"Cleopatra should be played by a Black Woman"

[Amused]

I know several Egyptians and they look much more black than white.

Next time, read the thread.

1: Cleopatra wasn't Egyptian, she was Greek and Egyptian.

2. Egyptians before the Islamic expansion were Semetic. Egyptians are now far more Arab and Nubian than anything else.

 

[MJinZ]

Would I be a racist if I were opposed to Martin Luther King or any other great leader who happened to be black being portrayed by a white person?

No.

I oppose history revisionism. And if you read all my posts in this thread, you'd see that.

Yes, you would.

You see, racism is a little bit more subtle and complex than most monkies here can grasp. The fact that you are paying attention to, and then get all fussed about someone who is playing a white Martin Luther King means that race affects your assessment of a person or situation.

And if the notion of a female God perks up your attention, then you are also sexist.

Both concepts do not equate to bad or good. They are concepts of prejudice or prejudgment only.

Both are necessary for human environmental interaction and learning. We must make prejudgments of certain characteristics because we learn what those characteristics mean to survival and prosperity, and because that is how we grasp reality of the physical world - by patterns and logic.

The only way you would not be racist seeing a White Martin Luther King acting in a movie was if his skin color was as meaningless to you in that context as was the size of his ears or his walking posture. We don't have earists nor do we have posturists (for good reason).

But that will never happen, because skin color is a huge factor of human prejudgment - and there is no way around it for now.

.
.
.

Most amusing in this thread is seeing you repeatedly misspell "Semetic" while positing to know all about their people.

 

[Amused]

Yes, you would.

You see, racism is a little bit more subtle and complex than most monkies here can grasp. The fact that you are paying attention to, and then get all fussed about someone who is playing a white Martin Luther King means that race affects your assessment of a person or situation.

And if the notion of a female God perks up your attention, then you are also sexist.

Both concepts do not equate to bad or good. They are concepts of prejudice or prejudgment only.

Both are necessary for human environmental interaction and learning. We must make prejudgments of certain characteristics because we learn what those characteristics mean to survival and prosperity, and because that is how we grasp reality of the physical world - by patterns and logic.

The only way you would not be racist seeing a White Martin Luther King acting in a movie was if his skin color was as meaningless to you in that context as was the size of his ears or his walking posture. We don't have earists nor do we have posturists (for good reason).

But that will never happen, because skin color is a huge factor of human prejudgment - and there is no way around it for now.

"God" is a fictional character. It can be whatever sex or color you want.

A historical figure is NOT. To ACCURATELY portray such a person you find someone who can do so, both in their actions AND appearance.

Cleopatra's skin color IS meaningless to me, but historical fact and the suspension of disbelief required for a movie to be enjoyable is not.

 

[Amused]

Most amusing in this thread is seeing you repeatedly misspell "Semetic" while positing to know all about their people.

Hmmm, a couple of typos and you jump on me. I look back and see I spelled it correctly the vast majority of the time.

Fail.

 

[MJinZ]

"God" is a fictional character. It can be whatever sex or color you want.

A historical figure is NOT. To ACCURATELY portray such a person you find someone who can do so, both in their actions AND appearance.

Cleopatra's skin color IS meaningless to me, but historical fact and the suspension of disbelief required for a movie to be enjoyable is not.

And here, you display your racism in its full glory.

You only see the skin color that is "wrong" with the historically accurate picture.

You object to nothing else.

The least of which would be a ridiculous storyline along with every other historically inaccurate parts of the movie (you are going to walk into it and expect to hear dialogue in English and not Egyptian right?)

 

[Amused]

And here, you display your racism in its full glory.

You only see the skin color that is "wrong" with the historically accurate picture.

You object to nothing else.

No, if you go back and look I object to the objection of a white woman playing Cleopatra.

Fail again.

 

[MJinZ]

No, if you go back and look I object to the objection of a white woman playing Cleopatra.

Fail again.

You are arguing about historical accuracy of race and race only.

 

[waggy]

You are arguing about historical accuracy of race and race only.

what?
...lol

 

[Amused]

You are arguing about historical accuracy of race and race only.

Only to prove that the objection over a white woman playing Cleopatra is foolish.

I didn't write the article in Essence Magazine. I didn't start Essence Magazine (a Magazine that caters to a single race) either.

Go play the racist card somewhere else. You've failed here.

 

[MJinZ]

Only to prove that the objection over a white woman playing Cleopatra is foolish.

I didn't write the article in Essence Magazine. I didn't start Essence Magazine (a Magazine that caters to a single race) either.

Go play the racist card somewhere else. You've failed here.

And that is only because you are racist. It is just a fact. You would not try to prove someone's bigger or smaller ear is historically accurate or not.

I don't expect everyone to understand how subconsciously, identifying and discussing a topic makes them actually care about that topic (like race).

Do you also argue over the finer points of the Koran? How about Nuclear Fusion? :hmm:

 

[Gibsons]

You see, racism is a little bit more subtle and complex than most monkies here can grasp.

:hmm:

Most amusing in this thread is seeing you repeatedly misspell "Semetic" while positing to know all about their people.

 

[Amused]

And that is only because you are racist. It is just a fact. You would not try to prove someone's bigger or smaller ear is historically accurate or not.

I don't expect everyone to understand how subconsciously, identifying and discussing a topic makes them actually care about that topic (like race).

Do you also argue over the finer points of the Koran? How about Nuclear Fusion? :hmm:

I see. You're one of those" everyone is a racist" people just because people may happen to notice different skin colors.

We'll stop here simply because this is pointless.

 

[MJinZ]

:hmm:

I never said I knew much about the monkie.

 

[MJinZ]

I see. You're one of those" everyone is a racist" people just because people may happen to notice different skin colors.

We'll stop here simply because this is pointless.

Correct, and everyone has socially imposed preconceptions ingrained into their psyches that the conscious mind can not logically reconcile.

So long as society remains racist, humans who grow up in society will remain so as well.

 

[foghorn67]

I know several Egyptians and they look much more black than white.

Yeah, because you know a ton of half greek ancient Egyptians.

 

[Perknose]

wait, so the african in african egyptian means black?

perk thinks it does. Lol

************LIAR!***********
This is the third time you have straight out LIED about what i said in this thread, you lazy, pos LIAR!

Your lazy-assed lies and closet racist viewpoint may make you self-appointed King of the Fucking Kindergarten here, but you have LIED about what I said here THREE time too many, asshole.

Here's EXACTLY what I said in my first post.

So, was Cleopatra black?

Despite what you, Amused, Shakespeare, Ebony or anyone else thinks, no one really knows with any absolute certainty how black or not Cleopatra was.

And, here, I will quote for the third fucking time, the considered opinion of a recognized scholar in the field, Dr. Ben Bronson, the long time Curator of Asian Archaeology and Ehnology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, and now it's Director, :

"It is a question that is nearly impossible to answer," says Ben Bronson, the museum's [Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago] curator of Asian archeology and ethnology. "What we've tried to do is narrow down the range of possibilities for her ancestry. And when you do that, you see that there is a perfectly good chance that Cleopatra was an African Egyptian. Was she 100 percent African, meaning was her skin dark? Probably not. The Romans, who wrote extensively about her, probably would have noted that. But it is quite possible--given the comings and goings of people in the Ptolemic court--that she was a mixed-race Egyptian."

I insist that you acknowledge all three of your persistent misinterpretations of what I said in this thread and publicly retract them, Amused.

C'mon, Mr. Personal Responsibility, time to MAN UP.

 

[Triumph]

Correct, and everyone has socially imposed preconceptions ingrained into their psyches that the conscious mind can not logically reconcile.

So long as society remains racist, humans who grow up in society will remain so as well.

So you agree that the author of the OP's linked article, is also racist?

 

[MJinZ]

So you agree that the author of the OP's linked article, is also racist?

Of course. Black people who talk about or whine about White and Blacks all day are about the most racist people on Earth.

 

[BoberFett]

Listen very closely:

I have seen you post for over a decade and you have always been and always will be anti-african american. There is nothing in your nature that appears to be worth a damn, especially your opinion of anything that has to with a person or persons who are black.

Waaaaaaaaaaaah!

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

 

[shortylickens]

Edited. For sanity.

 

[Kirby]

************LIAR!***********
This is the third time you have straight out LIED about what i said in this thread, you lazy, pos LIAR!

Your lazy-assed lies and closet racist viewpoint may make you self-appointed King of the Fucking Kindergarten here, but you have LIED about what I said here THREE time too many, asshole.

Here's EXACTLY what I said in my first post.

And, here, I will quote for the third fucking time, the considered opinion of a recognized scholar in the field, Dr. Ben Bronson, the long time Curator of Asian Archaeology and Ehnology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, and now it's Director, :



I insist that you acknowledge all three of your persistent misinterpretations of what I said in this thread and publicly retract them, Amused.

C'mon, Mr. Personal Responsibility, time to MAN UP.

 

[shortylickens]

No this

 

[MJinZ]

That fuse is still good.

 

[Kirby]

No this

lmfao!

 

[TehMac]

Listen very closely:

I have seen you post for over a decade and you have always been and always will be anti-african american. There is nothing in your nature that appears to be worth a damn, especially your opinion of anything that has to with a person or persons who are black.

*sigh* You didn't read my original post. And if anything, you don't get it, do you?

There have been plenty of great African civilizations and cultures through the centuries dominated by humans of the Bantu genetic makeup. But Ancient Egypt 3,000 B.C. to 1,000 B.C. simply is not one of them.

By trying to pretend something that isn't true is accurate, you shame the deeds of an entire race of people who did do something.

Mostly you shame yourself and your family which did a pretty shitty job teaching you academic dignity.

[/SIZE][/SIZE]Here's EXACTLY what I said in my first post.

And, here, I will quote for the third fucking time, the considered opinion of a recognized scholar in the field, Dr. Ben Bronson, the long time Curator of Asian Archaeology and Ehnology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, and now it's Director, :

First of all, in that great mess of html, Dr Bronson and his colleagues are delicately skirting the issue at hand, in order to avoid offending people like classy who gets butthurt because he didn't learn about the Kushites or So cultures during his stay in school.

It is without a doubt that Cleopatra was mixed-race but, she was certainly Greek, having come from the line of Ptolemy. With that established, it was likely she was Semitic, since the Semitic Egyptians had been the most populous peoples in that region since at least 3,000 B.C. It is most likely that these Semitic concubines the Ptolemies had at their disposal were responsible for Cleopatra's mixed descent. Her features noted by Roman scholars include an elongated hooked nose--this has long been associated with Semites and not for any undue reasons. It could very well be that she was perhaps 50-25% "Bantu" but that is extremely doubtful simply because those people did not have access to higher tiers of society.

So while Bronson is right that it is impossible to tell, it's a very distinct unlikelihood.

Furthermore, my original point still stands: Ancient Egypt from 3,000 to 1,000 B.C. was composed of Semitic peoples, not the classic Bantus. The people (namely Black "scholars" enabled by their progressive and politically correct "scholars") that perpetrate this destructive misconception shame not only themselves, but embarrass the people they think they are "helping."