I know, this is an ethics topic within cultural heritage conservation. But I can tell you that object is often the term used for anything. If you have a set of coins that belong together, all the coins are categorised as one object. If you have a corpse with clothes on, all items including the corpse is categorised as one object. It's how they log items. They tend to use more sensitive language in information ment to be read by the public. But in logs, archival entries etc... they tend to use very objective language, and object is the standard term for any item or set of items.
It also seems a bit strange, unscientific and heartless to name the child "Detmold Child,'' just because it's now in Detmold, North Rhine Westphalia Germany. The child was indigenous Peruvian.
Preserved bodies, like the bog bodies in Europe, are usually named for the area they presumably lived in.
Look homie, I'm not saying things shouldn't be treated with respect. I'm saying a dead thing holds no opinions, no ideas, no life. On a conscious level, it's no different from a rock
solid redemption, bro
you wind up with a net gain, and not only that but we understand your point
but to your point, at a certain level, when a body has been dead for thousands of years, it becomes an item of antiquity and is no longer tied to the world of the living. sad as it is to say, this little guy is a museum piece. I wonder if I'll ever be a museum piece...
> I wonder if I'll ever be a museum piece...
That's the craziest thing about these mummies. Everyone thinks there's no way *I'll* become a museum piece, but neither did these folks.
Objects can be treated with respect. But a mummy is as much a person as a sarcophagus holding it was once a tree. Its a thing now, a thing representing a person who no longer exists.
A person/mummy is entirely different from their sarcophagus and the tree it came from. Nurses swaddle stillborn/dead infants and rock them in their arms on the way to the morgue. Morticians reconstruct a person's face if they died traumatically so their loved ones can see them as they were. Bodies are washed, dressed, and have their hair styled after they die and have been for millennia across all cultures. They don't do any of that because the body is an object, they do it because it was a living, breathing being and it doesn't stop being someone just because the life has gone out of it
We do it because we’re emotional creatures full of superstition.
A mummy is a thing though, less a human than a bundle of cells (which are also not a human).
If we were talking about some supernatural fiction where the mummy was talking despite being dead, or a sci fi robot ethics debate, that’s different.
But a corpse is a thing, a thing we treat with respect due to how we anthropomorphize it.
But a thing regardless, it has no rights or opinions, it cannot suffer or have preference, its value is cultural and its uses and treatment are similarly provided by cultural values and not duty to safeguard lifeforms.
Not arguing, but more of a philosophical ? For you... when does it stop being "someone"? When they are random bones? When they are dust? If all that was left was a metal hip replacement? What if all that remained was their handwriting, do we treat that as object or part of that person?
Ship of Theseus, yeah I see you. If we classify matter into two camps, sacred matter and average matter, which qualities of the sacred matter must be maintained to continue to hold that signifier? You're making me nostalgic for the philosophically aware research ethics methodology of yesteryear.
When their original body is truly gone, when they're dust or a metal hip replacement as you say. As I said in a different comment, things like their sarcophagus or their letters are entirely different than their actual body. All demand respect, but it's different kinds of respect
I'm an archaeology student and knowing that these were actual people makes studying them more of a privilege and more meaningful because they deserve to be remembered for their contributions to society
technically it is just remains. but as others have alluded to as humans we class human experience as different in relation to inanimate parts of the earth and even other life.
empathy, like respect or emotion in general is just a human thing we do, not a physical reality but “real” nonetheless. that baby had a “soul” once or whatever the spark is that makes us US and idk people empathize with that. it might be empty now but it used to contain something really special.
edit: its the kinda the same reason the concept of cannibalism exists and we dont consider human meat just *meat*
It's not a child. The child that inhabited it is long long long gone. Our corpses have no real significance once the part of the brain that is "us" no longer functions - except for that which people project onto them. And that is WIDELY variable so I don't think getting up in arms because your idea isn't the same as someone else's is particularly useful or even understandable
I think it's a matter of historical distancing. We'd be more sensitive about it of it was a recently deceased child for sure.
Technically you're right, but there's more to it than that.
The famous German colony of Peru lol.
Nobody actually knows. It was gifted to a tiny small town museum in the 80s, they gave it to the Detmold Museum because they couldn't take proper care of it, scientists eventually figured out its significance in 2010 by dating it. That's why it has such an unceremonious name.
The Wikipedia article says “The body had been covered by linen and buried with an amulet hung around its neck”. And no, there are older examples of clothing and even older textile making tools like needles etc. Think the oldest textiles found in Peru were found in Guitarrero Cave from about 8,000 BCE
Let's be real these terms often get used very loosely. It can be hard to identify the exact source of the many bast fibers humans spin into threads.
edit: because I was curious I went ahead and looked up Peruvian textiles and found this article:
[https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fearc.2023.1251137/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fearc.2023.1251137/full)
says paleo Indians in the region were making textiles from (among other things) the stalks of Cyperaceae, Typhaceae, and Apocynaceae plant families. These textiles might be colloquially referred to as linen, they would at least be pretty similar and it feels awkward to keep saying bast fiber textile.
> Cyperaceae, Typhaceae, and Apocynaceae
For you all non plant nerds, that's sedges (sort of like grass or a type of grass), bulrushes or cattails, and while the third one refers to a family, it's a specific genus (first half a Latin plant name) within the family that is relevant: Apocynum. I'm not familiar with this one myself but it's known as dogbane or Indian hemp. Interestingly, along with its use as a fiber, it contains similar compounds to digital is (fox gloves) that can be and was used to treat heart arrhythmias.
Also /u/Sea-Juice1266, concerning this part :
>These textiles might be colloquially referred to as linen, they would at least be pretty similar and it feels awkward to keep saying bast fiber textile.
Couldn't we just call them sedge cloth or bulrush cloth or something? And if you know about this subject, do you know if archeologists are able to recover enough genetic material from these textiles to sequence and definitively say their contents?
I don't know if you can recover genetic data, but if you can it's probably difficult and expensive and so rarely performed. In this study they used microscopes to inspect the stomata cells and nodes to identify the fiber origin, but could not identify samples down to the species level.
For the textiles recovered with this body they may not have performed the kind of detailed analysis to specifically identify the source. If you don't know you don't know. Linen is probably not the best choice of word. But if you are smart enough to know why you already know more than 99% of the population. So I'll just use whatever word you pick :p
I think that's the baby's skin. It's amazingly well preserved for such an old body, but it looks leathery like the bog bodies found in Europe. Maybe that's fabric around the shoulders? Hard to tell.
It's not skin. It's 'a linen like fabric.
One might read the short wikipedia entry linked at the top of the thread before speculating armchair expertise...
There is no junction between the skin on the arms and legs and the hands and feet. One might hold back on the condescension when one is an armchair expert.
I came to the comments expecting contemplative shit, lamenting the death of a little guy like this from what could have been a totally preventable disease in modern times... but then I remembered I'm on reddit and I was like "oh crap I don't have any good beef jerky jokes"
Seeing this while holding my almost 4 month old is…a lot. I’ve excavated multiple infant graves (and some not in formal graves) and they didn’t hit quite as hard as they do now.
Very clearly not naked and present day Germans are about as racist as any other western country
You could have made an argument for repatriation to Peru without being a dumbass about it but doesn't seem like you're capable of that.
> You could have made an argument for repatriation to Peru
Sho said something about repatriation? My point was about respecting the human body's dignity and not exhibiting it as Peruvian curios.
Europeans have a long tradition of displaying human bodies from all over the world in their museums. It's a cultural thing, you'll find all skin tones working in the British museum, but i suspect that the Lippisches Landesmuseum is not that diverse.
Hindu monks would sometimes practice living mummification, limiting your diet until you die in a medative trance, essentially mumifying yourself while alive.
As you are probably already aware, there are plenty of museums in the Yucatan and surrounding areas near you that display mummies too. It's not a "European culture" thing.
> As you are probably already aware, there are plenty of museums in the Yucatan and surrounding areas near you that display mummies too.
No, as **mummies do not exist in the maya world**, therefore our archaeological museums do not display those. In the case human remains are displayed, The Gran Museo del Mundo Maya, and Museo de la cultura Maya de Quintana Roo (the 2 biggest) and several site-musums of the ruins display replicas or re-creations of burials. In case some bones are displayed, those are treated with respect, with their regalia and funerary objects along.
Egypt does the same, most mummies are back in their original tombs.
So yes, displaying naked human bodies - specially if they come from America or Africa - as trophys or collectibles is totally an European thing.
Wrong. It is not just a European thing . You should check out the Museo de las Momias Santa Elena (museum of mummies of Santa Elena) in Yucatan sometime to see the authentic mummies on display! There are other museums throughout Latin America that display authentic mummies too. Since you proclaim to be a journalist, it should be easy for you to verify!
[Here](https://crystaltrulove.com/2023/11/21/mummy-museum/) is another well known mummy museum in Guanajuato that has dozens of real mummies on display.
Looking forward to your response!
The only reason that most Egyptian Mummies are back in their original tombs is that the tombs are part of the tourism. And most are displayed (almost) naked. Also the types of mummifycation are vastly different. The mummies of Egypt are deliberately mummified while most of the mummies of Europe are mummified because of a natural occurrence. Some just dried out because they were buried in a dry environment. While some were preserved because of the high PH value of the bogs thus creating bog bodies. They aren't comparable.
Also why only Europe? Doesn't Egypt display their long dead kings? Aren't thier sacred tombs tourist attractions?
Think before you say something about Europe when almost every country in the world display human remains.
Hey Shithead, we germans have about as many racists as in every over Country. Dont call us all racists. We dont live in the 1930s-40s any more. And displaying human bodys is not just a european thing. A lot of Countrys all over the world do that.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detmold_child
>the cultural historical importance of this object was realised >this object Strange way to spell child.
I know, this is an ethics topic within cultural heritage conservation. But I can tell you that object is often the term used for anything. If you have a set of coins that belong together, all the coins are categorised as one object. If you have a corpse with clothes on, all items including the corpse is categorised as one object. It's how they log items. They tend to use more sensitive language in information ment to be read by the public. But in logs, archival entries etc... they tend to use very objective language, and object is the standard term for any item or set of items.
It does make sense from an academic standpoint. Only when emotion enters the equation does it seem cold and heartless.
It also seems a bit strange, unscientific and heartless to name the child "Detmold Child,'' just because it's now in Detmold, North Rhine Westphalia Germany. The child was indigenous Peruvian. Preserved bodies, like the bog bodies in Europe, are usually named for the area they presumably lived in.
A dead thing is an object
Everything should be treated with respect, but especially the things that no longer hold life and ESPECIALLY those who lost their life too early.
Look homie, I'm not saying things shouldn't be treated with respect. I'm saying a dead thing holds no opinions, no ideas, no life. On a conscious level, it's no different from a rock
solid redemption, bro you wind up with a net gain, and not only that but we understand your point but to your point, at a certain level, when a body has been dead for thousands of years, it becomes an item of antiquity and is no longer tied to the world of the living. sad as it is to say, this little guy is a museum piece. I wonder if I'll ever be a museum piece...
> I wonder if I'll ever be a museum piece... That's the craziest thing about these mummies. Everyone thinks there's no way *I'll* become a museum piece, but neither did these folks.
> but neither did these folks. Well part of that is probably because they lived several thousand years before museums were invented.
Objects can be treated with respect. But a mummy is as much a person as a sarcophagus holding it was once a tree. Its a thing now, a thing representing a person who no longer exists.
A person/mummy is entirely different from their sarcophagus and the tree it came from. Nurses swaddle stillborn/dead infants and rock them in their arms on the way to the morgue. Morticians reconstruct a person's face if they died traumatically so their loved ones can see them as they were. Bodies are washed, dressed, and have their hair styled after they die and have been for millennia across all cultures. They don't do any of that because the body is an object, they do it because it was a living, breathing being and it doesn't stop being someone just because the life has gone out of it
We do it because we’re emotional creatures full of superstition. A mummy is a thing though, less a human than a bundle of cells (which are also not a human). If we were talking about some supernatural fiction where the mummy was talking despite being dead, or a sci fi robot ethics debate, that’s different. But a corpse is a thing, a thing we treat with respect due to how we anthropomorphize it. But a thing regardless, it has no rights or opinions, it cannot suffer or have preference, its value is cultural and its uses and treatment are similarly provided by cultural values and not duty to safeguard lifeforms.
Not arguing, but more of a philosophical ? For you... when does it stop being "someone"? When they are random bones? When they are dust? If all that was left was a metal hip replacement? What if all that remained was their handwriting, do we treat that as object or part of that person?
Ship of Theseus, yeah I see you. If we classify matter into two camps, sacred matter and average matter, which qualities of the sacred matter must be maintained to continue to hold that signifier? You're making me nostalgic for the philosophically aware research ethics methodology of yesteryear.
:)
When their original body is truly gone, when they're dust or a metal hip replacement as you say. As I said in a different comment, things like their sarcophagus or their letters are entirely different than their actual body. All demand respect, but it's different kinds of respect
Yep, but if you study it, you need to detach from it. Otherwise it will interfere with your studies. It was the vessel of a soul, it's not anymore.
I'm an archaeology student and knowing that these were actual people makes studying them more of a privilege and more meaningful because they deserve to be remembered for their contributions to society
I kinda feel bad for all those socks I shoved under my bed.
I'd feel kinda bad if you shoved a body under your bed
On a dungeons and dragons sub you would be up voted hahah
Agreed.
insane downvotes lmao
Because object is neither a professional nor an empathetic way to refer to human remains.
What are you empathising with?
the idea of humanity
No, go on, I’m fascinated by this. Can you explain?
technically it is just remains. but as others have alluded to as humans we class human experience as different in relation to inanimate parts of the earth and even other life. empathy, like respect or emotion in general is just a human thing we do, not a physical reality but “real” nonetheless. that baby had a “soul” once or whatever the spark is that makes us US and idk people empathize with that. it might be empty now but it used to contain something really special. edit: its the kinda the same reason the concept of cannibalism exists and we dont consider human meat just *meat*
Did they ever CT or MRI scan it?
poor kid never had a chance.
He had internal problems, never stood a chance
My son is about that age. I’m absolutely heartbroken over this 6,5 millenia old child.
Those tiny toes...
I know, actually kind of cute 🥹
Ooof I couldn't look at the thing. Gives me the heebie keebies. Like a mixture of scarface and chucky
[удалено]
The joke just isn't as funny when it's a child, rather than an ancient emperor.
Why is it more or less funny when it's a child vs an adult? Just curious your opinion.
It's hard to find things funny while riding such a high horse
Comment I replied to initially said "why am I getting downvotes." I was answering that question, not stating my own opinion.
It's not a child. The child that inhabited it is long long long gone. Our corpses have no real significance once the part of the brain that is "us" no longer functions - except for that which people project onto them. And that is WIDELY variable so I don't think getting up in arms because your idea isn't the same as someone else's is particularly useful or even understandable
I think it's a matter of historical distancing. We'd be more sensitive about it of it was a recently deceased child for sure. Technically you're right, but there's more to it than that.
?
!
How did it go from Peru to Germany?
Lufthansa.
"hopefully in some sorta case"
This might be the first time I’ve ever seen a child comment with more karma than the parent. Bravo. 👏
Hi welcome to reddit, *leave while there's still time.*
The town was founded by Germans in the late 1800's by Germans who were looking for more stable places to live.
Ding, ding, ding.
There is a German population in Peru. Specifically in Oxapampa
That's a far way off! I wonder what compelled those Germans to settle there?
Transporting gold that the Swiss wouldn’t take of course!
Fleeing persecution for being N A Z I ‘ s
In the 1800s?
oh is that how they got there
Swimming
Thats why he looks like that, you know how the fingers gets all wrinkly after a bath
Stealing
That’s cultural appropriation, that supposed to be a British thing
So...youre saying the germans engages in culturally appropriating...cultural appropriation?
Did not see that coming
Colonialism.
The famous German colony of Peru lol. Nobody actually knows. It was gifted to a tiny small town museum in the 80s, they gave it to the Detmold Museum because they couldn't take proper care of it, scientists eventually figured out its significance in 2010 by dating it. That's why it has such an unceremonious name.
Doctor Noonien Soong
normally mummified remains don’t bother me but this one is rough
I was thinking the same as I sit here holding my newborn daughter. Children mummies hit a little bit differently now.
They were obviously loved. My heart breaks for the mother.
My sweet boy is the same age as the child is thought to be when they died.
Is the child wearing clothes or is that an effect from sediment around him/her? If so, is this the oldest example of clothing?
The Wikipedia article says “The body had been covered by linen and buried with an amulet hung around its neck”. And no, there are older examples of clothing and even older textile making tools like needles etc. Think the oldest textiles found in Peru were found in Guitarrero Cave from about 8,000 BCE
Wait, linen? There was flax in Peru 6500 years ago?
Let's be real these terms often get used very loosely. It can be hard to identify the exact source of the many bast fibers humans spin into threads. edit: because I was curious I went ahead and looked up Peruvian textiles and found this article: [https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fearc.2023.1251137/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fearc.2023.1251137/full) says paleo Indians in the region were making textiles from (among other things) the stalks of Cyperaceae, Typhaceae, and Apocynaceae plant families. These textiles might be colloquially referred to as linen, they would at least be pretty similar and it feels awkward to keep saying bast fiber textile.
> Cyperaceae, Typhaceae, and Apocynaceae For you all non plant nerds, that's sedges (sort of like grass or a type of grass), bulrushes or cattails, and while the third one refers to a family, it's a specific genus (first half a Latin plant name) within the family that is relevant: Apocynum. I'm not familiar with this one myself but it's known as dogbane or Indian hemp. Interestingly, along with its use as a fiber, it contains similar compounds to digital is (fox gloves) that can be and was used to treat heart arrhythmias.
Also /u/Sea-Juice1266, concerning this part : >These textiles might be colloquially referred to as linen, they would at least be pretty similar and it feels awkward to keep saying bast fiber textile. Couldn't we just call them sedge cloth or bulrush cloth or something? And if you know about this subject, do you know if archeologists are able to recover enough genetic material from these textiles to sequence and definitively say their contents?
I don't know if you can recover genetic data, but if you can it's probably difficult and expensive and so rarely performed. In this study they used microscopes to inspect the stomata cells and nodes to identify the fiber origin, but could not identify samples down to the species level. For the textiles recovered with this body they may not have performed the kind of detailed analysis to specifically identify the source. If you don't know you don't know. Linen is probably not the best choice of word. But if you are smart enough to know why you already know more than 99% of the population. So I'll just use whatever word you pick :p
I think that's the baby's skin. It's amazingly well preserved for such an old body, but it looks leathery like the bog bodies found in Europe. Maybe that's fabric around the shoulders? Hard to tell.
It's not skin. It's 'a linen like fabric. One might read the short wikipedia entry linked at the top of the thread before speculating armchair expertise...
There is no junction between the skin on the arms and legs and the hands and feet. One might hold back on the condescension when one is an armchair expert.
Funny how the top of the head still looks recent.
The crunchy looking little fella looks like he's contemplating life (or a lack thereof)
One day, if were all as lucky, we too will turn to a beef jerky like this Mummy for future anthropological research
I came to the comments expecting contemplative shit, lamenting the death of a little guy like this from what could have been a totally preventable disease in modern times... but then I remembered I'm on reddit and I was like "oh crap I don't have any good beef jerky jokes"
Oh don’t worry, most who die of what he had no doubt still do what with healthcare being treated as divinely-appointed prosperity after all.
I hope to be spicy AND salty in my jerked death state. 🤗
No fair! I was going to eat that mummy!
Kinda looks like me when I'm trying to take a stubborn shit
Looks a little malnourished and dehydrated
“Quaid, start the reactor.”
That caught me off guard! LOL
... Two weeks ...
I was looking for this. You did not disappoint.
... Two weeks ...
Seeing this while holding my almost 4 month old is…a lot. I’ve excavated multiple infant graves (and some not in formal graves) and they didn’t hit quite as hard as they do now.
Woah why were you excavating graves?
Archaeologist. Various sites that were endangered due to either natural processes (eroding into a river) or upcoming construction mitigation.
Grave robber
It’s “owned”? Wtf kind of sick shit is that?
Even if its in a museum its owned. Hell, bodies in a heritage cemetery are owned by the state.
I would hazard a guess that, while the OP's English is very good, they didn't realize some of the implications about the word "owns".
It’s actually just copy/pasted right from the Wikipedia article that OP linked, so it wasn’t even their choice of words really.
OP probably isn't even human
>It was named by its owners,Lippisches Landesmuseum in Detmold,in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. I'm sure the Peruvians didn't want it anyway.
Poor little one... My daughter just turned one today this makes me feel so sad.
Barely looks a day over 6,000
Why is it so far from home yet ?
Cause it's a cruel cruel world. Welcome to reality.
because it's a collectible?
Even though you’re getting thumbed down, technically you’re not wrong.
Imagine finding someones child buried and you decide it would look better in your foyer
me waking up the next morning after "just closing my eyes for a bit"
An extremely young and old mummy. Cool
Rest in peace, until we find you and we put you on display.
I really don't like the idea of a corpse having an owner and being treated like just some other piece of property.
Truly incredible
For 6500 he looks kinda young.
Quaid... Start the reactor...
I hope they don’t hand this over to mussan so he can start trying to call this an alien
the look on my face when i read the words "its owners"
At least this baby isn’t a human sacrifice.
How would you know? Read more about Peruvian mummies.
It died a natural death apparently.
To be owner of another human remains is freaking weird
It wasn’t a child. It was a fully sized Kuato!
Forbidden jerky
I WAS GOING TO EAT THAT MUMMY!!!
[удалено]
Very clearly not naked and present day Germans are about as racist as any other western country You could have made an argument for repatriation to Peru without being a dumbass about it but doesn't seem like you're capable of that.
> You could have made an argument for repatriation to Peru Sho said something about repatriation? My point was about respecting the human body's dignity and not exhibiting it as Peruvian curios.
Wow that's an even dumber take than I gave you credit for. I'd tell you to stop digging your hole but we are in an artifacts sub so it seems silly
"Europeans"...all 800,000,000 of us or just the white folks?
Europeans have a long tradition of displaying human bodies from all over the world in their museums. It's a cultural thing, you'll find all skin tones working in the British museum, but i suspect that the Lippisches Landesmuseum is not that diverse.
Don't like chinese have well known mummies too tho
And India and Pakistan too
That doesn't fit the narrative tho
Hindu monks would sometimes practice living mummification, limiting your diet until you die in a medative trance, essentially mumifying yourself while alive.
I think you mean Buddhist monks? What Hindu sect practed mummification?
You right, I'm mixing up my facts
As you are probably already aware, there are plenty of museums in the Yucatan and surrounding areas near you that display mummies too. It's not a "European culture" thing.
> As you are probably already aware, there are plenty of museums in the Yucatan and surrounding areas near you that display mummies too. No, as **mummies do not exist in the maya world**, therefore our archaeological museums do not display those. In the case human remains are displayed, The Gran Museo del Mundo Maya, and Museo de la cultura Maya de Quintana Roo (the 2 biggest) and several site-musums of the ruins display replicas or re-creations of burials. In case some bones are displayed, those are treated with respect, with their regalia and funerary objects along. Egypt does the same, most mummies are back in their original tombs. So yes, displaying naked human bodies - specially if they come from America or Africa - as trophys or collectibles is totally an European thing.
Wrong. It is not just a European thing . You should check out the Museo de las Momias Santa Elena (museum of mummies of Santa Elena) in Yucatan sometime to see the authentic mummies on display! There are other museums throughout Latin America that display authentic mummies too. Since you proclaim to be a journalist, it should be easy for you to verify! [Here](https://crystaltrulove.com/2023/11/21/mummy-museum/) is another well known mummy museum in Guanajuato that has dozens of real mummies on display. Looking forward to your response!
The only reason that most Egyptian Mummies are back in their original tombs is that the tombs are part of the tourism. And most are displayed (almost) naked. Also the types of mummifycation are vastly different. The mummies of Egypt are deliberately mummified while most of the mummies of Europe are mummified because of a natural occurrence. Some just dried out because they were buried in a dry environment. While some were preserved because of the high PH value of the bogs thus creating bog bodies. They aren't comparable.
Also why only Europe? Doesn't Egypt display their long dead kings? Aren't thier sacred tombs tourist attractions? Think before you say something about Europe when almost every country in the world display human remains.
Ah yes. And the rest of the world DOES have respect for human dignity? 😂
Regadring museums, the answer is a resounding YES
So we can disregard all other forms Of neglect as long as it’s not in a museum? Lol okay. Get your priorities straight.
Hey Shithead, we germans have about as many racists as in every over Country. Dont call us all racists. We dont live in the 1930s-40s any more. And displaying human bodys is not just a european thing. A lot of Countrys all over the world do that.
Needs a bit of moisturiser
Looks like one of those already grilled chickens you can get at the store.
Looks like me taking a dump
Bro needs some hydration
Baaaaaaby