Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

wazzel2u OP t1_j5m14tg wrote

Don’t be so insensitive Gahhhh… It’s a "mummified person" 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

2

menlindorn t1_j5m2t8g wrote

gas mask kid approaches

"Are you my mummy?"

"Nope!"

"My mistake!"

episode ends

81

PEVEI t1_j5m3fni wrote

Fuck. Off. With. Your. Nonsense.

−5

Jump_Like_A_Willys t1_j5m3rg5 wrote

Skeletons are to be known from now on as “defleshed individuals.” ^/s

59

hethical_ecker t1_j5m5rix wrote

mummy is an extremely offensive term. we need to cancel all movies and books that used this problematic term.

−3

YourFatherUnfiltered t1_j5m72md wrote

Replying to PEVEI (#1,459,177)

its amazing how sensitive you guys are, all while claiming everyone else is so sensitive.

"IT MAKES ME SO MAD THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE PLACE I WILL NEVER VISIT (a museum) ARE CHANGING THE WAY THEY REFER TO THINGS. FUCK THEM."

youre so cute when you try to be involved... with your angry little person face. I JUST WANTTO SQUEEZE IT AND PINCH THOSE WITTOO CHEEKS!

−16

udo3 t1_j5m7mte wrote

Not recognizing that mummies were once real live people (an issue mentioned in article) is ABSOLUTELY NOT a problem with the use of the word "mummy." It is a problem stemming from an incredibly ignorant, un-educated population of morons who probably barely comprehend complete sentences.

25

mynameisnotthom t1_j5mcj9m wrote

Ahh it was the Hancock up in Newcastle, everyone would have just referred to them as "mams"

12

johnsolomon t1_j5mejmk wrote

I get what they're trying to do (increase the treatment and baseline level of respect for the corpses of deceased humans) but I'm not sure this is the way to do it lol

82

Collins_Michael t1_j5mhwmn wrote

Replying to YourFatherUnfiltered (#1,460,139)

It's possible to think something is stupid without caring significantly about it. I think it's ridiculous when suburban excel-jockeys drive lifted pickups, but I don't really mind as long as they aren't tailgating me at night with their brights on.

3

CandidateDecent1391 t1_j5mjdx3 wrote

Replying to wazzel2u (#1,460,053)

why are you so sensitive about what researchers and institutions call preserved human remains?

nobody is trying to save the dead person's feelings or whatever... they're just switching to a more archaeologically correct name for mummified human remains

it's super strange you would jump to the "virtue signaling" dog whistle in regards to a change in academic terminology. it looks like you're desperate for something to be mad about

1

CandidateDecent1391 t1_j5mjqna wrote

Replying to johnsolomon (#1,460,183)

lol what on earth is wrong with adapting archaeological terminology to encourage learning

a "mummy" isn't an alien, it's the preserved remains of a human who once lived and breathed. that distinction is what fascinates people about history.

the weirdest part is the OP chimed in and claimed it's "virtue signaling" as though some librul somewhere is trying not to offend a dead guy lol

edit: thanks for the downvotes, everybody! everyone I've upset should go look up the words "learning," "perspective," and "historical accuracy" in the dictionary and maybe start there :) then learn to stop creating outrage bait just so you can complain about people (in this case, archaeologists and museum officials) being smarter than you! (good luck lol)

0

Informal_Cress9800 t1_j5mna6t wrote

Scholars are trying to humanize dead people and y’all just acting like stubborn babies

6

maialucetius t1_j5monq9 wrote

I understand wanting to emphasize they were once living people but come on. They'll always be mummies.

26

dukeimre t1_j5mrffv wrote

Replying to johnsolomon (#1,460,183)

It sounds silly but honestly as long as they're not canceling people who say mummy it seems like a nice (incredibly tiny) step to take that can help society rethink some of this stuff.

I know for myself, as a kid, it never occurred to me that all the Egyptian stuff in museums was looted during occupation of Egypt by foreigners who saw the locals as savages. I think it's an ok idea for people who feel like it and really care about how society thinks about history to tweak the way they talk about these things!

18

hardy_83 t1_j5na3m4 wrote

Using different language to describe these human remains can also distance them from the depiction of mummies in popular culture, which has tended to "undermine their humanity"

Right..... But digging their bodies up and showcasing them for a fee so people can gawk at them is... Not worse than calling them mummy?

16

hidden-in-plainsight t1_j5nayy9 wrote

Change something that was coined in the 7th century?

Why? Shits been fine for a long fucking time, why change it now?

10

atomicmarc t1_j5nc384 wrote

Welp, History Channel has a lot of video to re-edit, now!

5

Psychomadeye t1_j5ndrk2 wrote

Replying to wazzel2u (#1,460,668)

> "our recent displays used the term 'mummified remains of...' and include the name (when known) of the person who has been mummified...[to emphasize] that mummified remains are of people who once lived."

From the article you posted.

2

Psychomadeye t1_j5neu3h wrote

Replying to hidden-in-plainsight (#1,463,104)

Because the information is literally just higher quality.

> "our recent displays used the term 'mummified remains of...' and include the name (when known) of the person who has been mummified...[to emphasize] that mummified remains are of people who once lived."

Literally emphasizing that this is in fact the body of a king and not some weird supernatural creature because children and even some adults don't know it.

Also you'd probably not understand a word of English spoken in the seventh century. Here's Beowulf in the English from around that time:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beowulf#/media/File%3ABeowulf_Cotton_MS_Vitellius_A_XV_f._132r.jpg

9

CandidateDecent1391 t1_j5nhyx2 wrote

Replying to wazzel2u (#1,460,668)

lol it's clear you're extremely sensitive to anything that you can contort into being "woke"

calm down snowflake, it's just adults talking about archaeology using big words. probably not something you're ready to tackle yet

1

Trips-Over-Tail t1_j5nnskk wrote

I'm not going to stop eating them, whatever they're called.

0

braveabandon t1_j5ntad6 wrote

They've been stolen them from their tombs, their countries, and propped up for display for crowds to gawd at, but you had best not dehumanize them any further in front of us staff, it makes us feel bad about how we had one job?

18

Jmich96 t1_j5nv7kc wrote

My local history museum has entirely removed all mummified Egyptian remains from their showcases.

I understand the reasoning behind all of this, but I don't think going as far as removing historical remains, which serve an educational purpose, is the correct path.

I've never in my adult life really thought of mummified remains as a "mummy". I believe trying to drop a media elected term for something more accurate is a good step in an educational direction.

2

GetlostMaps t1_j5nxcob wrote

The whole point of making yourself into a mummy was that you became a statue. Statues were revered as they could hold the souls of the dead. For it then to be forgotten/ignored that there is a person inside there is actually exactly what they wanted when they chose to be mummified.

So this PC change is against the wishes of the deceased and very un-PC indeed.

4

Corvus_Manufaktura t1_j5o1ghp wrote

Instead, they are starting to adopt terms such as "mummified person"

Here's the thing: "mummy" and "mummified person" aren't the same. There are a number of natural processes that can cause a human body to mummify, whereas "mummies" refer to corpses purposely preserved by the Egyptians' process of mummification.

3

NNewt84 t1_j5o1hds wrote

Replying to Psychomadeye (#1,463,458)

Seriously? I’d have thought, at least nowadays when B-movies are a thing of the past, that most kids WOULD hear about mummies in the context of Ancient Egypt. Bloody American neurotypical men and their refusal to pick up an encyclopaedia, amirite?

−4

pdonchev t1_j5o6bip wrote

Stealing artifacts and bodies from their tomb is perfectly fine, but stereotyping those long deceased people as potentially cursed is where they draw the line...

0

JoostinOnline t1_j5oprvk wrote

This makes total sense, and doesn't belong here. You should read the article before posting it.

Imagine if someone died today and we propped them up in a glass case for people to see, and kids made jokes about them. It's kinda fucked up. Calling them "mummies" just reduces their humanity and makes us think of Scooby Doo cartoons.

1

Translationerr0r t1_j5p0fiy wrote

Mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummymummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummymummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy mummy.

3

90k_swarming_rats t1_j5p4m5e wrote

Really reminds me of how some people want to change "homeless person" to "unhoused person". At the end of the day it's utterly meaningless. If a word has negative connotations associated with it due to the nature of the thing it's describing, changing the word does nothing because the underlying issues that give the original word it's meaning havent changed.

2

Fanwhip t1_j5p9du2 wrote

Replying to CandidateDecent1391 (#1,460,655)

For your whole "Learning language" stick your trying to use.

Mummy: Noun (especially in ancient Egypt) a body of a human being or animal that has been ceremonially preserved by removal of the internal organs, treatment with natron and resin, and wrapping in bandages.

Mummifed: Verb 1) to make (a dead body) into a mummy, as by embalming and drying.2) to make (something) resemble a mummy; dry or shrivel up3) to preserve (an idea, institution, custom, etc.) that may have outlived its usefulness or relevance:

For the whole "virtue signaling"

Virtue Signaling : the public expression of opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or social conscience or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue.

" But some museums in Britain are now using words other than "mummy" to describe their displays of ancient Egyptian human remains. Instead, they are starting to adopt terms such as "mummified person" or to use the individual's name to emphasize that they were once living people. "

When the shoe still fits sometimes it means you don't need new ones. Specially if the new ones are in the same condition's as the old ones.

I.e they are going from an noun to a verb for the same object that needed 0 change to it. So they can feel better about decades and century's of encouraging theft via "exploring" and the fact the things they have are by definition an object.

If they want to "change" how the world see's the body's and the lives the body's did have. they should give up every single part of every single exhibit back to the respective places they came from. So they could either be reburied. As much of it was stolen or taken without permission or for the country to be the one properly showing it off and taking care of it.

Encourage learning to the world by returning the stolen goods and apologizing for showing stolen them off and profiting from it vs doing a name change.

2

Fanwhip t1_j5p9tk2 wrote

Replying to Steven-Maturin (#1,465,158)

>mummy

It Sucks folks are down voting you cause its a very true statement.
As long as its something they okayed to be used. Then it "should be used by all" even if them using the new word doesn't change anything.

Still showing off mostly stolen objects/bodys. Still making money off said objects/bodys. Maybe they should return all of them to the national country before trying to go "we are outstanding and exemplary people"

3

melody_elf t1_j5qopex wrote

Replying to Fanwhip (#1,469,456)

If words don't matter then why are you in a tiff about it? Personally I don't really care if people call them mummies, mummified persons, flibbergibbits or paper deadlings.

1

Psychomadeye t1_j5rfncr wrote

Replying to NNewt84 (#1,464,964)

UK but same concept I guess. Most of the information kids get is from eachother unfortunately. And adults often don't exactly do enough to explain the situation to children very well even at funerals.

>most kids WOULD hear about mummies in the context of Ancient Egypt

Yes, very often in the same breath that says they are the bird god of the sun and that they are mummified so they can make their way to the realm of the jackal that is the god of the underworld. Then they hear about "the mummies curse" from friends. Then this information is relayed by a game of telephone.

1

Fanwhip t1_j5ri63a wrote

Replying to melody_elf (#1,474,839)

Same reason Reddit is for anyone that wants to type what ever and give opinons.

If folks wanna go "this is For X reason" and looking at it from the whole picture there is no difference. Then the reasoning is false and just done for "karma" points. Do something tangible if your doing it for X reason. Words can be as strong or weak as others deem them. Actions speak louder then words and changing a word for your action makes the action worth less then the word.

1

melody_elf t1_j5riuvk wrote

Replying to Fanwhip (#1,477,659)

I see the point about how they were stolen from Egypt. When I visited the British Museum it felt uncomfortable knowing that everything there was taken from other countries.

At the same time, Egypt is a very unstable country so I don't know how safe the mummies and artifacts would be there. There are some radical factions that pretty much want to destroy anything from before Islam.

Another factor is that, when these artifacts are over the world, it lets many more people see them and learn and enjoy history than if they were in Egypt.

On the other hand, these are people who were stolen from their graves and there is definitely something disturbing about that.

1

Fanwhip t1_j5rjgm2 wrote

Replying to melody_elf (#1,477,742)

As a joke once said.
What is the difference between grave robbing and archeology?

The "answer" verys on POV.

Honestly it comes down to "Are they claiming its preserving something?" or "they selling it for money"

Either way money is changing hands somewhere and only one is more "acceptable" then the other is.

1

NNewt84 t1_j5rygwe wrote

Replying to Psychomadeye (#1,477,464)

Dang, that’s insane. See, I didn’t really hang out with the other kids at school that much. Like, yeah, I had a few friends I would hang out with from time to time, but most of the information I learned as a kid came from books, television and the occasional museum day. You know, because those are made by ADULTS who know what the frick they’re talking about, so I trusted them over the word of some random kid at school.

1