• PMFL@lemmy.pt
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      And the girl in the back on the original post photo, looking like this below meme photo. LoL

  • Questy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Since I don’t see much football stuff on Lemmy, this is Mohammed Salah, an Egyptian footballer and premier league royalty. YNWA

        • ggtdbz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 hours ago

          You see, when football is mentioned online, the collective intelligence of any comment section is cut by at least 90%. This stacks with another 90% if it’s women’s football or any token LGBT acknowledgement in football. The joke is Muslim Bad.

          Which is a shame. I used to make fun of le sportsball amirite until it clicked that there was immense entertainment value in these matches, which could be super tense and exciting even when an individual match doesn’t have super high stakes. There’s storylines with each of the players and managers, there’s a lot of diverging personalities among them and they all handle the same game in their own way. And unlike scripted shows, when something unexpected happens it is so much more interesting. Like the story is real in a way that scripted entertainment isn’t.

          • ugo@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 hours ago

            You have expressed my feelings excellently. I find football a very entertaining sport (not that I have the money to watch it, or the time / energy / social media connections to keep very up to date with it) but the fanbase can be absolutely braindead.

            I mean, I love rivalries and some shithousery, but things escalate too often, too much, and too quickly.

            Still, wish I knew of ways that would allow me to keep up to date with stuff without costing me a good chunk of change or a huge amount of time, or having to have a twatter account or whatnot.

  • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    7 hours ago

    funny for an Egyptian man to say this, considering that it was made by black people not Arabs. If such things went by blood then and culture then South Sudan would have the strongest claim to it, its like saying that art by ancient indigenous americans belongs to an amerikkkan only difference is time.

    • BlushedPotatoPlayers@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      40 minutes ago

      If you look at any of the ancient statues they don’t look black, whatever the recent propaganda tries to push. It doesn’t make any sense to put everyone in those four racial boxes - an Ethiopian looks as distinct from a South African as a Spaniard and a Swede

    • 50_centavos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Just because Egypt is in Africa doesn’t automatically make Egyptians black. Look at a map. Northern Africa and Egypt were just as much part of southern Europe and the Middle East.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Hell look at the written records of the pharaohs. Ramseses II (Ozymendias, of King of kings, look upon his works all ye mighty and despair fame) reasserted control of Canaan and Phoenicia, led military campaigns into Syria and the Levant, and also led expeditions into Nubia. That indicates a clearly more established connection to the Middle East than to elsewhere in Africa at the height of ancient Egypt (height of the new kingdom).

    • JamesConnollysStache [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Oh cool. Hotep? So, what percentage of Nubian blood must Mo Salah have before he is allowed to claim a connection to Ancient Egypt? Upper or Lower? Pseudohistory aside, one’s own cultural history is not subject to some racial blood purity tests. That’s some borderline Nazi shit. Anyway, fuck the Brits.

    • Entropywins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Is this an ancient Kush statue or am I missing something? I don’t believe upper ancient Egypt would be considered modern Sudan. Also DNA evidence from Egyptian mummies show little to no sub saharan DNA in them. How did you learn this information?

    • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      except that not actually an other hand sorta thing at all, almost exclusively it was colonizers and their wars that destroyed so many of artifacts the artifacts that werent stolen, if they weren’t delivery destroyed by colonizers to erase history and beyond even that the colonizers carelessness, greed, and racism which they brought to archeology led to much more than just artifacts being destroyed. There are so many historical sites whose histories we will never know at all because these clown excavated them to take “relics” and took little if any records where their precious artifacts were found and how, and that is if sites were not destroyed in their entirety out of sheer idiocy in the search of something else like how troy was. 18th, 19th, and even some 20th century so called archeology is a history of the destruction of history.

      • 50_centavos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Holy run-on sentences. I agree with you, but it was done, it’s already in the museums. Signing petitions and raising awareness of agencies/museums that are trying to get the stuff back is probably a better way to funnel your frustrations.

    • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      70
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Sure, I’m gonna steal your TV because I’ll take better care of it than you would.

      You’re welcome

        • lad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          This is a conundrum I can’t wrap my head around. One (country, usually) can have something of cultural significance, and decide what to do with that. They can make it a museum, make it generally available, forbid access at all, and even destroy it completely (e.g. see Palmyra under ISIS).

          If the object in question is not protected by UNESCO (and really, even if it is) no one has a say in that. The only remotely correct argument that can be made is that destroying historical artifacts makes it hard or impossible to study history, but one can argue that we don’t need to study history, it’s not like this is an imperative. Another argument may be that things do not belong to those who have it, but instead to their people as inheritors of people who lived long ago, but I don’t think that also helps.

          And so, on one hand, I am for preserving artifacts and not destroying those, on the other hand, I don’t quite see what moral ground is there for it.

    • Z3k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      11 hours ago

      That’s an interesting point. While I agree it’s kinda shitty the UK nicked everyone’s cool stuff and shoved it in 1 building. I’m willing to bet if we hadn’t the number of pieces that would be lost to time would not be zero