Netflix Getting Sued for Blackwashing Cleopatra by Actual Egyptian

IceJad · Apr 20, 2023

DaisyDay said:
Trailer:

From the article:

The complaint submitted against Netflix stated, “Most of what Netflix platform displays do not conform to Islamic and societal values and principles, especially Egyptian ones.”

Also from the article

The case said that the documentary promotes Afrocentrism which aims at distorting and obliterating Egyptian identity.

durangodawood · Apr 20, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
It's always been a murky territory with regards to "international laws" (with regards to various forms of art that gets transmitted over the internet, and whether or not you have to adhere to the laws of other countries)

I don't see any reason why a US-based company has to operate within the guidelines of what does or doesn't offend the sensibilities of people in other countries, nor certain foreign rulings for that matter.

If a platform who's content delivery mechanism is the internet (be it movies like Netflix, or social media) is based out of a particular country, and other countries don't like what they have on there, the onus should be on those other countries to invest in the tech interventions that would block it from coming in. Not on origin country's company to coddle everyone else.

However, I think certain precedents were set when Germany threatened legal action against Facebook because people (elsewhere in the world) were posting things that violated certain German speech laws, and Facebook caved and started removing posts.

Likewise when Australia tried to demand that Facebook owed their publishers money whenever someone linked their articles on the platform (although Facebook opted to just shutdown the news section for Australia...for which, they also cried about)

From my perspective, I don't care how an Egyptian judge may rule against Netflix, offended people in other countries shouldn't be able to dictate what I can or can't watch. And if Egypt wants to prevent its citizens from accessing certain things, it's on them to find a way to block it...not to expect that a US-based company is going to sink exorbitant sums into trying to cater to the "strictest common denominator" and to try to make 194 other countries happy with the content.

I tend to agree that you should be able to host whatever is legal in your home country and allow anyone to access it from wherever.

But I was commenting more on free speech and censorship in terms of basic moral principles. The notion of suing because you dont like a casting decision is laughably absurd.... not to mention immoral.

IceJad · Apr 20, 2023

Ah the cope is real. When you can't dismiss the criticism as bigotry or racism (because he is not a western conservative) you go after the person's credential by downplaying his lawyer profession.

Even renowned Egyptologist Zahi Hawass criticize it.

Former Egyptian Antiquities Minister Zahi Hawass described depicting Queen Cleopatra as a black woman as “falsifying facts”, adding that “This is completely fake. Cleopatra was Greek, meaning that she was blonde, not black.”

ThatRobGuy · Apr 20, 2023

IceJad said:
Ah the cope is real. When you can't dismiss the criticism as bigotry or racism (because he is not a western conservative) you go after the person's credential by downplaying his lawyer profession.

Even renowned Egyptologist Zahi Hawass criticize it.

Former Egyptian Antiquities Minister Zahi Hawass described depicting Queen Cleopatra as a black woman as “falsifying facts”, adding that “This is completely fake. Cleopatra was Greek, meaning that she was blonde, not black.”

There's lots of stuff that's fake...or dramatized with some "creative stretches" in terms of casting choices. It is the movie industry after all.

John Wayne once played Genghis Khan in a movie, the play Hamilton involves Black people playing historical figures that were White.

It's one thing to critique it (if one is some kind of historical accuracy purist, which I doubt most people are, they just turn it on and off when convenient), it's another thing to try to sue for it.

I wasn't downplaying the profession of being a lawyer, I was specifically critiquing this one in particular for doing something silly.

Much like when I critique Dr. Mercola for trying to capitalize on nonsense, I'm not going after the entire medical profession.

But, hey, if you like the idea of the US's entertainment media being constrained by the sensibilities of people in other countries in order to "prove a point" about the far-left, feel free to paint yourself into that corner. The same kind of legal efforts going after this are the same sources that would just as gladly go after a person for making a movie critiquing Islam or standing up for Israel.

I seem to recall people on the more conservative end of the spectrum taking some serious objections to the notion of Sharia Law (and rightfully so, I agreed with them when that debate was a thing), now, people are willing to root for countries that implement Sharia Law (against our own domestic entities) as long as it provides a way to "own the libs".

durangodawood · Apr 20, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
....
I seem to recall people on the more conservative end of the spectrum taking some serious objections to the notion of Sharia Law (and rightfully so, I agreed with them when that debate was a thing), now, people are willing to root for countries that implement Sharia Law as long as it provides a way to "own the libs".

Sure "own the libs".

But many US "conservatives" also actually want a strong state to enforce their notions of traditional social values and legislate against what they call "woke" expressions in art and commerce.

I mean, right here for example, the OP guy wants this lawsuit to prevail.

ThatRobGuy · Apr 20, 2023

IceJad said:
Even renowned Egyptologist Zahi Hawass criticize it.

Just for a point of reference, some other things Zahi Hawass has serious opinions on:

"The concept of killing women, children, and elderly people ... seems to run in the blood of the Jews"
"the faith that they forged and contaminated with their poison, which is aimed against all of mankind."
In an interview on Egyptian television in April 2009 Hawass stated that "although Jews are few in number, they control the entire world" and commented on the "control they have" of the American economy and the media.

So, given the nature of the stuff he gets offended about, I think I'd give it a hard pass on using his viewpoint as a guiding light.

ThatRobGuy · Apr 20, 2023

durangodawood said:
Sure "own the libs".

But many US "conservatives" also actually want a strong state to enforce their notions of traditional social values and legislate against what they call "woke" expressions in art and commerce.

I mean, right here for example, the OP guy wants this lawsuit to prevail.

That's true, and when they're siding with entities that they were griping about not 5 years ago, rooting for them to succeed now (in the interest of some short term culture-war "win) sounds like a classic case of "ready, fire, aim"

The problem we have right now in the US, is that we have only 2 viable political parties, and after the various events of the last few decades, neither of them can claim the title of being "the free speech party", as they've both taken various efforts to shut down the speech/expression (and wanted to use the force of government to do it), and have flip-flopped on the issue more than once.

There was a time when the democrats held that "pro-free expression" mantle for a long stretch, but now it's not so clear who's actually worse for it.

The people who want free expression for left-wing initiatives are the same ones trying to throw people off of Twitter and Spotify 2 years ago and who riot in order to shutdown right-wing speakers.

The people who want free expression for right-wing initiatives are the same ones trying to label everything as "woke" or "an attack on parents" as a means of shutting it down.

"What you shouldn't be allowed to say/do" seems to change rapidly based on the topic, and who's made it their pet project. Neither side is innocent in the "cancel culture" game.

PsaltiChrysostom · Apr 21, 2023

MyOwnSockPuppet said:
One of my favourite ways of tweaking people who at this point truly deserve it is pointing out Ben Kingsley played Gandhi, while failing to mention that while it's been his stage name since the 1960s he only changed it legally relatively recently.

Then there is Erick Avari who has played pretty much every nationality around (okay the real count is 24), and he is a fantastic actor no matter where he shows up! And he's playing Nicodemos in The Chosen.

durangodawood · Apr 21, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
That's true, and when they're siding with entities that they were griping about not 5 years ago, rooting for them to succeed now (in the interest of some short term culture-war "win) sounds like a classic case of "ready, fire, aim"

The problem we have right now in the US, is that we have only 2 viable political parties, and after the various events of the last few decades, neither of them can claim the title of being "the free speech party", as they've both taken various efforts to shut down the speech/expression (and wanted to use the force of government to do it), and have flip-flopped on the issue more than once.

There was a time when the democrats held that "pro-free expression" mantle for a long stretch, but now it's not so clear who's actually worse for it.

The people who want free expression for left-wing initiatives are the same ones trying to throw people off of Twitter and Spotify 2 years ago and who riot in order to shutdown right-wing speakers.

The people who want free expression for right-wing initiatives are the same ones trying to label everything as "woke" or "an attack on parents" as a means of shutting it down.

"What you shouldn't be allowed to say/do" seems to change rapidly based on the topic, and who's made it their pet project. Neither side is innocent in the "cancel culture" game.

People are free to use persuasion to cancel whatever they want in the public sphere. And even if I find that odious in various cases, that freedom should be respected.

Where I firmly draw the line is at using force of law or violence to silence expression. And thats whats being celebrated in the OP: having the courts weigh in to force changes in, of all the ridiculous things, a casting decision.

dzheremi · Apr 21, 2023

Just so it's clear, I'm not in favor of using law to silence expression. I'm in favor of making a public rebuttal to afrocentrist people who want to take everything having to do with Egypt and make it fit their own narrow definition of 'African' for their own ends, rather than respecting the actual diversity of Egyptian people, who come in all kinds of hues and from all kinds of backgrounds. I don't care at all about the 'violating Islamic norms' part or whatever (obviously), but that's to be expected as part of it, because it's Egypt, and they have Islam enshrined in their constitution as the state religion over there.

FireDragon76 · Apr 21, 2023

The "Afrocentrist" viewpoint is pseudo-history. However, I'm fine with a little creative license. I think it's OK for somebody that's black to play an Egyptian. However, her hair style is wrong. Egyptian royalty had braided hair.

SeventhFisherofMen · Apr 21, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
Seems like a publicity grab for the lawyer.

From the article, they link to the Lawyer's yellow pages entry (although the name's not exactly the same, so maybe the article got it wrong and it's a different attorney and the author of the article made a mistake)

But I highly doubt that a lawyer with almost no web presence, operating out of a dingy strip mall between a barber shop and the "Kolo Ala El Fahm BBQ", is going to pose any serious legal challenge to the legal team at an organization like Netlfix.

Lol but he'll get the clicks on the news article, maybe a few locals will hire him

dzheremi · Apr 22, 2023

I am also fine with a black person playing an Egyptian, depending on who they're playing. There are, after all, millions of black people in Egypt to this day. They're called Nubians, and they've always been there, since their territory is split between Sudan and Egypt. There are also people of mixed Egyptian-Sudanese heritage who have risen to high positions in Egyptian society, such as President Anwar Sadat (born of an Upper Egyptian father and a mixed Egyptian-Sudanese mother). It's not unreasonable to assume, therefore, that such things were also historically the case, just not with Cleopatra, of all people. I'd have a lot less of a problem with this if this series were not being presented as a documentary, and if its director was not on record as saying things like this:

Obviously Cleopatra likely didn't look like Elizabeth Taylor, since Elizabeth Taylor was a modern-day British-American actress, but does that mean that she would've looked like a modern-day Afro-British actress instead? No. Of course not. Why would that be the case? Point being, this isn't a corrective to a 'whitewashed' narrative, like the stupid British-Iranian director apparently thinks it is. This is just more nonsense dressed up as enlightenment and truth-telling. Why don't these idiots ever think of casting an EGYPTIAN PERSON to play an Egyptian? There are people of mixed Egyptian-Greek heritage, after all! I'm sure at least a few of them can act!

Also, are there no indisputably subsaharan black African queens that Hollywood could make a miniseries or a movie about? Why is it always Cleopatra? It's so lazy. I would love -- love -- to see a series on the exploits of Empress Taitu Betul of Ethiopia (1851-1918). Wife of Emperor Menelik II (1844-1913), she, along with her husband, is to be credited for the modern country of Ethiopia as much as anyone.

Some highlights of her life include:

Founding the modern capital, Addis Ababa, in 1886.
Playing a leading role in the anti-colonialist struggle, which kept Ethiopia free during the 'Scramble for Africa', and included things like tearing up the Treaty of Wuchale (1889), signed by her husband with Italy in the context of the Italian occupation of Eritrea.
Commanding a force of cannoneers during the Battle of Adwa (1896), the famous battle which led to the defeat of the Italians after they tried to invade the Ethiopian Empire under the guise of enforcing a protectorate over Ethiopia.
Largely taking over decision-making for her by-then ailing husband from 1906 to her eventual forced retirement from the political scene in 1910 on the order of relatives of Lij Iyasu (the next emperor, ruling from 1913-1916). Upon being banished from court, she was restricted to living the previous palace in Entoto, next to the Church of St. Mary which she herself had founded years earlier, and at which her husband had been crowned emperor.

There's political intrigue, battles with regiments being led by an extremely intelligent and cunning woman, anti-colonialism...everything that it seems like the people who cheer on this Cleopatra mockumentary would love! But it's not a story that is widely known outside of Ethiopia (and maybe Eritrea and Italy), and it happened in modern times, so we have definitive proof of what she looked like, and it probably doesn't fit with the Hollywood/Netflix version of the tale they want to tell about an African leader, so instead they continue to make stale trash and sell it to people as revolutionary.

Pictured: Empress Taitu, 1880 (courtesy of Unesco's interesting biography page on her)

IceJad · Apr 24, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
Just for a point of reference, some other things Zahi Hawass has serious opinions on:

"The concept of killing women, children, and elderly people ... seems to run in the blood of the Jews"
"the faith that they forged and contaminated with their poison, which is aimed against all of mankind."
In an interview on Egyptian television in April 2009 Hawass stated that "although Jews are few in number, they control the entire world" and commented on the "control they have" of the American economy and the media.

So, given the nature of the stuff he gets offended about, I think I'd give it a hard pass on using his viewpoint as a guiding light.

So he has antisemitic views and suddenly his years long profession of Egyptologist is worth nothing? Just another character assassination. Must all knowledgeable people be good people? No. But their knowledge is what we are talking about. Martin Luther King Jr. committed adulatory so his message of racial equality can't be guiding light by that line of logic.

Back to Cleopatra VII. Can you explain away the Roman busts and coins made in her honor? Forgery? Ancient whitewashing? Even Egyptian statues attributed to her has no African features. They did however made her look more inline with Egyptian features.

Accept it, she is of Macedonian Greek ancestry. From the line of Ptolemy I Soter one of Alexander's generals he left to administer Egypt. Their family line has been Greek. You can say she is not Anglo-Saxon white, but you can't say she is anywhere near African black. And having a black actress portraying her in a documentary is falsifying history. That is why the Egyptians are angry.

All these nonsense can be easily avoided by not race-swapping characters of any race. But Hollywood and the western movie industry can't help themselves for some reason. Like the Joker (Joker movie) said "You get what you deserve".

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

The Beauty of Cleopatra.

Queen Cleopatra is not the Little Mermaid

You can joke with Egyptians about almost anything, except when it comes to their history and culture. Indeed, the most humorous and easygoing people of the Arab world will definitely draw the line if you dare insult, belittle, or misrepresent their icons and monuments; some of them pre-date the...

www.arabnews.com

RocksInMyHead · Apr 24, 2023

IceJad said:
So he has antisemitic views and suddenly his years long profession of Egyptologist is worth nothing? Just another character assassination. Must all knowledgeable people be good people? No. But their knowledge is what we are talking about. Martin Luther King Jr. committed adulatory so his message of racial equality can't be guiding light by that line of logic.

Antisemitism is a close cousin of racism - it's a hatred of a (specific) group of people based on their heritage. If someone espouses antisemitic views, I would consider any of their other thoughts on race suspect as well. That doesn't mean he's necessarily wrong - it just makes him a bad source.

IceJad said:
Back to Cleopatra VII. Can you explain away the Roman busts and coins made in her honor? Forgery? Ancient whitewashing? Even Egyptian statues attributed to her has no African features. They did however made her look more inline with Egyptian features.

Accept it, she is of Macedonian Greek ancestry. From the line of Ptolemy I Soter one of Alexander's generals he left to administer Egypt. Their family line has been Greek. You can say she is not Anglo-Saxon white, but you can't say she is anywhere near African black.

No one in this thread has denied that.

IceJad said:
And having a black actress portraying her in a documentary is falsifying history. That is why the Egyptians are angry.

Media takes creative license with historical figures constantly. Not sure what makes this instance special.

Frankly, Netflix has been pushing controversial "documentaries" lately (see the MH370 one, which was mainly 2-3 people pushing their personal conspiracy theories) because controversy drives views and gets them attention. This is definitely a case of "there's no such thing as bad publicity" - this lawsuit is unlikely to go anywhere, no one who's currently slagging it was going to watch it in the first place, and it's going viral in the news and on social media, which gets it out to a wider audience.

Heck, if you want to get all conspiracy theory on it, Netflix could have paid this lawyer to file the suit - it's a perfect "stealth" ad campaign.

Pommer · Apr 24, 2023

IceJad said:
Egyptian lawyer sues Netflix over Queen Cleopatra - Egypt Independent

Egyptian lawyer Mahmoud al-Semary filed a case with the Public Prosecutor to shut down the Netflix platform in Egypt, following the trailer release of “Queen Cleopatra,” a new documentary depicting the historical figure as a black woman.

egyptindependent.com

Over the years Hollywood has this weird woke obsession of race swapping main characters (mostly white) to only feature minority especially black & latinos. When people complain about it the Hollywood elites and their progressive media hounds were quick to label genuine criticisms as bigotry and racism. They can get away with that in the west. After so long race swapping with impunity and gaslighting all who challenge them, now they face real push back from a place where their far-left ideology doesn't hold sway. And western laws hold even lesser sway.

Blackwashing Cleopatra from her Greek ethnicity has now landed Netflix in hot sand - hot Egyptian sand! Netflix is being sued for Afrocentrism and trying to eliminate ethnic Egyptian identity by falsifying history. In the lingo of the woke "We don't want your cultural imperialism". The woke Hollywood got too comfortable with their race swapping of historical people in their own lands unimpeded, they forgot the larger world don't operate on the same illogical ideology as them.

I hope the lawsuit succeed and Netflix gets heavily fined or booted out from Egypt. It is high time woke Hollywood learn that the rest of the world don't fancy their far-left racist ideology.

“Artistic license” not a thing anymore?

DarkForest · Apr 25, 2023

But by choosing a light-skinned actor to play a character who originally had dark skin, Disney is reinforcing deep-rooted notions about what features are considered acceptable or beautiful in society, she added.
“My issue with the casting is the fact that we live in a supremacist society that favors light skin, therefore this casting contributes to a level of erasure,” she wrote in a message to CNN. “We see so often in all genres of cinema – stories based on people that are dark skinned in real life, only to be played by someone lighter in a film.”

Disney's live-action 'Lilo & Stitch' remake sparks another debate about colorism in Hollywood | CNN

Disney's "Lilo & Stitch" is getting the live-action treatment, but reports on a casting decision for a character originally depicted as a dark-skinned Native Hawaiian have set off a new conversation about colorism in Hollywood.

www.cnn.com