Typing gay caveman into Google seems like kind of a weird request, so why not do it. Well I did. I expected something kind of different from what actually came up. First of all I expected a lot more pictures to come up when I typed it in.
Instead I got news articles from sources like the telegraph, globe and mail, and the National Post. This kind of media needs to be taken with a grain of salt, as many of these sources tend to be biased from one side or another. The evidence that is brought up to prove that this individual was homosexual does not seem to measure up with a number of other different situations that could be possible. For instance they might have been buried that way because of something that had happened in that community. The individual may not have been from that community and had died there, out of respect this society buried them, but to show they were different they were buried in a different way. They may have been buried that was to confuse them if they were ever to come back in the after life. These could all be plausible understandings for the same findings. Which one is right??
As you can see from just a small amount of brainstorming on my part there can be many conclusions made from the individual found. Not that I am saying that these articles are not credible or correct or incorrect in any way. They can simply be seem as misleading to the average reader. This can also cause people to make their own assumptions about where the origin of homosexually has come from. It fuels the fire to many sides of this ongoing debate. Soooo which explanation is right?? I guess like all situations in archaeology we make an educated guess. As ya do.
No comments:
Post a Comment