[blam]

GGG Ping.

No Picture.

[Puppage]

[Fitzcarraldo]

Paging Larry Flynt...

[wallcrawlr]

They open up a gateway for historians and anthropologists to discuss whether sex really was a taboo subject in the stone age.

You know those horn dogs couldnt wait to find something to start that discussion. Suddenly those classes in Universities are going to become real popular. Cave man sex 101

[anniegetyourgun]

How they created stone-age cyberporn:

[GraniteStateConservative]

but the other possibility is that the man and woman were copulating and that he was standing behind her.

Bow wow wow yippy yo yippy yay...

[Fierce Allegiance]

Ping.

[Semper Paratus]

Linda Lovelimestone and Harry Rocks?

[balch3]

Evil has always been with us.

[patent]

>>>>The extraordinary find, at an archaeological dig in Saxony, shatters the belief that sex was a taboo subject in that era.

I don't understand that statement. One statue "shatters" a belief that sex was taboo before? If they found hundreds of statues in different locations, sure, call it shattered. But one broken statue could prove a number of things, including that one guy was a perv and was killed by bashing him over the head with his statue, breaking it. ;-)

(Of course, I had no idea that we believed sex was taboo 7200 years ago. If that were the case, how did the human race survive?)

[wideawake]

Dr. Gunther Grossenschwanz, world-reknowned pornography expert and chairman of the Institute of Applied Erotics at Berlin University commented: "In my opinion these figurines can not be considered pornographic, because they have nothing to do with defecation."

[Publius6961]

The extraordinary find, at an archaeological dig in Saxony, shatters the belief that sex was a taboo subject in that era.

Admittedly, this topic has never been a burning issue with me ever, but I find this assertion absurd.
Shatter what belief? According to whom?
I have read many archelogy, anthropology and history books in my life, but can't recall such a silly assertion.

Tabboo? Makes no sense.

[BIGLOOK]

What next? Jurassic Porn?

Archaeologists lead much too cloistered lives.

[KarlInOhio]

Putting the ass in Jurassic.

[IamConservative]

"shatters the belief that sex was a taboo subject in that era."

Not really. An archiologist uncovering a San Frnacisco bathouse 2000 years from now would not mean society condoned the behavior.

[Junior]

A rock-hard (as in statue -- get your mind out of the gutter) ping.

[Verginius Rufus]

it's not true that the earliest known representations of erotic scenes previously known were 2,000 years old...there are a number of Greek vases from before 400 B.C. which have various lovemaking scenes shown (including heterosexual), and there is an Etruscan tomb from about 550 B.C. which has a fresco depicting intercourse. There may be some material from Egypt which is much earlier.

There's probably a lot more from around the world, but until the last few decades that sort of thing wasn't often exhibited in museums or published.

[AmericanChef]

I think the archaeologists are just excited they finally get to see some action.

[Brilliant]

Another myth shattered... I thought sex was not invented until quite recently.

[Charles Martel]

"There are two ways of looking at this. The first is that they were doing a ritual dance, but the other possibility is that the man and woman were copulating and that he was standing behind her. The copulation option is far more likely, and would make this the oldest representation ever of a pornographic scene."

Or... it's just a scene depicting an early version of "freak dancing".