I thought it was less about racial stereotypes, and more about this big recent push across multiple fields to not have people’s names attached to things. Right now (or recently) it’s about oviducts v Fallopian tubes or the bulbourethral gland v Cowperis gland in biology, which I’m familiar with. I think there was a post and comment thread about birds specifically in the last few days on Lemmy; same thing with people’s names being removed.
From what I’ve seen, a lot of the motivation to not have peoples’ names attached to things is because people have things attached to them (such as racism). Not saying that’s every case, but I’m sure that’s a significant factor behind the general push.
Um. The names aren’t being replaced with other personal names, and even if they were, it’s certainly not with the names of the people doing the replacement.
I think the point was they aren’t necessarily trying to replace names with their own, but they get the privilege to name it whatever they like and the name will be used until the next big wave of renaming things comes along.
It’s really dependent on the attitude of the renamers. Maybe they are honored for the privilege and take it seriously, others might think it’s their god given right to name things and fuck the old names. That last one may be a bit extreme, and without actually knowing these people, the best option is to just not give a fuck and move on with life.
I laughed way too hard at this. But seriously most antiquities need to be returned to their places of origin. It’s 2023 how is this still a conversation to be had?
The problem is that you have governments like the Taliban in Afghanistan, pre-9/11, destroying ancient statues, trying to erase the history they don’t agree with.
Instead of returning stolen antiquities, countries that are currently in possession of them should be required to send an equivalent value of their own country’s treasure to be displayed in the victim country’s museums.
Imagine having to go to Egypt to see the crown jewels of England.
I absolutely agree that there are some locations that are too volatile/corrupt to have items returned. I never would have thought to have equivalent items sent out of county for display, that would really drive the emotional point home.
Some artifacts were acquired legitimately either as gifts or through purchase. So have no reason to be returned.
Some states are too unstable or corrupt to be able to return them, such as Syria or Egypt. And there was a case recently where France returned some artifical to an afircsn state just for the president (? King?) To keep them for himself.
Some artifacts don’t have an easy place to return them too. Like take the kohinoor diamond, do you give it back to the Indian government? The Pakistani government? The Afgan government? The decendents of of the Maharaja that signed over possession to the Queen, or the descendents of the people he stole it from? Or the people that person stole it from? And so on and so on. And at this point it’s more historically important to the UK than it is to any other country.
Which brings me to the next point, some artifacts are important because of their history after being taken. The Rosetta stone is a perfect example of this. When it was discovered by the French it was rubble being used to construct a crude wall. If the French didn’t recognise it might br important it would have been lost to history. And if it wasn’t translated by a French archaeologist after the British took it, then it would still be insignificant, as the are other identical stele in Egypt and its actual cobtents are pretty mundane and unimportant. Literally the only thing that makes the rosetta stone significant is its history AFTER it was taken from Egypt.
And finally some cases the artifacts are only their because that country got invaded. Like a lot of roman artifacts in the British museum were brought by invading Romans. I don’t think anyone sensible thinks they should be returned to Italy right?
Absolutely, and all the people that now have the artifacts benefit in keeping the status quo, so there is effectively little push to solve a very complex problem.
You make a very well reasoned point, and I don’t disagree with you. I can see why museum curators won’t release antiquities because in your examples establishing provenance and actual logistics would be a nightmare. Not to mention the precedent of giving away some country’s items but not others. But, at this point in time it’s also a point of contention, rightfully so, that items obtained are still viewed as the property of the British museum in what amounts to a trophy case of imperialism. Ultimately we are in a period of growing pains as society and this is just another awkward period we have to get through to move forward.
Cnn: Rowan’s design “kept getting shared,” Dittus said. “People were saying it’s really different, it really captures the essence of the political zeitgeist.”
People should know that having nothing to say on a topic is a completely valid option
For me personally, i think it’s cringe because pennywise would destroy hannibal. It’s not even a contest. I doubt he’d even have to bust out the deadlights, but if he did, it would instantly be over.
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.