Comments on: Archaeological Surprise: Grave Site Full of Phallic Figurines

By: Eric

Eric — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:58:57 +0000

Comments like “but the possible alternative explanations for carving a bunch of phalluses are perhaps more unsavory.” are the kinds of journalism that put discovermagazine firmly in the “popular” realm and clearly separate it from academic sources. Science is not savory or unsavory, it just is.

There is a possible social / sexual comment therein. I suspect if there were vaginas, tits and ass it wouldn’t be so “unsavory”. Why is the penis and what people might do with one, or even something shaped like one so “unsavory”?

By: hottie

hottie — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 19:30:21 +0000

ASAP

By: Toil and Trouble: Scientists Analyze 17th Century “Witches Brew” | Discoblog | Discover Magazine

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:47:29 +0000

[...] Archaeological Surprise: Grave Site Full of Phallic Figurines Discoblog: Caribbean Bowls Reveal Ancient…Drug Habit? Image: flickr / [...]

By: Joan Griffith

Joan Griffith — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:24:37 +0000

As a matter of fact, such objects were used in “holy” rites in which a barren wife would be ritually inseminated by the god. It makes sense that the object would then be discarded so that worshippers would get their money’s worth.

By the way, can we relate this at all to the round stones with a hole in Britain (Scotland? Ireland? England? ) that women would crawl thru in order to get pregnant? AND, there is today an African statue made of dark wood which if one only touches it, causes women to get pregnant, or so they claim… the mythology of seeking God’s help to have a child is very old. Oops, I forgot, Nicole Kidman & friends swim in the pool down under where about 6 of them became pregnant, including Nic. So she said.

I seriously doubt that DNA would remain after all this time.

Rocks as sex toys? Rocks?? Leave it to a man to think of that.

By: Chris Wood

Chris Wood — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 14:34:23 +0000

I find it insufferably Puritan that archaeologists consistently ignore one of the most sensible explanations for phallic figures – at least the larger ones – is that they were sex toys. Has anyone ever tested the surfaces of some of these “figurines” to check for bodily fluids?

By: Charles M. Barnard

Charles M. Barnard — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:03:33 +0000

What “alternative explanations” are “unsavory?”

Perhaps they were carving dildos…?

By: tresmal

tresmal — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 05:27:06 +0000

“Archaeologists excavating a burial site near Nazareth dating back to between 6750 and 8500 B.C.”

Doesn’t that make them older than the Earth? (snark, snark, snark)