“Statue of Idet & Ruiu, two women who have been identified as possibly mother and daughter, sisters, or a same-sex couple. Idet is given priority by the artist who placed her on the right, and is given the title “Lady of the House”. Limestone. New Kingdom, 18th Dynasty, 1480-1390 BCE. From the Theban necropolis, Egypt. (Egyptian Museum of Turin)”
I feel the text was fair, too. Statues like this typically depict a married couple, although their relationship is not specified. That’s a full tilt scientist explanation, not necessarily a gay-denying bigot.
People are a lot less willing to give the benefit of the doubt when it comes to same-sex relationships because of the history of erasure and bias present in science. Once burned, twice shy, as they say. Like how women are less likely to trust a doctor’s opinion because of how often doctors ignore women’s symptoms and pain.
The text in the above comment clearly spells it out, but the text in the photo is more reminiscent of the ways that lesbian relationships are often erased or ignored. Stuff like “These two women lived together for their entire lives, never marrying, and often wrote poems of their deep love and longing for each other. Historians don’t know what this could mean, but they most likely were very close friends.”
I think a simple rephrasing would have made people a lot less critical of the original text. “Though the relationship between these women is unclear, these statues were often made for married couples.” is a lot less likely to be seen as “These statues were usually made for married couples, so we don’t know why they would make one for two women. They must have been very close friends or even roommates.”
“Statue of Idet & Ruiu, two women who have been identified as possibly mother and daughter, sisters, or a same-sex couple. Idet is given priority by the artist who placed her on the right, and is given the title “Lady of the House”. Limestone. New Kingdom, 18th Dynasty, 1480-1390 BCE. From the Theban necropolis, Egypt. (Egyptian Museum of Turin)”
From the World History Encyclopedia:
https://www.worldhistory.org/image/14160/statue-of-idet--ruiu/
The photo is also prominently displayed in the wiki for “Homosexuality in ancient Egypt”,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Egypt?wprov=sfti1
So it seems that there are people who are aware of the likelihood of them being a lesbian couple, if that’s the case.
I feel the text was fair, too. Statues like this typically depict a married couple, although their relationship is not specified. That’s a full tilt scientist explanation, not necessarily a gay-denying bigot.
Which is the best way to do it. I get this sub is (mostly) tongue-in-cheek, but erasing platonic relationships from history is problematic as well.
People are a lot less willing to give the benefit of the doubt when it comes to same-sex relationships because of the history of erasure and bias present in science. Once burned, twice shy, as they say. Like how women are less likely to trust a doctor’s opinion because of how often doctors ignore women’s symptoms and pain.
The text in the above comment clearly spells it out, but the text in the photo is more reminiscent of the ways that lesbian relationships are often erased or ignored. Stuff like “These two women lived together for their entire lives, never marrying, and often wrote poems of their deep love and longing for each other. Historians don’t know what this could mean, but they most likely were very close friends.”
I think a simple rephrasing would have made people a lot less critical of the original text. “Though the relationship between these women is unclear, these statues were often made for married couples.” is a lot less likely to be seen as “These statues were usually made for married couples, so we don’t know why they would make one for two women. They must have been very close friends or even roommates.”
I think that mostly depends on if these statues normally specify the relationship.