EgyptKang

Today show reveals the "newly recreated" bust of Nefertiti

108 posts in this topic

I found some interesting information on Tutankhamun.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, songfourone said:

 

Sorry Megyn, Santa Claus Is Not White

Fox News’s Megyn Kelly recently assured the children watching her program that “Santa just is white.” She was responding to Slate writer Alisha Harris’ suggestion that Santa should be an animal (like the Easter bunny) instead of a human, so that no child of any race would be uncomfortable or confused by a Santa that did not share their skin color (Harris proposed a penguin.) Megyn’s comment was meant to protect the “Santa belief” of children who might be confused regarding how there could be a debate about what color Santa “should be” if Santa really exists. “We’re just debating this because someone wrote about it kids.” But it spawned a media firestorm. Harris herself replied, along with John Stewart, SNL, Jimmy Kimmel, and MSNBC’s Toure Neblett.

Now there are all kinds of social and political issues to consider here, and this also a debate about Santa’s “race”—which could get really complicated because race really has no biological basis, and is more a social construct. But here I’m interested in one simple question, which really does seem to be at the bottom of all this: Is Santa’s skin white?

Bill O’Reilly came to Megyn’s aid, claiming that her statement was historically accurate, since the historical St. Nicholas was white. Does that settle the issue? Not really. It turns out the question of Santa’s skin color is not as easy to answer as it first appears.

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/plato-pop/201312/sorry-megyn-santa-claus-is-not-white

 

Waiting for Papi's head to explode.

:D

Why would my head explode over senseless babble between talking heads and your regurgitation of it? Why should I (or any logical person) care how a child might picture Santa, or the Easter Bunny, of the Tooth Fairy? They will picture those mythical figures in a way that is familiar to them, or pleasing to them, which is as it should be. Every culture has their own way of visualizing such figures, and to suggest that one version is somehow "correct" is absurd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a kid, the Easter Bunny rabbit punched me during the egg hunt. I never trusted him after that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, EgyptKang said:

This reminds me of a skit by Richard Pryor which was so spot on.

 

Was his boyfriend Marlon Brando ever on the show?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, soulflower said:

Slaves in Egypt were more like Indentured Servants or Serfs. Some slaves were prisoners of war. 

Talk about whitewashing. (Pardon the pun.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, FatBoy said:

When I was a kid, the Easter Bunny rabbit punched me during the egg hunt. I never trusted him after that.  

Ok. You really must elaborate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sprightly said:

Talk about whitewashing. (Pardon the pun.)

Don’t take my word for it:

In ancient Egypt, textual references to slaves are indistinct. From word usage along, it is difficult to ascertain whether one was a slave or a servant. For example, a priest could be read as a god's slave, but by our definition and understanding of slavery he was not. In reading Egyptian texts, therefore, context is the only criteria for determining such a status, and even then, it can be difficult, because there were different levels of servitude. Those who were not free might not only include slaves, but also those with various degrees of encumbered liberty. For example, could an artisan who worked on tombs who lived in the Deir el-Medina worker's village on the West Bank at Thebes simply walk of his job? In effect, almost anyone under the authority of an absolute ruler such as a pharaoh might in some degree be considered a slave. We should also note that, if it is difficult to identify slaves from textual references, it is even harder to do so with depictions.

 

In fact, the term that conjures up anachronistic visions either of ancient Rome or of the nineteenth century plantation of the New World do little to help understand slavery in Egypt. Most of the population of pharaonic Egypt were tied to the land or followed strictly hereditary professions. These men or women were often included among the possessions of kings, high-ranking officials or Temple estates. Serfs might better describe these people, though even that term is too closely connected with images of feudal society in medieval Europe, especially in view of the fact that Egyptian farmers were tied to the land not so much legally but by tradition and economic circumstances.

 

For ancient Egypt, a better, or at least more precise definition of a slave might be a "person owned by a master, as was any other chattel, used as the master pleased, to the extent of being disposed of by inheritance, gift sale and so forth". In reality, such slavery seems to have been fairly rare in Egypt prior to the Greek Period, progressing over time.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/slaves.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, soulflower said:

There was a large wave or “exodus” of Middle Eastern immigrants out Egypt around the 16th or 17th Dynasty (the Hyksos). But they were foreign rulers, not slaves. Also no proof that Moses existed. 

Slaves in Egypt were more like Indentured Servants or Serfs. Some slaves were prisoners of war. 

They always overlook this fact. Indentured servants were able to work off what they owed. Slaves never had that opportunity. BIG difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, soulflower said:

Meh. I don’t think people should be angry about it. However it is rare that White historical figures are depicted in Pop Culture as anything other than White. 

In contrast, when it comes to non-White historical figures there tends to be an obsession in Pop Culture with reimagining them as more caucasian. 

What color would you depict White historical figures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Apexbud said:

The Hyksos as Hebrews theory is interesting. Even as foreign leaders, the Hyksos were known to claim Pharaoh status and hold slaves.

The Old Testament is mostly oral history finally written down. Maybe Moses didn't exist, but three major religions have him as a focal point. If he didn't exist, someone very much like him most likely did.

 

A slave is a slave is a slave.

Dress it up and call them indentured servants, serfs, prisoners, bondservant, chattel, or laborer.

A slave is a slave.

But not all slave systems are the same. One that causes a particular race to be chattel slaves in perpetuity is simply not the same as one that allows slaves to earn freedom or gives them some rights,freedoms and ownership of their own family history and culture.

I understand how we might like to consider them to be all the same considering how utterly dehumanizing our own was. Guilt loves company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hst2 said:

But not all slave systems are the same. One that causes a particular race to be chattel slaves in perpetuity is simply not the same as one that allows slaves to earn freedom or gives them some rights,freedoms and ownership of their own family history and culture.

I understand how we might like to consider them to be all the same considering how utterly dehumanizing our own was. Guilt loves company.

Hilarious.  :lol:

You are saying that slavery that still exists today in Africa is not so bad.  I doubt the slaves would agree with you.  Pathetic and typical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EgyptKang said:

They always overlook this fact. Indentured servants were able to work off what they owed. Slaves never had that opportunity. BIG difference.

Tell that to the indentured servants that worked for the master from cradle to grave, never having a chance to earn the money to buy their freedom. Generations lived that way.

My ancestors came to America as indentured servants and escaped into the wilderness wetlands of the Eastern Shore when the master died suddenly. That could not have happened in the Irish homeland. The British had tight control there.

Slavery is still slavery no matter how much you dress it up to meet your agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, soulflower said:

The concept of Race in ancient times isn’t the same as how we understand it today. 

Clearly both Sub-Saharan people and Middle Eastern Caucasian people made up the population of ancient Egypt. The mixing of people from Africa and Asia is represented in their artwork. We have a pretty good idea of what Nefertiti actually looked like based on the numerous depictions of her by the Egyptians themselves. 

That is my understanding.  And it is only in the last 50 years or so that we would not consider all those people "white" for what that is worth.  But there is money and influence to be made by further subdividing people based on "race."  I mean when you check off "caucasian" on Federal forms, what color is that considered to be?  People from the Caucuses are darker than Swedes and Norwegians, so are Scandinavians not Caucasian?  Maybe we have a new protected class in the making?  LOL.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EgyptKang said:

They always overlook this fact. Indentured servants were able to work off what they owed. Slaves never had that opportunity. BIG difference.

Except that the master has more say in what the servant owes than the servant, and the master decides what the servant will be paid.  Then if the servant is provided room & board, there is no guarantee the debt will not actually grow.  So the line can be blurred.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Apexbud said:

Tell that to the indentured servants that worked for the master from cradle to grave, never having a chance to earn the money to buy their freedom. Generations lived that way.

My ancestors came to America as indentured servants and escaped into the wilderness wetlands of the Eastern Shore when the master died suddenly. That could not have happened in the Irish homeland. The British had tight control there.

Slavery is still slavery no matter how much you dress it up to meet your agenda.

It’s not “dressing it up” to explain that their forms of slavery were different from our modern idea of slavery. 

It also wasn’t race-based slavery. 

 

Edited by soulflower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, soulflower said:

It’s not “dressing it up” to explain that their forms of slavery were different from our modern idea of slavery. 

It also wasn’t race-based slavery. 

 

The reason they can't seem to grasp that concept is because they are busy trying to justify the wickedness that went on during slavery in America. They want to say....."they did it too....so slavery (the way it was done in America) is just a natural thing to do."

Edited by EgyptKang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing the nonsense spouted here about some forms of slavery are not as bad other forms of slavery.  ALL slavery is horrible and it should never be tolerated ANYWHERE EVER!  No one, including the government, has the right to own another person. 

Some of you should be ashamed of yourselves. 

 

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, EgyptKang said:

The reason they can't seem to grasp that concept is because they are busy trying to justify the wickedness that went on during slavery in America. They want to say....."they did it too....so slavery (the way it was done in America) is just a natural thing to do."

Ancient Egypt was no democracy. Pretty much all Egyptians were in one way or another Slaves of the Pharoah or State. 

So yeah, it was different but not necessarily better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, soulflower said:

It’s not “dressing it up” to explain that their forms of slavery were different from our modern idea of slavery. 

It also wasn’t race-based slavery. 

 

So that makes slavery better in your mind if it's not race based?

What nonsense!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EgyptKang said:

The reason they can't seem to grasp that concept is because they are busy trying to justify the wickedness that went on during slavery in America. They want to say....."they did it too....so slavery (the way it was done in America) is just a natural thing to do."

So you say.

That is the most twisted-knot logic I've seen for a long time. 

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2018 at 11:39 AM, EgyptKang said:

 

It seems Nefertiti created Looney Tunes.  Do they have road runners in Egypt, or was that an add on?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only here can a bust thousands of years old degenerate into yet another discussion of slavery in America. 

It would be funny if it weren't so trite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mlatoman said:

Only here can a bust thousands of years old degenerate into yet another discussion of slavery in America. 

It would be funny if it weren't so trite. 

It's hilarious!

Some are even saying certain types of slavery are better than others! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Apexbud said:

It's hilarious!

Some are even saying certain types of slavery are better than others! 

They just had a different name .......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now