DEBUNKING THE MEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT

plansfornigel:

DEBUNKING THE MEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT

POSTED BY
DEBUNKINGMRAS

POSTED ON
MARCH 12, 2014

What follows is a response to a popular list of claims and arguments made by men’s rights activists.

1. SUICIDE: Men’s suicide rate is 4.6 times higher than that of women’s. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 males vs 5,700 females]

Not for lack of trying: women attempt it three times as often. [1] Men are more likely to succeed because we are trained for violence, trained for emotional detachment, and trained to deal with problems ourselves rather than seeking help from others. Moreover, we are socialized with a sense of self-importance that can lead men to believe family members would be better off dead without them or to use suicide as a form of revenge against people close to them. The statistic given here also masks that many of these “suicides” were actually murder-suicides. In the United States, an estimated 1,000 to 1,500 people died in suicide attacks each year. [2] More than ninety percent of the offenders are men; nearly all the victims are female. [3]

2. LIFE EXPECTANCY: Men’s life expectancy is seven (7) years shorter than women’s [National Center for Health Statistics — males 72.3 yrs vs females 79 yrs] yet receive only 35% of government expenditures for health care and medical costs.

This is a curious statement. If women live seven years longer than men, it should be obvious why they receive more health support: because the oldest people in society are those that most need subsidized health support, and the oldest people are predominantly women. Furthermore, the insurance industry charges $1 billion a year more to women in health insurance each year for the same coverage plans men receive [4], and up to 53% more for the same individual coverage plan [5], despite women’s overall better health and despite receiving 23% less income then men. [6]

3. WAR: Men are almost exclusively the only victims of war [Dept. Defense — Vietnam Casualties 47,369 men vs 74 women]

The first thing to say is that if trained soldiers sent to engage in imperial wars of aggression can be called “victims” at all, then they are victims of those responsible for the wars in which they fought. And those responsible are men. All Presidents and Vice Presidents have been men. All members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have been men. Both branches of Congress have always been dominated by men. Polls since Vietnam show that men have been the ones to support going to war, and the ones most likely to support wars currently in progress. [7] On every level of analysis it is men who are responsible for war, and to somehow blame male combat deaths on women is not only absurd, but insane. If we want to stop these deaths, we need to stop those who are responsible for them: the male politicians, male military personnel, male war contractors, and male warmongers who perpetuate them.

The second thing to say is that this is simply a lie. A study by researchers at the Harvard Medical School looking at wars in 13 countries, including the Vietnam War, found that of the 5.4 million people violently killed, more than 1 million were female. [8] This figure does not account for those women killed less directly through aerial spraying, inflicted poverty, or as the result of sexual torture by men. This also ignores male sexual violence during wartime. In Vietnam, for instance, it was common and accepted practice for soldiers to gang rape women and young girls, as well to kill a female following a rape. [9] Such was the frequency of the latter that the term “double veteran” was coined to refer to such perpetrators. [10]

4. WORKPLACE FATALITIES: Men account for more than 95% of all workplace fatalities.

The figure is 92% as of 2012. One important reason for this discrepancy is that men are inclined to select work that is dangerous in order to prove their masculinity to women, to other men, and to themselves. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the most dangerous professions in the United States are construction, transportation, and warehousing, all of which are male-dominated professions. [11] Men’s relative risk of danger is further increased through a relative lack of safety compliance. [12] Tellingly, the most common way for a woman to die in the workplace is to be murdered. [11]

5. MURDER: Men are murdered at a rate almost 5 times that of women. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 men vs 5,700 women]

Men also murder at a rate more than 9 times that of women. That men are often killed by other men is not a problem that women are responsible for. I can hardly imagine why that even needs to be said. In the United States in 2010, 1,095 women were killed by husbands or boyfriends, accounting for 37.5% of female murders. By contrast, only 241 men were killed by their female partners. [13] The smallness of this figure is particularly striking when we consider that 200,000 women in the United States suffer serious violence from male partners each year. [14]

6. CHILD CUSTODY: Women receive physical custody of 92% of all children of separation, and men only 4%. [Department of Health & Human Services]

91% of the time, custody is agreed upon or settled by parents themselves, usually without outside mediation. Mothers are more likely to receive custody because both parents usually understand that it is in the best interests of their children. In married two-partner households, women spend nearly twice as much time doing child care as their male partners. [15] Only 4% of custody cases go to trial and only 1.5% are resolved there. [16] In disputed custody cases, fathers win custody 70% of the time, [17] despite abusive men being among those most likely to fight for custody. [18]

7. JURY BIAS: Women are acquitted of spousal murder at a rate 9 times that of men [Bureau Justice Statistics — 1.4% of men vs 12.9% of women]

This is not a matter of “bias”: women are sometimes acquitted of murdering their husbands because their husbands abused them or their children. It is estimated that 1.3 million women are beaten by male partners in the United States every year, putting them in fear for their lives. [18] Every one of these women would be justified in killing her spouse or partner and receiving an acquittal. It is exceptionally rare for any man to experience a comparable level of terroristic threat from his wife.

8. COURT BIAS: Men are sentenced 2.8 times longer than women for spousal murder [Bureau Justice Statistics — men at 17 years vs women at 6 years]

As per above, many women receive lighter sentences for killing their husbands because their purpose in doing so was to stop physical abuse against themselves or their children.

9. JUSTICE SYSTEM BIAS: Women are assessed for Child Support on average at half the rate of men, yet are twice as likely to default on Child Support payments. Ninety Seven (97%) of all child support prosecutions are against fathers. [Census Bureau]

Women are assessed less often than men and default more often because women aged 18-35 have on average $0 in net worth. Many mothers simply have no means to pay child support. By comparison, white men of the same age have a median wealth of $5,600, and men of color have $1,000. [20] This wealth discrepancy also pressures young mothers who care for the welfare of their children to prosecute men for child support.

10. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: Numerous credible studies from independent researchers report that women are the initiators of domestic violence in 58% of all cases, and cause physical abuse in almost 50% of all cases, yet women only account for 6% of all criminal proceedings in such matters.

It’s telling that you speak of “numerous credible studies” and carefully avoid citing any of them. I tried to find studies from any source making such claims, with no success. What I did find is the most recent report by the US Department of Justice, which found women suffer 805,700 physical injuries at the hands of partners each year, compared to 173,960 men. Moreover, the injuries suffered by women were more than twice as likely to be considered “serious”, defined as including sexual violence, gunshot and knife wounds, internal injuries, unconsciousness, and broken bones. To put that another way, partners inflicted 104,741 serious injuries on women, compared with less than 9,400 inflicted on men, a greater than 11:1 ratio. [14] Even those men who have been subject to partner violence have usually not taken it seriously. According to a study by researchers at the Medical College of Wisconsin, they were “significantly more likely than were women to laugh at partner-initiated violence”, while women “reported more fear, anger, and insult and less amusement when their partners were violent.” [21] It’s also worth noting that a number of these male injuries were incurred by male rather than female partners; according to a 2000 Department of Justice report, men living with male partners are at nearly twice the risk of “serious” violence as those living with women. [22] If women really are criminally prosecuted in 6% of domestic violence cases, then that figure sounds eminently reasonable.

11. CHILD VIOLENCE: Mothers commit 55% of all child murders and biological fathers commit 6%. NIS-3 indicates that Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households. Despite these compelling figures, children are systematically removed from the natural fathers who are their most effective protectors.

The first sentence is unsourced and not credible. According to one group of filicide [child murder] researchers:

Although some studies have noted that mothers commit filicide more often than fathers, other research has shown that paternal filicide is as common or more common than maternal filicide.

Reports of a higher proportion of maternal filicides most likely reflect the inclusion of neonaticides in some studies. [23]

In other words, there is no agreement as to whether mothers or fathers are more likely to kill their own children, but when mothers are seen as more likely, it is likely because infanticides are included in the results. According to the above researchers, the main motivation “may be the undesirability of the child,” and mothers under the age of 20 with a previous child are among those most likely to engage in such a murder. Young mothers without sufficient economic, family, or medical support may find there are no better options for themselves or for their other children. By contrast, fathers who kill their children are “often perpetrators of fatal-abuse filicide”, meaning that they batter their children to death. Some of the most common motivations for father filicide are “attempts to control the child’s behavior, and misinterpretation of the child’s behavior”. [23]

I’ve recently obtained a copy of the NIS-3 study, and while Table 5-4 does indeed provide data indicating that “Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households,” the provided footnote also says explicitly that the difference is either statistically insignificant or marginal, with p-values above 0.10. What that means is that the numbers, while provided, are statistically worthless and cannot be used to even hint at inferences. Meanwhile, the data from the NIS-3 regarding parental households that is statistically valid paints a very different picture. In every category, father-only households put children at a higher risk of harm than mother-only households. Risk of abuse is 71% higher, including a 68% greater chance of physical abuse. Risk of neglect is 28% higher, including a 32% rise for physical neglect, 67% rise for emotional neglect, and 14% rise for educational neglect. Risk of both moderate or serious injury is 40% higher.

That this is true is particularly exceptional when we pair this with data from the more recent NIS-4 study which found that households with a lower socioeconomic status were nearly 7 times more likely to involve neglect, including a nearly ninefold risk of physical neglect. Overally the safety of children in these households was classified as 5.7 times more severe than those of a higher socioeconomic background. [24] Single women with children are far more likely than men to live under conditions of severe poverty: both black and Hispanic women with children under age 18 have an average median wealth of $0, compared to $10,960 for black men and $2,400 for Hispanic men; white women with children have an average median wealth of $7,970, compared to an average of $56,100 for white men. [20] If economic justice for women was sufficiently advanced, we would expect the safety of mother-only households illustrated by the NIS-3 to increase still further. Given this information, to call fathers the “most effective protectors” of children is a hateful turn of phrase, suggesting that mothers wish harm on their children and only fathers can protect them. This in spite of the reality that children are far safer in the custody of their mothers than their fathers.

12. WEALTH: Women hold 65% of the total wealth in the USA [Fortune Magazine]

This is a ridiculous lie, and to their credit I can find no evidence that Fortune Magazine ever made such a claim.

Contrary to this claim, one Harvard University researcher found that men have an average net worth of $26,850, compared to an average of $12,900 for women. [25] That is to say, men on average hold more than twice the wealth of women.

References

[1] http://www.afsp.org/understanding-suicide/facts-and-figures
[2] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/21/murder-suicides-are-in-a-class-by-themselves/2572133/
[3] http://www.jaapl.org/content/37/3/371.long
[4] http://www.nwlc.org/press-release/new-nwlc-report-discriminatory-health-insurance-practices-cost-women-1-billion-year
[5] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/health/policy/women-still-pay-more-for-health-insurance-data-shows.html?scp=1&sq=women%20insurance%20costs&st=cse
[6] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/07/the-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-has-grown-during-the-recovery/
[7] http://www.gallup.com/poll/7243/gender-gap-varies-support-war.aspx
[8] http://www.bmj.com/content/336/7659/1482
[9] Nick Turse, Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, pages 164-171
[10] http://www.waywordradio.org/double_veteran_1/
[11] http://pro.sagepub.com/content/41/2/1283.short
[12] http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0011.pdf
[13] http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain
[14] http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipvav9311.pdf
[15] http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/06/15/a-tale-of-two-fathers/
[16] http://www.divorcepeers.com/stats18.htm#fn%201
[17] Joan Zorza, “Batterer manipulation and retaliation compounded by denial and complicity in the family courts” In M.T. Hannah & B. Goldstein (editors), Domestic violence, abuse and child custody: Legal strategies and policy issues
[18] http://www.nnflp.org/apa/issue5.html
[19] http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/ipvbook-a.pdf
[20] http://www.insightcced.org/uploads/CRWG/LiftingAsWeClimb-WomenWealth-Report-InsightCenter-Spring2010.pdf
[21] http://vaw.sagepub.com/content/8/11/1301.short
[22] https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf
[23] http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf+html
[24] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
[25] http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/9/2/6/pages109260/p109260-1.php

This synopsis was written by Owen Lloyd, a stay-at-home dad living on the Oregon coast. Hate mail can be addressed to him at owen.lloyd@gmail.com.

http://debunkingmras.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/debunking-the-mens-rights-movement-x/

(via boppinrobin)

captainmarvel:

no one does it better : songs by boys covered by girls

1. sex on fire, beyoncé 2. take me to church, neon jungle 3. will you still love me tomorrow, sweet talk radio 4. give me love, demi lovato 5. wagon wheel, mal blum 6. valerie, amy winehouse 7. stay with me, florence + the machine 8. just a dream, taylor swift 9. rude, kina grannis 10. lego house, fifth harmony 11. ho hey, lennon and maisy 12. can’t help falling in love, ingrid michaelson 13. i’m not gonna teach your boyfriend how to dance with you, kate nash 14. wicked games, couer de pirate 15. going home, pia mia 16. same love (freestyle), angel haze 17. get lucky, daughter 18. midnight city, the knocks 19. whatever you like, anya marina 20. make you feel my love, adele 21. teenage dirtbag, mary lambert 22. sex, lauren aquilina 23. counting stars vs. holy grail, little mix 24. what makes you beautiful, rita ora

captainmarvel:

no one does it better : songs by boys covered by girls

1. sex on fire, beyoncé 2. take me to church, neon jungle 3. will you still love me tomorrow, sweet talk radio 4. give me love, demi lovato 5. wagon wheel, mal blum 6. valerie, amy winehouse 7. stay with me, florence + the machine 8. just a dream, taylor swift 9. rude, kina grannis 10. lego house, fifth harmony 11. ho hey, lennon and maisy 12. can’t help falling in love, ingrid michaelson 13. i’m not gonna teach your boyfriend how to dance with you, kate nash 14. wicked games, couer de pirate 15. going home, pia mia 16. same love (freestyle), angel haze 17. get lucky, daughter 18. midnight city, the knocks 19. whatever you like, anya marina 20. make you feel my love, adele 21. teenage dirtbag, mary lambert 22. sex, lauren aquilina 23. counting stars vs. holy grail, little mix 24. what makes you beautiful, rita ora

(via novembersmith)


[x]

SIGH.

I MISSED YOU SO.

[x]

SIGH.

I MISSED YOU SO.

(Source: uncapitaine, via urrone)

pensfan4lfe:

Draisaitl & Nurse.

INTO IT.

pensfan4lfe:

Draisaitl & Nurse.

INTO IT.

(via urrone)

(Source: heittskomm, via queenklu)

spacetwinks:

watching multi-million dollar corporations constantly struggle and fail to make gifs and gifsets that people would actually give a shit about is so interesting

(via bananapoleon)

thessiansongbird:

keeperofdreams:

nicholasdunnes:

winkbooks:

Dead Inside: Do Not Enter — Notes from the Zombie Apocalypse

Dead Inside: Do Not Enter
by Lost Zombies
Chronicle
2011, 160 pages, 8 x 10 x 0.5 inches
$15 Buy a copy on Amazon

Some of my favorite things about zombie movies are the details of the changed world. The dead grass, broken windows, toppled telephone poles, abandoned cars with missing wheels and trunks left open, boarded-up buildings, spent ammo shells, and other signs of struggle and desperation serve to create a fascinatingly creepy environment.

And that’s why I like Dead Inside: Do Not Enter so much. The book consists entirely of letters, hand-written warnings, and pages torn from journal entries that were written during the zombie pandemic. The notes are on matchbooks, napkins, photographs, advertisements, shopping lists, road maps, scraps of cardboard, and gum wrappers. Some of the notes are written with pen and pencil, others are written with lipstick, burnt wood, crayons, and blood.

The messages of the notes themselves tell the tale of the rise of the zombie pandemic, from tentative, joking questions about a “really bad flu,” escalating to confused panic, and later to grim acceptance of the new reality that the survivors now must live in.

In the introduction to Dead Inside, we learn that these notes had been found in a Dora the Explorer backpack. The first note presented in the book was written by the man who killed the owner of the backpack, a girl who was about 10 years old and had been bitten by a zombie (but had not yet turned into one). The man wrote “I opened her backpack and found all these notes and letters. This stuff is poisonous. No one in their right mind should read it. Reading this is like looking into the sun.” – Mark Frauenfelder

September 16, 2014

hopeheisagentleman

Oh god it’s like playing the first Walking Dead game all over again. *sob*

yourprepboy

(via heirhelle)

orientaltrading:

real-faker:

virginmarx:

zebablah:

television history

i’ve been trying to explain this sketch to people for years

there is literally no way to explain this sketch it’s just a thing you have to see and even then I’m not sure why it’s so funny

Omg I haven’t seen this in ages

(Source: stupidfuckingquestions, via zarathuse)

eros-dikaios:

kanirou:

fatfeistyandfashionable:

bathsabbath:

piscula:

skooth:

bhavatarini:

myblacksexuality:

poetofwar333:

#cleopatra with the nose knocked off. I wonder if people still think she was European like the movies betray…

I still think it’s one of the most desperate things whites have done to blacks and to black history. The disrespect is outrageous. They came to our country and mentally could not fathom how these black civilizations could be so great. They literally rode through our lands and shot the noses off of our statues. Why? So that the statues would no longer resemble the African people and they could LIE about the origins of Egypt and countless other civilizations. It was a widespread practice. It’s why statues of Pharaoh’s and their wives have no noses. It’s why the Sphinx has no nose. When I was in middle and high school, we were taught that the noses had fell off due to time and poor craftsmanship! They have literally tried to teach us that our ancestors were shitty builders of noses just to hide their malicious destruction of our heritage. European fears of African peoples had to come from somewhere. I want to know what part of the history is missing. There’s something that they don’t want to be told.

The shade is real

i was taught that the noses fell off as well and actually continued to believe this. in retrospect this makes no sense, considering greek/roman statues pretty much always have intact noses whereas egyptian ones are always conveniently missing theirs. thank you for pointing this out to me, i hadn’t even made that connection until now.

The bolded was me too and I am seriously embarrassed that I never even thought about how that could be false.

Damnnn. I hate myself for not realizing this.
    I hate myself even more, since I know the ancient Egyptians created their sculptural works with the idea of permanence in mind. They were literally built to last throughout the afterlife. Notice how the majority of their monumental sculpture is stone-bound, without any protruding elements or breakable appendages. That’s because many of these sculptures were intended to house the life-force (Ka) of those they portrayed. Of their favorite materials were basalt and diorite, both extremely hard stones that were incredibly difficult to carve. Meaning a nose just doesn’t “fall off” because of “poor craftsmanship,” you would literally have to take a hammer to it. Fuckers.

I’m embarrassed and ashamed to add myself to the list of people who where taught that the noses “fell off” as a child and never once stopped to think about how incongruous that was to everything I had been taught about the Egyptian civilizations and their propensity for lasting works of art.

This is so inaccurate. 
Noses are always the first thing to go on statues, they protrude from the rest of the sculpture and are unsupported. This is true of Greek and Roman statues as well. This is Sulla, Roman general, consul, dictator, reformer, and kind of important. This is also the best bust we have of him and the one you will find in just about any textbook. 

Also, can we pause to think about environment here? The Mediterranean is much more long-lasting-statue friendly than Egypt is. Differences in humidity, wind patterns, building materials, and especially sand storms have immense effect on how well statues and carvings are preserved. 
More importantly, statue defamation was a practice that goes far back into Egyptian history itself. As previously (and accurately) mentioned, many statues were believed to either contain, preserve, or safeguard a deceased’s spirit after death. Burial statues would be deliberately defaced as acts of revenge, intimidation, or political leverage in times of upheaval. Political rival wants to hit you where it hurts? Deface your family’s statues. New dynasty in charge? Deface every statue of the old blood so their spirits can never hurt you. 
An unfortunately perfect example involves Hatshepsut, Queen and Pharaoh of Egypt who was immensely successful and powerful. Upon the succession of Thutmose III, he eventually ordered that all public images of her be defaced, some merely having the facial features knocked off, or sometimes full-out erasure:
(“la la la, nothing to see here!” like damn)
This practice was continued by invading conquerers, particularly Muslims (as they simply had far greater and longer lasting control than anyone else) but also Christians if they were in the area. Defacing local rulers is pretty common practice by conquerers anywhere you go in the world, but the spiritual/emotional/mental affect it had on Egyptians would not have gone unnoticed, so it was a good tool to undermine popular morale. 
The legend of Napoleon’s forces shooting off the nose is pure fiction, easily debunked by multiple scholars’ accounts and artists’ renditions of the Sphinx from before Napoleon was even born showing the Sphinx without a nose. The Sphinx’s nose was deliberately removed, but evidence strongly supports this being a religiously motivated act, not racial. Muslim officials deliberately defaced the Sphinx (made extremely clear by the large chisel marks left on the Sphinx’s face) because they repeatedly found local Egyptians worshipping or making homage to it. This was of course unacceptable to their new rulers, so they destroyed the statue and therefore whatever life force the Egyptians believed was within it. 
By the time we fast forward far enough in time to get to white European imperialists, noses have been getting knocked off Egyptian statues for hundreds and thousands of years. Did these Europeans deface more statues? I’m sure some did, but probably cause they were racist dicks, not out of any great international organized scheme at historical revision (please, you really think they were thinking that far ahead? all they cared about was money at this point). Europeans crafted cultural perceptions of racial superiority by denying the existence of Black Kingdoms, not by writing home “yeah these African kingdoms are totally rad and totally white.” Their approach was definitely more “African kingdoms? What African kingdoms?” But this all deals more with subSaharan peoples, not Egyptians.
At the end of the day, Egyptian archaeology ends up with lots of noseless statues, brought about by a number of factors:
1. some fell to environment and deterioration (as do all statues in the world)2. some fell to political violence and social upheaval3. some fell to religious foreign conquerers4. and finally some fell to European invaders
But to claim that all statues were defaced at the same time by the same people for the same reasons is just grossly inaccurate and is deliberate misrepresentation of the facts to create hyperbole. Egypt has a long and vibrant and at times tragic (and at others inspiring!) history, with plenty of truth to inspire lots of debate and discussion, so please, don’t dilute all this with falsehoods. 
PS - I swear I thought we’d gotten past this by now, but Cleopatra was a Macedonian Greek, and was heir to a long line of Macedonian Greeks. The Ptolemaic Dynasty was established after Alexander the Great conquered Egypt and established one of his generals as ruler. They adopted some Egyptian customs (mainly sibling marriage of the ruling family), but were always staunchly Greek. Cleopatra is indeed interesting though, because while her predecessors as a practice didn’t even speak Egyptian, Cleopatra learned and frequently spoke Egyptian, and very closely associated herself with the goddess Isis. But cultural blending aside, she was Greek, and her successor Caesarion was half Roman ala Julius Caesar.

Hey above blogger, I love you for schooling these dumb-dumbs on history and archaeology. And yes, for the last frickin’ time, Cleopatra was a descendent of Ptolemy, one of Alexander’s generals, and thus a Macedonian.
EESH. 
And FWIW 19th century Europeans acted horrendously destructive against much of Greece and Rome’s own treasures (Lord Elgin, anybody) because archaeology was only a beginning science and also because many of the items they came across did not fit their pre-conceived notions of classical antiquity.

eros-dikaios:

kanirou:

fatfeistyandfashionable:

bathsabbath:

piscula:

skooth:

bhavatarini:

myblacksexuality:

poetofwar333:

#cleopatra with the nose knocked off. I wonder if people still think she was European like the movies betray…

I still think it’s one of the most desperate things whites have done to blacks and to black history. The disrespect is outrageous. They came to our country and mentally could not fathom how these black civilizations could be so great. They literally rode through our lands and shot the noses off of our statues. Why? So that the statues would no longer resemble the African people and they could LIE about the origins of Egypt and countless other civilizations. It was a widespread practice. It’s why statues of Pharaoh’s and their wives have no noses. It’s why the Sphinx has no nose. When I was in middle and high school, we were taught that the noses had fell off due to time and poor craftsmanship! They have literally tried to teach us that our ancestors were shitty builders of noses just to hide their malicious destruction of our heritage. European fears of African peoples had to come from somewhere. I want to know what part of the history is missing. There’s something that they don’t want to be told.

The shade is real

i was taught that the noses fell off as well and actually continued to believe this. in retrospect this makes no sense, considering greek/roman statues pretty much always have intact noses whereas egyptian ones are always conveniently missing theirs. thank you for pointing this out to me, i hadn’t even made that connection until now.

The bolded was me too and I am seriously embarrassed that I never even thought about how that could be false.

Damnnn. I hate myself for not realizing this.

    I hate myself even more, since I know the ancient Egyptians created their sculptural works with the idea of permanence in mind. They were literally built to last throughout the afterlife. Notice how the majority of their monumental sculpture is stone-bound, without any protruding elements or breakable appendages. That’s because many of these sculptures were intended to house the life-force (Ka) of those they portrayed. Of their favorite materials were basalt and diorite, both extremely hard stones that were incredibly difficult to carve. Meaning a nose just doesn’t “fall off” because of “poor craftsmanship,” you would literally have to take a hammer to it. Fuckers.

I’m embarrassed and ashamed to add myself to the list of people who where taught that the noses “fell off” as a child and never once stopped to think about how incongruous that was to everything I had been taught about the Egyptian civilizations and their propensity for lasting works of art.

This is so inaccurate. 

Noses are always the first thing to go on statues, they protrude from the rest of the sculpture and are unsupported. This is true of Greek and Roman statues as well. This is Sulla, Roman general, consul, dictator, reformer, and kind of important. This is also the best bust we have of him and the one you will find in just about any textbook. 

Also, can we pause to think about environment here? The Mediterranean is much more long-lasting-statue friendly than Egypt is. Differences in humidity, wind patterns, building materials, and especially sand storms have immense effect on how well statues and carvings are preserved. 

More importantly, statue defamation was a practice that goes far back into Egyptian history itself. As previously (and accurately) mentioned, many statues were believed to either contain, preserve, or safeguard a deceased’s spirit after death. Burial statues would be deliberately defaced as acts of revenge, intimidation, or political leverage in times of upheaval. Political rival wants to hit you where it hurts? Deface your family’s statues. New dynasty in charge? Deface every statue of the old blood so their spirits can never hurt you. 

An unfortunately perfect example involves Hatshepsut, Queen and Pharaoh of Egypt who was immensely successful and powerful. Upon the succession of Thutmose III, he eventually ordered that all public images of her be defaced, some merely having the facial features knocked off, or sometimes full-out erasure:


(“la la la, nothing to see here!” like damn)

This practice was continued by invading conquerers, particularly Muslims (as they simply had far greater and longer lasting control than anyone else) but also Christians if they were in the area. Defacing local rulers is pretty common practice by conquerers anywhere you go in the world, but the spiritual/emotional/mental affect it had on Egyptians would not have gone unnoticed, so it was a good tool to undermine popular morale. 

The legend of Napoleon’s forces shooting off the nose is pure fiction, easily debunked by multiple scholars’ accounts and artists’ renditions of the Sphinx from before Napoleon was even born showing the Sphinx without a nose. The Sphinx’s nose was deliberately removed, but evidence strongly supports this being a religiously motivated act, not racial. Muslim officials deliberately defaced the Sphinx (made extremely clear by the large chisel marks left on the Sphinx’s face) because they repeatedly found local Egyptians worshipping or making homage to it. This was of course unacceptable to their new rulers, so they destroyed the statue and therefore whatever life force the Egyptians believed was within it. 

By the time we fast forward far enough in time to get to white European imperialists, noses have been getting knocked off Egyptian statues for hundreds and thousands of years. Did these Europeans deface more statues? I’m sure some did, but probably cause they were racist dicks, not out of any great international organized scheme at historical revision (please, you really think they were thinking that far ahead? all they cared about was money at this point). Europeans crafted cultural perceptions of racial superiority by denying the existence of Black Kingdoms, not by writing home “yeah these African kingdoms are totally rad and totally white.” Their approach was definitely more “African kingdoms? What African kingdoms?” But this all deals more with subSaharan peoples, not Egyptians.

At the end of the day, Egyptian archaeology ends up with lots of noseless statues, brought about by a number of factors:

1. some fell to environment and deterioration (as do all statues in the world)
2. some fell to political violence and social upheaval
3. some fell to religious foreign conquerers
4. and finally some fell to European invaders

But to claim that all statues were defaced at the same time by the same people for the same reasons is just grossly inaccurate and is deliberate misrepresentation of the facts to create hyperbole. Egypt has a long and vibrant and at times tragic (and at others inspiring!) history, with plenty of truth to inspire lots of debate and discussion, so please, don’t dilute all this with falsehoods. 

PS - I swear I thought we’d gotten past this by now, but Cleopatra was a Macedonian Greek, and was heir to a long line of Macedonian Greeks. The Ptolemaic Dynasty was established after Alexander the Great conquered Egypt and established one of his generals as ruler. They adopted some Egyptian customs (mainly sibling marriage of the ruling family), but were always staunchly Greek. Cleopatra is indeed interesting though, because while her predecessors as a practice didn’t even speak Egyptian, Cleopatra learned and frequently spoke Egyptian, and very closely associated herself with the goddess Isis. But cultural blending aside, she was Greek, and her successor Caesarion was half Roman ala Julius Caesar.

Hey above blogger, I love you for schooling these dumb-dumbs on history and archaeology. And yes, for the last frickin’ time, Cleopatra was a descendent of Ptolemy, one of Alexander’s generals, and thus a Macedonian.

EESH. 

And FWIW 19th century Europeans acted horrendously destructive against much of Greece and Rome’s own treasures (Lord Elgin, anybody) because archaeology was only a beginning science and also because many of the items they came across did not fit their pre-conceived notions of classical antiquity.

(via saintawesome)

jammiebenns:

Weird to call yourself an older guy?

I have no idea how but this tumblr has been taken over by my Jamie Benn love and IDEK, I’m just gonna go with it.

I promise I’m a Blackhawks fan. I really have no idea how this happened.

(via urrone)

raptorific:

I hit words at random on iOS 8’s new predictive text feature so I could see what type of sentence my phone thinks I’m likely to say, and

image

This is apparently what ALL Apple iOS 8 phones say. I’m not even kidding.

Thanks for that, Apple.

(via hellhoundstooth)

loki-the-god-of-sarcasm:

missespeon:

sixstrategos:

sixstrategos:

sixstrategos:

this is what is going on in scotland right now.

dont ignore this.

there is NO coverage of the rioting on the news which is why its so important that you dont ignore this. 

please stay safe if you live in scotland. 

my partner actually went to the yes rally in george square a couple days ago and said the no guys were indeed doing nazi salutes

The unionists have set fire to the building housing The Herald. 

A 15 year old boy is dead. 

The riots continue. 

My friends have been trying to get out of Glasgow and have been attacked. 

Your voter status doesn’t matter to these people, they will attack for no reason. 

Gay SNP councillor Austin Sheridan has been subjected to an unprovoked attack simply because he is a gay man who voted yes.

Homes have been broken into.

There are riots on the streets even outside of Glasgow.

The BNP, UKIP, Britain First and The Orange Lodge are attacking peaceful protestors with flares.

LGBT people are being singled out by the above groups. 

DON’T LET THIS ABHORRENT SITUATION CONTINUE. 

DO NOT LET THIS BE HIDDEN.

PLEASE, DO WHAT YOU CAN. 

MY CITY AND COUNTRY IS UTTER CHAOS. 

I am just trying to stay safe, for now.

(via lamardeuse)