snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > NFBSK Gone Wild!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03 June 2016, 05:02 PM
overyonder overyonder is offline
 
Join Date: 03 March 2010
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvanz View Post
I found this article online. I don't know a lot about the writer or the circumstances, but the arguments seem logical to me. It also has some cites and feels...scholarly.
https://whatistalent.wordpress.com/2...reek-statuary/
Quote:
This offered a way for sculptors to depict female nudity in a way considered chaste.
Aheum.

OY
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03 June 2016, 05:15 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 22,949
Default

Maybe I'm a bit dense. Not getting what's funny, OY
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03 June 2016, 05:18 PM
overyonder overyonder is offline
 
Join Date: 03 March 2010
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Maybe I'm a bit dense. Not getting what's funny, OY
quoting myself from earlier:

As for the ladies not having much shown down below... I don't know. Perhaps the intention was to show them as chaste? (pure speculation here).
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03 June 2016, 05:32 PM
Sylvanz's Avatar
Sylvanz Sylvanz is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,861
Default

The article cites the Greek belief in the differences between men and women. Men were intellectual, balanced, and strong. Women were, mothers, daughters, you know same ole' same ole'. This writer posits, or cites someone that does,* that showing women's genitalia might possibly be seen as "aggressive". A non-feminine trait to the Greeks.

*I read it late last night, and I'm not ready to read it again at this moment.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03 June 2016, 06:49 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 7,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvanz View Post
I found this article online.
From that link:

Quote:
a pubis that was often curiously devoid of both hair and any indication of a vulva. Lack of pubic hair can be explained by the common Greek practice of depilation, but the lack of visible genitalia is much more telling. In a culture known for carefully sculpting male genitals, all while imbuing them with deep reasoning, why shy away from a simple indication of a cleft?
There indeed is exactly what bothers me.

And the article seems to me to indicate that I have indeed got reason to be bothered:

Quote:
Most scholars shun the idea that a realistic pubis was seen as aesthetically unappealing, and the most prominent theories today center around female genitalia being viewed as sexually aggressive. Women being aggressive, let alone sexually aggressive, was heavily discouraged and punished in Greek society. [ . . . ] In the words of Beth Cohen describing the ideal citizen, “this human male’s beauty and goodness, indeed his Greekness, both in life and art, was defined in opposition to that which was neither ‘beautiful’, nor ‘good’, nor free, nor Greek, nor male, nor human, and so on”.
The women's genitals aren't there, but the men's are, because the male genitals were defined as good and proper, but the women's were defined as being wrong, improper, perhaps not even human.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01 June 2017, 07:45 AM
nonnieyrissa's Avatar
nonnieyrissa nonnieyrissa is offline
 
Join Date: 16 July 2007
Location: Brooklyn/Hudson, NY/Rancho Cordova, CA
Posts: 2,554
Default

I think it's likely that that is what the average penis looked like, and they shaped their views to match. Mark has a smaller penis when not erect, and Ia always tease him about going from the Florence Hercules to the the statue where he is wrestling with Diomedes, and Diomedes has him by his huge penis. I would think most men would prefer it to be tiny when flaccid, so it doesn't get in the way of sitting and what not.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02 June 2017, 02:09 AM
urbanlegendfanatic urbanlegendfanatic is offline
 
 
Join Date: 16 October 2014
Location: California
Posts: 139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
They would have had to be small, if they were to have any hope of reproducing, considering that ideal ancient Greek women, judging by the statues, had genitalia so small that despite a lack of hair they were entirely invisible.

-- I always found the combination of the lovingly detailed male genitalia and the entirely missing female ones rather unnerving.
If Greek women had small genitalia it's probably because they were married young - 12 or 13 wasn't unheard of. They were considered "bad" and the property of their husbands. They had few rights - they had to stay indoors most of the time and they died often died young.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02 June 2017, 05:24 PM
DawnStorm's Avatar
DawnStorm DawnStorm is offline
 
Join Date: 11 March 2003
Location: Montgomery County, MD
Posts: 15,304
Icon84

All of this talk about Greek statues reminds me of the time my grade school class was learning about Ancient Greece. The two teachers for my grade decided to combine the classes one afternoon for a movie on the art of that time. Oooh naked people! I remember the teacher shutting off the film to tell us to stop laughing. Good luck with that. Not that there weren't muffled giggles all through the movie.....
I honestly don't know what the teachers expected, showing a movie like that to a bunch of 11-12 year olds.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06 June 2017, 10:48 PM
urbanlegendfanatic urbanlegendfanatic is offline
 
 
Join Date: 16 October 2014
Location: California
Posts: 139
Default

I would suppose it would be because Greeks married young. Very young. Young Greek women in particular lived very restricted lives - they were not allowed to associate with men outside their own families. I think their lives resemble women who live in modern day Saudi Arabia. I'll provide a link to what their lives were like. But in regards to the statues themselves you are thinking of adults - I think they were designed to resemble people around the age of 14. If you think of them like that the size of their, uh, body parts would be small - you're talking about people who are basically children.

Here's the link;
http://www.ancient.eu/article/927/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Officials approve drug which can be used to fix bent PENISES snopes The Doctor Is In 1 07 December 2013 09:45 PM
Whey Too Much: Greek Yogurt’s Dark Side A Turtle Named Mack Business Bytes 1 25 May 2013 05:05 PM
Science proves women like men with bigger penises A Turtle Named Mack NFBSK Gone Wild! 56 12 April 2013 09:33 PM
Small fishbowl makes small fish snopes Critter Country 8 21 February 2008 03:38 AM
Statues offer clues to Greek isle's past Minstrel History 22 08 January 2007 03:01 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.