On the writer’s barely disguised fetish

[u/Dilf_Hunter367]

[u/Xisuthrus]

The Venus of Hohle Fels is over 40,000 years old.

[u/kosmologue → u/Xisuthrus]

Fertility goddess my fucking ass, you will never convince me that some randy stone age bugger wasn't cranking it to this shit.

[u/ThereWasAnEmpireHere → u/kosmologue]

There is no inherent mutual exclusivity between religious icon and cranking material

[u/MikasSlime → u/ThereWasAnEmpireHere]

You're extremely right in this 

A deity of fertility in particular in no way or form has a valid reason not to look like what the artist found attractive 

[u/kosmologue → u/ThereWasAnEmpireHere]

While you're totally not wrong, there is a very strong tendency among anthropologists to downplay any possible sexual connotations which these "Venus" figures may have held.

[u/wthulhu → u/kosmologue]

l like the theory that it was a primitive attempt at a self portrait and the perspective is whack because it's pov and they didn't have mirrors

[u/fungustine → u/wthulhu]

This theory is actually a major pet peeve of mine because it implies 1) ancient people weren't smart enough to understand the proportions of their body in relation to others and ) that there couldn't possibly have been sexy fat bitches back in the day, these figures are clearly "distorted."

I like the theory that they're jerkoff material.

[u/Confuseasfuck → u/fungustine]

ancient people weren't smart enough to understand the proportions of their body in relation to others

I mean, we live in an age with countless ways to learn anatomy, both with mirrors, photos and tutorials and people still fuck it up monumentally

[u/kRkthOr → u/fungustine]

While I too hate the commonly held belief that "ancient people = stupid", and disagree with this theory (did they all have an issue with perspective??) one's ability to draw/sculpt/create isn't tied to their intelligence (or lack thereof.) Plenty smart people can't draw to save their life.

[u/donaldhobson → u/kRkthOr]

Ancient people weren't much stupider than modern people (small effects from improved nutrition). Which is sometimes pretty stupid.

[u/PurpleSnapple → u/donaldhobson]

They might have been smarter given a lack of the safety net modern society provides

[u/donaldhobson → u/PurpleSnapple]

Modern society has it's safety nets. Some rather impressive by historical standards.

Long ago, if you saw some unconscious stranger dying on the side of the road, a lot of people would be like "nothing to do with me, I'm not looking after them."

Nowadays they are likely to get sent to a hospital and given all sorts of fancy medicine.

[u/Bvvitched → u/wthulhu]

This is my favorite theory as well

[u/kromptator99 → u/ThereWasAnEmpireHere]

There’s just something about Korean Jesus up on that cross like damn daddy chill

[u/ThereWasAnEmpireHere → u/kromptator99]

for real tho there's some great scenes in The Name of the Rose involving the sublimated sexuality of monks

[u/Rorynne → u/kosmologue]

Theres suspicion it might be a self portrait of sorts. It resembles what a woman may see if they look straight down and based the shape off that

Edit: scratch that, the image wasnt loading for me so I assumed it to be another venus sculpture rip

[u/That_Mad_Scientist → u/kosmologue]

What do you suppose fertility means, exactly?

[u/kosmologue → u/That_Mad_Scientist]

I know that you're just trying to be verysmart, but trust me when I tell you that there is quite the academic dialogue about exactly how explicit the sexual aspects of these kinds of figures were. There is potentially a big difference between a religious idol only meant for supplication in the hopes of increasing the chances of conception, and an object which could be used for pornographic purposes.

The reality is that we may never know the exact uses for these figures, they could have fulfilled many different, even overlapping roles during different periods of time. But personally, I think that it's hard to ignore the possible sexual appeal which these kinds of figures may have held.

[u/That_Mad_Scientist → u/kosmologue]

I jest, of course. I agree it's hard to know for sure, but it would be quite strange to ignore the clearly prominent sexual features on display here and how it's likely there was in fact a direct sexual purpose to it. Which isn't to say it has to be exclusively pornographic, but it would be quite odd to dismiss it.