See horemheb you are playing the ignorance card so to speak. In order for something, someone or a concept to be displayed or conceptualized as IDEAL there must be an idea, diety, a people or image (whether concrete or abstract) that/who resembles the likeness of that ideology. We know that the AE ideal colour was STILL what we call black or African today (or in ancient times) and NOT white or European. Most Africans/Blacks/Negro (whatever euphemisms you like)are medium brown or in your words reddish-brown. Even khoisans (who can be as light as the AE's ideal female colour sans non-African admixture) are still in the colour schematic of what we call black or african collectively.
Bottom line is their ideal was still "black" and not European/white/nordic/blanco.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. On one hand you protest that the colour is symbolic then turn around and say that they were'nt "black" but reddish-brown as if their ideal colour scheme was not "black" (which still is the average colour of most african nations).
This is honestly intellectually empty rhetoric and sounds schizophrenic quite honestly. Horemhem I think your are in denial! If you sit and think about all the contradictory statements, ideas, and concepts you put forward you would know the truth, but you refuse to THINK LOGICALLY!
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic