
Wise move... (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, it's a great gimmick, and with the test costing about $330 dollars, I am certain that they don't lose a dime, in fact they probably make more money per customer, and whichever lab is doing the testing is getting free publicity for the real 'meat' of the DNA testing business; paternity testing.
At the next table (Score:5, Funny)
khan! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:khan! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:khan! (Score:1)
Test to prove you are a Genghis Khan descendant: (Score:5, Funny)
1) Do you have a predilection for little fur hats?
2) Do you prefer axes to climbing roses on the door of your cottage?
3) Have you ever suffered of inexplicable but terrbly attractive visions of houses consumed by fire?
4) Have you ever felt your brain filled with a thousand hairy horsemen shouting at you?
If the answer is "yes" to all questions, you are a Genghis Khan descendant, unfortunately you are too busy lying in the mud to go to the pub -- pardon, restaurant.
Obligatory nitpick post. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Obligatory nitpick post. (Score:3, Informative)
First of all, Arthur wasn't the descendant of Khan, the guy overseeing the demolition of his house is.
In fact, I'm referring to Mr. Prosser, who is convinced by Ford to lie in the mud in place of Arthur to block bulldozers, so Ford and Arthur may go to the pub.
Re:Obligatory nitpick post. (Score:2)
Sure, you say that now... but you originally said "too busy lying in the mud to go to the pub", Mr. Prosser didn't want to go to the pub, he just wanted to demolish the house. It was arthur who wanted to go to the pub. Actually, he didn't even really want to go to the pub, he wanted to defend his house, but ford dragged him to the pub.
Anyway, I don
Re:Obligatory nitpick post. (Score:2)
But yeah, I get your point about Prosser not being able to go to the restaurant to get the free food now, I wasn't even thinking about the original slashdot story, I was just thinking about the book. Oops
Re:Obligatory nitpick post. (Score:1)
So close! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:So close! (Score:2)
I'm descended fron Genghis Goldstein.
-
but all you get is the mongolian beef (Score:2, Funny)
All the way? (Score:5, Funny)
All the way across London? Verily, these Mongolians have lost none of the nomadic spirit of their forefathers!
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re:British food (Score:1)
I'll pass... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ashworth the Enlightened (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a true statement, isn't it? That Genghis Khan and his good friends, The Mongol Horde, swept through raping and pillaging? It was pretty much their modus operandi, from all the accounts I've read.
Oh sure, in all the excitement, I'm sure a few guys got buggered too, but on the whole, it was probably mostly women getting raped or taken captive. How is this fact sexist?
Re:Ashworth the Enlightened (Score:2, Insightful)
"The Mongol Horde, swept through raping and pillaging" tells me a fact about the Mongol Horde.
"The Mongol Horde took their women", tells me that the speaker considers that the women were property.
It matters not what position *they* considered the women, the speaker is also making that assertion.
Re:Ashworth the Enlightened (Score:3, Insightful)
Thus, "took their women" is proper, if slightly archaic (which is appropriate in the context of acts thousands of years old), English that in the context of this story is perfectly correct and non-sexist (at least for the speaker). (And yes, I have heard of
Re:Ashworth the Enlightened (Score:2, Informative)
no, hang on a second (Score:1)
it's the "their" not the "took"
"their women" implies that the women were property but not by opinion of the contemporaries but that the speaker considers that to be the case.
nice distracting argument though, got me for a second
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:1)
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:2)
The obivous issue was "he". Kahn is suddenly representatives for all males. Ergo all men 'take' their women. Disgusting really...
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:3, Informative)
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:2, Interesting)
The mongol hordes took their mothers and sisters.
The mongol hordes took their girlfriends.
The mongol hordes took your girlfriend.
Am I allowed to say "I have a girlfriend" or "My girlfriend's name is..."? Or would it imply that I own her?
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:1)
If I had mod points, this would get one.
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:2)
You are casting yourself as the subject.
Took their women, implies a they to whom the women are subjugate.
Thus it is the "they" that are affected.
"She is your girlfriend" : the speaker gives "you" higher status than "she" for the context of the story.
And so it is with "their women". "They" are afforded higher status than the "women".
This is the institutionalisation of sexism. Shine enlightenment into these dark corners and you may be suprised what you will see.
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:1)
To confirm this, I could ask my well-educated professor. Other college students could ask their professors. Enlisted military personnel could ask their commanding officers, while religious people could pray to their god. Are you really going to make the case that those sen
Re:no, hang on a second (Score:2)
"while religious people could pray to their god"
in this sentence you are communicating how *you* see the relationship between the people and the god
that is the point I am making
But attacking me for noticing such subtlety and lambasting me for not finding *real* sexism is just makes me feel embarassed. "See a fool, you're a fool".
Perhaps it is because people round here aren't even English.
Re:Ashworth the Enlightened (Score:5, Interesting)
The Mongols designed a written language which was capable of forming all the syllables of their subjugated nations.
Genghis was one of the first (and only) conquerors to allow his subjugated peoples to practice their own religions, spared and freed everyone who surrendered immediately, destroyed powerful nations (such as the Caliphate of what is now Iraq) as a result of barbarous behaviour visited upon his diplomats, was one of the only rulers ever to base promotion and reward *purely on merit* and not familial ties nor nobility, invented modern warfare and perfected siege technique, created tremendous surplus and prosperity and justice for all who lived inside the Mongol empire, and visited total destruction on all who refused to submit.
Genghis Khan and his successors conquered more people, more land, with fewer warriors and in less time than anyone else ever has in recorded history. Alexander the Great was a gnat by comparison. Attila the Hun, a nobody. The Roman Empire, a blemish on the ass-cheeks of one of Genghis' concubines. Hitler killed fewer people and conquered less land--even with those death-camps and all the Schlieffen plans he wanted to dream up. Stalin was a punk-ass backstabber rat.
Genghis could travel faster and further with 50,000 horse-mounted warriors, could defeat larger armies, and destroy or conquer countries better and with fewer Mongol casualties, than anyone else prior to or since.
The only nation that Genghis' descendents failed spectacularly in conquering was Japan, and that was only because a nasty storm whipped up and destroyed their invading ships every single time they tried to take the islands.
One of the more terrible things that came about from Genghis' subjugation of pretty much all of Asia and Europe was the Black Plague, the spread of which was facilitated by the active overland trade routes the Mongols built.
The Mongols prized engineers, craftsman, and skilled workers above *all* others because of their unique abilities.
The Mongols also forced advanced education on and provided health care and doctors to, their subjugated nations.
Say what you will about them, they were the impetus which dredged us inexorably towards modern civilisation, kicking and screaming, and without whom we probably wouldn't be as advanced socially and technologically as we are today.
Most of those savageries attributed to Genghis are simply lies: propaganda whipped up before the Mongols even arrived by jittery European scribes who bought into the pre-invasion panic the Mongols liked to sow.
Re:Ashworth the Enlightened (Score:1)
Re:Ashworth the Enlightened (Score:3, Interesting)
DMCA Anyone (Score:1)
Could he sue his decendants for unauthorised 'copying' of his DNA under the DMCA?
Before you blast me as a Troll yet again [slashdot.org] this comment is meant to be a satire of the overly broad DMCA. No Mod Parent Down posts please, unless this post is actually crap... which it is.
Re:DMCA Anyone (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:DMCA Anyone (Score:2)
OT: don't obsess about the mods (Score:2)
You are *not* barred from moderating later on (there's no lasting effect to a single troll), and your karma will recover quickly, if you have useful comments to contribute.
Not that I'm a exactly a grizzled old-timer... but I had a few accide
another nefarious conspiracy (Score:5, Funny)
Obviously, it's a clever plot to *eradicate* the descendants of the Khan.
"Chefs desperately fleeing UK" . . . (Score:1)
"We're exporting chefs to France, for crying out loud".
Perhaps they're leaving to avoid their talents being wasted.
But seriously, the issue is not, "Can good dining establishments be found in the UK?", or "How numerous are good British-born chefs?". Rather, the issue is, "How should one characterize the cuisine associated with the UK?", either traditionally, OR statistically vis-a-vis current practice.
The traditional canard is, "To eat well in Br
Re:"Chefs desperately fleeing UK" . . . (Score:2)
Canards that are derived from cultural bigotry really shouldn't be touted as "traditional wisdom." Have you eaten "traditi
Re:"Chefs desperately fleeing UK" . . . (Score:1)
Just as much as the fine citizens of Maryland export a taste for a 40oz. of 'Natty Bo' and a heapin' helpin' of scrapple.
I for one... (Score:1)
In 12th century Asia (Score:1)
Re:I for one... (Score:1)
Parse error (Score:3, Funny)
They are going to be giving out a lot of meals. (Score:3, Interesting)
Due to the exponential nature of family trees anyone alive more than 600 years ago is everyone's ancestor in one way or another. (Ignoring massive inbreeding or closed cities.)
Re:They are going to be giving out a lot of meals. (Score:1, Funny)
((rimshot))Thanks, folks I'll be here all night!
Re:They are going to be giving out a lot of meals. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:They are going to be giving out a lot of meals. (Score:4, Interesting)
I've seen guestimates that Khan may have gotten his y chromosome into as many as 1/3 of the Asian and Russian males alive today, as well as smaller fractions of the middle-eastern and European populations. I've never seen any hard figures to try to support this, but 30 generations isn't enough for one person to have a bloodline connection with everybody in the world - maybe if we had perfect worldwide random pairing in the gene pool, but some of us are still stuck over here in the shallow end.
Re:They are going to be giving out a lot of meals. (Score:2)
Other famous autocrats (Score:1)
For For 180 pounds (US$330) you can eat free! (Score:2, Funny)
Ghenghis Khan's death (Score:4, Funny)
[Cut to Genghis Khan's tent. Genghis strides about purposefully. Indian-style background music. Suddenly the music cuts out and Genghis Khan with a squawk throws himself in the air and lands on his back. This happens very suddenly. Judges hold up cards with points on, in the manner of ice skating judges.]
[Voice Over] 9.1, 9.3, 9.7, that's 28.1 for Genghis Khan.
[Mozart still at piano.]
[Mozart] Bad luck Genghis. Nice to have you on the show. And now here are the scores.
[Scoreboard with Eddie Waring figure standing by it. The scoreboard looks a little like this:]
29.9 St Stephan
29.3 Richard III
29.1 Jean D'arc
29.0 Marat
28.2 A. Lincoln (U.S of A)
28.1 G. Khan
3.1 King Edward VII
By Monty Python [ibras.dk]
Ob Bill & Ted's quote... (Score:4, Funny)
Ted: This is a dude who, 700 years ago, totally ravaged China, and who we were told, 2 hours ago, totally ravaged Ashman's Sporting Goods.
Re:Ob Bill & Ted's quote... (Score:2)
After they took over, they instituted health care for the masses and many advanced education centres!
I'd hardly call that "savaging." Fair justice for the common peasants? That's not "savaging."
Re:Ob Bill & Ted's quote... (Score:1)
Obligatory HHGTTG (Score:2)
KHAAAAAAAANNNNNNN!!!!! KHAAAAAAANNNN!!! (Score:4, Funny)
Would that be sufficient proof for a free meal?
Eat for free!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry I am not a descendant of the khan
LessonOfTheDay : Free food is not always good for your pocket; unless you can sue the restaurant for troubling your stomach
Good Lord ... (Score:2)
So when does the government start setting up a free give-away of Pepsi (or whatever) if you'll only give them your DNA.
I realize that what we can routinely do with DNA is simply amazing, but this just sounds absolutely scary to me. Yeah, go ahead, accuse me of being in the tinfoil-hat crowd, but I'd choose to restrict the way I just go around handing that information out.
Ther