[ SECRET POST #3036 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3036 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Big Bang Theory]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Jamie Oliver]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Jed and Leo, The West Wing]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Shipwrecked Comedy (YouTube)]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Conan O'Brien]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Star Trek]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Regular Show]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Anne of Green Gables]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Tintin]


__________________________________________________



11.
[Ciel nosurge]


__________________________________________________



12.
[Angel]


__________________________________________________



13.
[Dragon Age]


__________________________________________________



14.
(Joann Fletcher)


__________________________________________________



15. http://i.imgur.com/xEVbfF2.png
[John Ridley, cut on request for blatant racial slurs and stuff]













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 066 secrets from Secret Submission Post #434.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

14. http://i.imgur.com/KAqIMzl.jpg
(Joann Fletcher)

[(Anonymous)]

I feel ignorant for asking this, but what did she do?

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that her own prejudices influence her work too much, especially as regards men and women. It's such a pity because the rest of what she has to say is really interesting, and there are fascinating stories about ancient Egyptian gender relations that still have the power to inform and shock us today.

[philstar22]

What exactly is this about, OP? It sounds interesting, whatever the story is.

Quick summary of what happened

[(Anonymous)]

Basically, Fletcher is an Egyptologist who believes that the Younger Lady mummy is really Nefertiti:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Younger_Lady

This is sort of a big deal because what happened to Nefertiti is one of Egytology's greatest mysteries. She was the powerful, beloved queen of Akhenaten, but at some point she disappears from the historical record. Some theories suggest that she either died suddenly of illness, was disgraced and overthrown by a rival, or quite radically, that she took on a male name to rule with her husband as co-regent and became the Pharaoh Smenkhkare.

Now Fletcher believed at one point that the Younger Lady mummy was Nefertiti because of a wig that had been discovered nearby (not on the mummy, nor proven to belong to the mummy, just near it) was a style that would've been worn by royal women. Never mind that there were many women at court who might've worn such a popular style of wig. She also found a nefer bead and seized upon that as proof the Younger Lady was Nefertiti, because Nefertiti was known to have worn such beads in jewelry. Never mind that LOTS of people probably wore that design of bead, it wasn't exclusive by any means. Then she claimed that a broken off arm found near the mummy proved that the Younger Lady was royal, because the arm would've been in a bent, i.e. royal position. There was a big, embarrassingly gushy expedition and documentary about it. Later, DNA tests proved that the bent arm didn't belong to the Younger Lady mummy at all, not that it would've been conclusive proof even if it had.

Basically, Fletcher's theory is not impossible, it's just that she had nothing but circumstantial evidence that was rather shaky at best. But to hear her talk about it, it's clear she's a bit of a zealot on the subject and maybe isn't the most objective researcher.

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you so much for this!

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[(Anonymous)]

Thanks, this was most helpful!

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[dreemyweird]

Thank you <33

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[lb_lee]

That was really interesting! Thanks, anon!

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[tasogare_n_hime]

Thank you for this! I get super interested in ancient cultures, especially ancient Egypt every once in a while. I wasn't aware of any of that though. Also; OMG whoever she is, she's Tutankhamun's mom! I did not know they had done all that DNA testing. I wonder how difficult the age of the samples, and everyone being related made that. Now I'm going to be reading about mummies on wikipedia all night. :)

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[(Anonymous)]

Well, for some other parts of the humanities, that level of speculation would be par for the course. (I'm thinking of Jesus scholarship in particular.)

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[(Anonymous)]

She also broke guidelines when she failed to report her "discovery" to the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities about her discovery (and, I think, lied to them about her reason for accessing the Younger Lady mummy?) and was subsequently banned from working Egypt.

Re: Quick summary of what happened

[(Anonymous)]

"By the late 20th Century, there was "'a fair degree of consensus'"[27] that Neferneferuaten was a female king and Smenkhkare a separate male king, particularly among specialists of the period[28] (although the public and the internet still often commingle the two). Many Egyptologists believe she also served as coregent on the basis of the stela and epithets, with advocates for Meritaten being notable exceptions. A sole reign seems very likely, given that the Pairi inscription is dated using her regnal years. Opinion is more divided on the placement and nature of the reign of Smenkhkare."

[dreemyweird]

With all due respect, OP, things like this happen in science just about all the time, to both men and women. Getting carried away because you're too passionate about a theory is possibly the most common kind of scientific failing out there.

That's not to say that your frustration over this particular case isn't valid, but if you freak out every time this happens to a lady scientist, you'll soon have no nervous tissue left.

[dinogrrl]

Emotional over-investment comes into play a LOT in science. A lot. The famous one in my field is the Bone Wars.

It happens. It sucks when it happens on a public stage instead of just within the scientific community, yes. There's damage control to be done, and it will take time, but I'm pretty sure Egyptology will keep moving forward.

[lb_lee]

The Bone Wars? That sounds intriguing! Do tell?

--Miranda

[dinogrrl]

Wikipedia because I am lazy.

Back in the early days of paleontology, these two dudes Marsh and Cope decided to have a pissing contest and used some underhanded and blatant techniques to do it. It's actually pretty interesting but did cause a lot of collateral damage to the field in the mean time.

[lb_lee]

Wow, damn. That's a hell of a thing. Oh, humanity, you strange creature you.

--Rogan

[(Anonymous)]

Yep. There's another Egyptologist (Nicholas Reeves) who's also so blinded by his boner for Nefertiti that anything he says about this time period can't be taken seriously.

[(Anonymous)]

This happens a lot with men researchers too. I think that because there is fewer women researchers that this type of behavior might stick out more when a woman does it? But, normally, to get ahead in their field I think woman have to be more competent than men as researchers.

[(Anonymous)]

Men get overzealous about things too

Addendum from the OP

[(Anonymous)]

Just to clarify, I am well aware that men get over emotional about research, too, and do not mean to suggest it is only a thing that women do. It's just frustrating when you know women are under harder scrutiny and receive more criticism about this, and then you see a female researcher whose actions plays toward negative stereotype.

Re: Addendum from the OP

[(Anonymous)]

But that's like saying every black person has to be a credit to their race to be worth anything. IDK. Just...ugh. I can understand your frustration but I find it kind of frustrating to see this attitude as well...that women have to be better than men to be considered equals. Like instead of just letting herself down she's letting ALL OF WOMENKIND down and that she's proving the instability of women. When are men accused of this in research? It's dumb.

Transcript

[(Anonymous)]

Image: Joann Fletcher standing in front of an Egyptian mural, and a bust of Nefertiti

Text: I HATE that her major ladyboner for Nefertiti colored her research so badly that she jumped to false conclusions based on little more than her circumstantial evidence and her “feels”. She was so busy gushing about how magical it ws to restore Nefertiti’s sacred identity blah blah blah to do a proper investigation. Women are frequently accused of being unfit for research because they prioritize emotions over facts and science and she did exactly that! In the end, she was wrong and I feel embarrassed that she still has a job and any credibility whatsoever in Egyptology.

[countess_dria]

OP, thank you, thank you for making me squee about there being an Egyptology secret <3