28,000 year old sex toy

[JoeP]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/sci_nat_enl_1122287057/img/laun.jpg

"highly polished" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4713323.stm)

The 20cm-long, 3cm-wide stone object, which is dated to be about 28,000 years old, was buried in the famous Hohle Fels Cave near Ulm in the Swabian Jura.

The prehistoric "tool" was reassembled from 14 fragments of siltstone.

Its life size suggests it may well have been used as a sex aid by its Ice Age makers, scientists report.

[livius drusus]

Is it just me or is pretty much every other word in that article laden with innuendo? I mean, I'll just bet it was used for knapping flints, wink, wink, nudge, nudge, saynomore.

[JoeP]

"tool"

[livius drusus]

:beavis: :butthead:

[ChuckF]

But is it dishwasher safe?

[WinAce]

I DARE anyone to post that at a board with heavy censorship, prudish attitudes and tons of young-earth creationists, like RaptureReady or FreeConservatives.

[JoeP]

What would be the problem? They would just ignore it - nothing can be older than 6,000 years!

[Dingfod]

If it had been found in the U.S. it would just be another fucking rock.

[JoeP]

:faint:

[Fencesitter]

What would be the problem? They would just ignore it - nothing can be older than 6,000 years!

:happy:

Well, there's an argument against YEC if there ever was one.


Fence

[SillyGoose]

LMAO!

[Stormlight]

If it had been found in the U.S. it would just be another fucking rock.

:roflmao:

[Ensign Steve]

I like the sculpture of the woman with the highly accentuated sexual organs.

[Legs]

Where do the batteries go?

[HighOnHotSauce]

Now I’ll really be impressed if they find a 28,000 year old set of anal beads

[livius drusus]

:laugh:

They probably found those already; they just called them worry beads or something.

[SillyGoose]

OMG. What I want to know is how did the scientists determine that it was used sexually? I mean, they say that it showed indications of sharpening tools on it - can't they leave it at that? Just because it looks like a different kind of 'tool' doesn't mean it was used as such. Did women of the Ice Age have alot of free time to loll around in bed looking at pornographic cave drawings?

[godfry n. glad]

Gee... I guess I get to be the party pooper.

I'd say it's a pestle. For mashing and grinding things like acorns.

That's not to say that it couldn't have been used as a sex toy, but I'd bet it's primary function was far more mundane.

[ChuckF]

Really? I think it looks totally unsuitable for a pestle. You would want a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point, which would quickly dull.

[HighOnHotSauce]

That's not to say that it couldn't have been used as a sex toy, but I'd bet it's primary function was far more mundane.
That’s why I’ll be impressed by the inevitable anal bead discovery. There’s no explaining away anal-beads.

[Skep]

Really? I think it looks totally unsuitable for a pestle. You would want a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point, which would quickly dull.
In addition, I would think that the sedimentary nature of siltstone would make it unlikely to be used as a pestle.

[Dingfod]

Really? I think it looks totally unsuitable for a pestle. You would want a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point, which would quickly dull.
You're looking at it upside down.

[ChuckF]

Now if it had some balls maybe...

[Dingfod]

Yeah, some frame of reference like that would be nice.

[MonCapitan2002]

I DARE anyone to post that at a board with heavy censorship, prudish attitudes and tons of young-earth creationists, like RaptureReady or FreeConservatives.
The thread would be deleted in no time flat.

[Joshua Adams]

Really? I think it looks totally unsuitable for a pestle. You would want a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point, which would quickly dull.It doesn't look much different from some of these pestles (http://images.google.com/images?q=pestle&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images).

[Petra]

http://www.christianforums.com/t1902848-penis-sculpture-made-28000-years-ago-found.html

Check out CR0C0DILE's comments.


:laugh:

[ChuckF]

Really? I think it looks totally unsuitable for a pestle. You would want a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point, which would quickly dull.It doesn't look much different from some of these pestles (http://images.google.com/images?q=pestle&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images).
Um, actually, yes it does. Those pestles have a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point.

[Corona688]

Really? I think it looks totally unsuitable for a pestle. You would want a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point, which would quickly dull.It doesn't look much different from some of these pestles (http://images.google.com/images?q=pestle&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images). Au contraire, it looks very different. No flattened ends, anywhere.

[Joshua Adams]

Really? I think it looks totally unsuitable for a pestle. You would want a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point, which would quickly dull.It doesn't look much different from some of these pestles (http://images.google.com/images?q=pestle&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images).
Um, actually, yes it does. Those pestles have a thin handle and wide, flat tip to use for grinding things. This has a thin handle and the tip comes to a point.I was thinking specifically of the first row, third from the left, which just looks like a somewhat fatter version of the thing in the OP... I'm not really sure why the width of the handle would change anything in regards to usefulness as a pestle, could you explain?

The tip doesn't look that pointed to me. It isn't as wide across as the others, though.

[ChuckF]

You want the handle thinner than the base so you can hold on to it easily. You want the base flattened so you can get more surface area for crushing. According to the article, this thing is 3 cm wide at its widest point. The page with the image of the pestle you mentioned says that it's 11" x 2.5", which is considerably wider than this piece.

[PinkRose]

ya it could be referred to as a sex toy, we have one here, found in a field. it is a pestle used to "grind" things. an early tool of some kind and certainly looks like a possible poker. indians and early settlers probably used it? :yup:

[MonCapitan2002]

http://www.christianforums.com/t1902848-penis-sculpture-made-28000-years-ago-found.html (http://www.christianforums.com/t1902848-penis-sculpture-made-28000-years-ago-found.html)

Check out CR0C0DILE's comments.


:laugh:
The site says that I do not have permission to access that page. :(

[Skep]

That link worked earlier today. I'll bet they took the thread down. :rolleyes:

[Adora]

It would be really funny if it ended up being a hammer they used to bash tent-pegs into the ground or something.

[Joshua Adams]

You want the handle thinner than the base so you can hold on to it easily. You want the base flattened so you can get more surface area for crushing. According to the article, this thing is 3 cm wide at its widest point. The page with the image of the pestle you mentioned says that it's 11" x 2.5", which is considerably wider than this piece.Although I am convinced enough that the base is too narrow to make a very good pestle (I didn't realize how scaled down the picture of that other thing is), I'd like anyway to quibble that the relative size of the handle to the base does not make it any easier to hold. What we have here is a thin handle; changing the width of the base to make "the handle thinner than the base" will not affect how cumbersome the tool is.

:D

(Later, I read the news story and it says something about flint something or other. I am not sure why the scientists say it might also be a dildo in addition to that)

[ChuckF]

Quibble away. Changing the width of the base doesn't make it any more or less cumbersome, but it does make it more efficient. It would be pretty stupid to have a pestle with a base thinner than the handle, especially 28,000 years ago, when I doubt they did much grinding of pharmaceuticals and such. In that case, you would want to maximize the surface area of the base in order to maximize how much you could grind at a time.

The only reason you want the handle to be thin is so that the user could wrap his/her fingers completely around this, thus reducing fatigue when moving or lifting the pestle. If presented with a pestle whose handle is thicker than its base, I think prehistoric man would promptly turn it upside down.

As you can see in the photo in the article, there are marks where this thing may have been used to knap flints. Clearly, this was not its primary use - otherwise, they would be everywhere. Instead, they are only in a small area near the tip, which looks suspiciously like a glans. If it were used only for knapping flints, I would think such scars would be everywhere. That said, its well-shaped for flints, if a little bit thin.

I guess all those prehistoric naked fat ladies were paperweights or bookends.

[Skep]

Again, the characteristics of siltstone are such that it is a poor choice for use as a hammering, crushing, or grinding tool. It is simply too soft and is easily broken when struck. Prehistoric men and women would certainly have known this.

[ChuckF]

Again, the characteristics of siltstone are such that it is a poor choice for use as a hammering, crushing, or grinding tool. It is simply too soft and is easily broken when struck. Prehistoric men and women would certainly have known this.
In other words...no rough stuff :sex:

[livius drusus]

I think it just wanted to be held.

[PinkRose]

in other words the men used it on the men? :hotdog:

[Adora]

Prehistoric men and women would certainly have known this.
How do you know that?

Also, who said the best tools are the ones we end up digging up? Wouldn't the tools that were made better than the rest be used more often, and therefore break & breakdown faster than the crappy, badly-designed tools nobody used?

[HighOnHotSauce]

Now this is time well spent....

[ChuckF]

For what it's worth, this artifact significantly predates the advent of agriculture and the active cultivation of grains.

[livius drusus]

Mammoth tenderizer?

[Ensign Steve]

Mammoth tenderizer?

Did you mean to post that in this thread (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2944)?

[livius drusus]

Or in a masturbation euphemisms thread for the overconfident.

[Ensign Steve]

Do we have a thread for that? My favorite is menage a moi.

[Corona688]

Prehistoric men and women would certainly have known this.
How do you know that? Who would know better what stones crush easily and which don't, than people who use stones for such things?