You're viewing a single thread.
The Egyptlogists might have some additional context and knowledge that some rando on Twitter might now.
sure, but experts have been making bad assumptions before.
Like archaeologists up until relatively recently have been calling viking graves with swords in male, without really looking at the actual skeleton.
that said, yeah, I still definitely trust the experts more
My wife's been reading this book that references this. As well so many other cases of men assuming genders or disregarding women in science, among other things. It's crazy. "hmm that skeleton has wide hips, but it is also buried with a sword, so it's a man". Female physiology traits in a man is way more plausible, than a woman being buried with a sword ... wtf?!?
Anyway, the book is next on my reading list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Women:_Exposing_Data_Bias_in_a_World_Designed_for_Men
I'm thinking they found other fruit/veggie/food models with the dildo.
yeah, I still definitely trust the experts more
Yeah, I'm also guessing the Tweeter is just a masterbator, not a real doctorbator with a PhD in D.
And there is some green coloration on it, indicating the dildo was once painted to look like a cucumber. Derek Smalls gets it.
Shouldn't have just assumed but in that case it was the correct assumption vast majority of the time. Still bad to assume.
And out of Viking graves with swords, how many of them have turned out to be women?
But did cucumbers look like that 4000 years ago?