Hacker News Reader

Comment by mabub24 | Hacker News Reader

This was an interesting article, but I found this editorial warning a little odd:

> Please note that this article includes images of human remains.

I don't think I've ever seen a warning like this before in any anthropological publication, or even in a museum or exhibit. I can't say I've ever found looking at skulls to be particularly weird or shocking, especially if they are extremely old. But, is this a warning that people or the general populace are requesting or feel is necessary? Or, is it purely an editorial decision?

View on HN

> I don't think I've ever seen a warning like this before in any anthropological publication, or even in a museum or exhibit

I went to the Carnegie Museums in Pittsburgh a couple of weeks ago, and they had warnings for if an exhibit had human remains in them (even if they were not visible, I.e. in a mummy).

They also had a short blurb on the ethics of displaying human remains, especially if the remains on exhibit didn't/couldn't give consent. I found it very thought provoking honestly.

To extend it, I found it interesting that there was a lot of discussion on the ethics of showing human remains (taxidermy, in alcohol solution, bones, etc.), but then they showed a lot of animal remains and there was no discussion on that, especially when I would assume that many of the animals shown in the museum were killed for the specific reason of having them on a museum or for study.

Some people avoid human remains for religious reasons too. Religious Jews who are Kohanim for example.

This religious ban does not include pictures of human remains, does it? And the warning mentioned in the root comment of this thread is located on a website.

Edit: I wonder what is downvoteable about my original comment. My Jewish colleagues do not eat pork, but they do not avoid depictions of it, such as photos in a menu. I guess it should be similar in the case of Kohanim being forbidden to come in contact with human remains. Direct contact is very different from a painting or description.

> I wonder what is downvoteable about my original comment.

Lazy randoms who disagree also often feel entitled that they don't have to explain their displeasure or engage in meaningful discourse. Instead, they will try to silence you for having an opinion different than theirs. Also, sometimes I think it's passive aggressive social win-lose mentality or maybe even gaslighting. Best to not care about popularity and move on seeking discussions of valuable insight rather than dwelling on being clobbered for no apparent reason.

That’s correct, pictures of human remains are allowed. I was referring to the museum situation. Many religious Kohanim would avoid going to a mummy exhibit.

Skeletons are taboo in Chinese culture. All sorts of companies and organizations has gotten much more aware of Chinese things the past few years, so maybe that is why.

Other people bringing up cultural differences is appreciated, because to me that warning implied pictures of cadavers. Upon assessment, don't think I've ever looked at a skull (or any other decontextualized bone) and considered it "human remains." An entire skeleton, sure, but even then...faux skeletons are such common imagery throughout America, I've become 90% desensitized to what they're a representation of.

It seems like an unnecessary accommodation for the easily offended. This sort of pandering cedes more and more control to the whims of sheltered, infantile crybullies.

According to their about us page, the warning fulfills some commitments they apparently have (clarity of reporting and empathy for example). So it might very well be a decision by the editorial team.

https://www.sapiens.org/about-us/

It's not too odd that some people don't want to look at gore. For most of us corpses sterilize, become like objects the older they get, but I don't why that's anything but arbitrary.

Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islanders get warnings that what they're about to view may contain depictions of people that have died. Not depictions of dead people, but depictions of people who have died since they were filmed or had their picture taken.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Aboriginal_avoidanc...

I'm not sure exactly why, but it may have to do with certain cultural taboos. For instance, skeletons are considered bad luck in Chinese culture: https://magicuntapped.com/index.php/features/item/66-no-skel...

On the contrary, you never knew who might be reading. Maybe there's a kid who gets really freaked out by skeletons? It's not hurting you to have the warning there.

It doesn't hurt anybody, and could potentially help some folks that might have some trauma, so I don't see the problem at all?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com