1. Reblog if you’re shorter than 5’8.

    (Source: nuocmamboi)

  2. edwardprendick:

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.

Just quickly: the Sphinx damage is unlikely to have been committed, as commonly thought, by careless French archaeologists or soldiers’ firing practice under Napoleon. There are records of the nose being missing pre-Napoleon, or British, presence in Egypt. It is absolutely correct to say that it was not due to poor craftsmanship, and it was deliberately (and obviously) removed by chisel. The most accepted theory presently is that it occurred in the 14th century due to disrupting religious idolatry. Damage to various works, Muslims and Christians have both been guilty of through history. Religion is historically as much to blame for the destruction of art as it is to be marvelled at for the creation of it. Damage to architecture and art is also common to violent movements opposing political regimes. That continues to this day. 
Europeans have, yes, suppressed and damaged and flat out denied Arfican art/architecture was created by Africans. I’m up for discussing that racist, imperialistic, Western bull. Let’s talk Carl Mauch and Cecil Rhodes and Richard Hall (let’s talk about what a bloody awful, imperialist, destructive bastard of an excuse for an archaeologist that man was). Only one archaeologist at the turn of the century actually argued that the structures of Zimbabwe were of African design, and the first team to validate his work on site were a British all-female group led by Gertrude Caton-Thompson who was a far better researcher than most of her male peers, as despite being of her time she went “Hey look, the evidence says African. It’s African”. You should read up on her too, once you’re done researching the Sphinx’s nose, she’s cool.
And, furthermore, the Greek statue thing above? It. Is. Bullshit. There’s a museum in Copenhagen that literally has a fucking collection of removed restoration noses. A university in Sweden has a good hundred more. The marble favoured by many sculptors was very easily damaged so museums in the 19th century had a bad habit of making them new arms, noses etc out of - usually - plaster. Noses are the most common thing to be missing from Greek statues. 
Please, please, please do not lower yourself to the level of traditional European history with this negationist shit. It helps no-one to make up or buy into historical fallacy.  
tl;dr Sphinx nose not European damage. 18-20th century Europeans destructive bastards, but not so much with regard to missing noses. African craftsmanship better than Greek. Greek noses do fall off all the time. Don’t believe everything you read. Don’t believe me. Go do some research. Find some primary sources, check out the period/background of the historians you’re reading.

    edwardprendick:

    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.

    Just quickly: the Sphinx damage is unlikely to have been committed, as commonly thought, by careless French archaeologists or soldiers’ firing practice under Napoleon. There are records of the nose being missing pre-Napoleon, or British, presence in Egypt. It is absolutely correct to say that it was not due to poor craftsmanship, and it was deliberately (and obviously) removed by chisel. The most accepted theory presently is that it occurred in the 14th century due to disrupting religious idolatry. Damage to various works, Muslims and Christians have both been guilty of through history. Religion is historically as much to blame for the destruction of art as it is to be marvelled at for the creation of it. Damage to architecture and art is also common to violent movements opposing political regimes. That continues to this day. 

    Europeans have, yes, suppressed and damaged and flat out denied Arfican art/architecture was created by Africans. I’m up for discussing that racist, imperialistic, Western bull. Let’s talk Carl Mauch and Cecil Rhodes and Richard Hall (let’s talk about what a bloody awful, imperialist, destructive bastard of an excuse for an archaeologist that man was). Only one archaeologist at the turn of the century actually argued that the structures of Zimbabwe were of African design, and the first team to validate his work on site were a British all-female group led by Gertrude Caton-Thompson who was a far better researcher than most of her male peers, as despite being of her time she went “Hey look, the evidence says African. It’s African”. You should read up on her too, once you’re done researching the Sphinx’s nose, she’s cool.

    And, furthermore, the Greek statue thing above? It. Is. Bullshit. There’s a museum in Copenhagen that literally has a fucking collection of removed restoration noses. A university in Sweden has a good hundred more. The marble favoured by many sculptors was very easily damaged so museums in the 19th century had a bad habit of making them new arms, noses etc out of - usually - plaster. Noses are the most common thing to be missing from Greek statues. 

    Please, please, please do not lower yourself to the level of traditional European history with this negationist shit. It helps no-one to make up or buy into historical fallacy.  

    tl;dr Sphinx nose not European damage. 18-20th century Europeans destructive bastards, but not so much with regard to missing noses. African craftsmanship better than Greek. Greek noses do fall off all the time. Don’t believe everything you read. Don’t believe me. Go do some research. Find some primary sources, check out the period/background of the historians you’re reading.

  3. princelesscomic:

mermaidskey:

hemipelagicdredger:

mermaidskey:

mermaidskey:

oxidoreductase:

Lavoisier is having none of your shit.

Heeeey so fun fact: the woman in that painting is Lavoisier’s wife, Marie-Anne Pierrette Paulze, who not only acted as Lavoisier’s lab assistant but also translated English and Latin texts into French so he could read them. But she didn’t just translate, she pointed out errors in the chemistry in some of the texts. Her observations of these errors convinced Lavoisier to study combustion, which led to his discovery of oxygen. She was also critical to the publication of Lavoisier’s Elementary Treatise on Chemistry in 1789. She kept strict records of every experiment they conducted together and drew detailed diagrams of all their equipment. She also threw amazing parties and invited all the brightest minds in science so her husband could pick their brains. After Lavoisier was guillotined she secured all of his notebooks and equipment for posterity.
In short: NOBODY KICKS MADAME LAVOISIER OUT OF THE LAB.

Also, a side note: My historian husband-to-be pointed some things out to me about this painting. Notice that Madame Lavoisier is looking at the viewer, and all the light is on her, while Lavoisier himself is physically smaller than her, in shadow, and looking up to her in reverence. This isn’t a candid photograph- all of these choices are deliberate. The painting isn’t of Lavoisier- Madame Lavoisier is meant to be the central subject. 
I can just imagine Lavoisier telling all his colleagues that his wife is really the one with all the clever ideas, and them patting him on the back and telling him he’s sweet for saying so.

more like


I LOVE IT

This post got better and better

    princelesscomic:

    mermaidskey:

    hemipelagicdredger:

    mermaidskey:

    mermaidskey:

    oxidoreductase:

    Lavoisier is having none of your shit.

    Heeeey so fun fact: the woman in that painting is Lavoisier’s wife, Marie-Anne Pierrette Paulze, who not only acted as Lavoisier’s lab assistant but also translated English and Latin texts into French so he could read them. But she didn’t just translate, she pointed out errors in the chemistry in some of the texts. Her observations of these errors convinced Lavoisier to study combustion, which led to his discovery of oxygen. She was also critical to the publication of Lavoisier’s Elementary Treatise on Chemistry in 1789. She kept strict records of every experiment they conducted together and drew detailed diagrams of all their equipment. She also threw amazing parties and invited all the brightest minds in science so her husband could pick their brains. After Lavoisier was guillotined she secured all of his notebooks and equipment for posterity.

    In short: NOBODY KICKS MADAME LAVOISIER OUT OF THE LAB.

    Also, a side note: My historian husband-to-be pointed some things out to me about this painting. Notice that Madame Lavoisier is looking at the viewer, and all the light is on her, while Lavoisier himself is physically smaller than her, in shadow, and looking up to her in reverence. This isn’t a candid photograph- all of these choices are deliberate. The painting isn’t of Lavoisier- Madame Lavoisier is meant to be the central subject. 

    I can just imagine Lavoisier telling all his colleagues that his wife is really the one with all the clever ideas, and them patting him on the back and telling him he’s sweet for saying so.

    more like

    image

    I LOVE IT

    This post got better and better

  4. freedomtomarry:

Reblog to congratulate Colorado on this huge win for the freedom to marry! 

    freedomtomarry:

    Reblog to congratulate Colorado on this huge win for the freedom to marry! 

  5. mothernaturenetwork:

8 adorable videos of baby animals taking bathsRub-a-dub-dub. Watch tiny sloths, kittens and hedgehogs in the tub.

    mothernaturenetwork:

    8 adorable videos of baby animals taking baths
    Rub-a-dub-dub. Watch tiny sloths, kittens and hedgehogs in the tub.

  6. Jesus had a lot of issue with powerful people using power over the powerless.

    — Clergy protest Supreme Court by handing out condoms at Hobby Lobby. (via think-progress)

  7. alloftheveganfood:

    Vegan One Pot Pasta Round Up

    One Pot Vegan Pasta

    One Pot Wonder Thai Style Peanut Pasta

    One Pot Spaghetti Alla Puttanesca with Chickpeas & Artichoke

    Spinach & Artichoke Wonderpot

    Outstanding One-Pot Pasta with Tomatoes & Herbs

    10 Minute One Pot Tomato Pasta with Walnut Parmesan

    One Pot Tomato Basil Spinach Pasta

  8. It seems that when you want to make a woman into a hero, you hurt her first. When you want to make a man into a hero, you hurt… also a woman first.

    — Leigh Alexander absolutely hits it out of the park (via bedabug)

  9. buzzfeed:

    these are probably the only sex gifs i will every post, because for some reason i feel like it’s more than just sex. i don’t know if it’s how they’re actually looking at one another or the way they can’t get close enough. he’s actually looking at her like a person and not just a sex object.      

    but then again, it could be all in my head. i mean, this is how i would want it to be. but that’s just me.

  10. After a while you may want to respond to every request for a take on the day’s newest racist incident with nothing but a list of corresponding, pre-drafted truths, like a call-center script for talking to bigots. Having written thousands of words about white people who have slurred the president over the past six years, you begin to feel as if the only appropriate way to respond to new cases—the only way you can do it without losing your mind—is with a single line of text reading, ‘Black people are normal people deserving of the same respect afforded to anyone else, but they often aren’t given that respect due to the machinations of white supremacy.’

    Imagine an editor asking a writer to passionately articulate why a drunk driver hitting and killing a boy on a bicycle is wrong and sad. That would never happen, because a drunk driver killing a boy on a bike is a self-evident tragedy. Asking a writer to exert lots of effort to explain why would be a disservice to the dead, as if his right to life were ever in question, as if our moral obligation to not snuff out our fellow citizens via recklessness were something in need of an eloquent plea.

    When another unarmed black teenager is gunned down, there is something that hurts about having to put fingers to keyboard in an attempt to illuminate why another black life taken is a catastrophe, even if that murdered person had a criminal record or a history of smoking marijuana, even if that murdered person wasn’t a millionaire or college student. There is something that hurts when thinking about the possibility of being ‘accidentally’ shot on some darkened corner, leaving a writer who never met you the task of asking the world to acknowledge your value posthumously, as it didn’t during your life.

    — The Racism Beat: What it’s like to write about hate over and over and over (via ethiopienne)