Featured: Hare and Tabor T Shirts for discerning antiquarians

Hare and Tabor T Shirts for discerning antiquarians

Stonehenge Sacred Symbolism - Ancient Beliefs in Britain and Northern Europe

Stonehenge Sacred Symbolism - Ancient Beliefs in Britain and Northern Europe

Login

Register here - as a registered user you get more features and fewer ads.

Who's Online

There are currently, 1240 guests and 11 members online.

Sponsors

<< News >> The oldest swingers: sex games of Stone Age exposed

Submitted by coldrum on Tuesday, 15 May 2007  Page Views: 5311

Other ArchaeologyHe may have come down from the trees, but prehistoric man did not stop swinging. New research into Stone Age humans has argued that, far from having intercourse simply to reproduce, they had sex for fun.

Practices ranging from bondage to group sex, transvestism and the use of sex toys were widespread in primitive societies as a way of building up cultural ties.

According to the study, a 30,000-year-old statue of a naked woman - the Venus of Willendorf - and an equally ancient stone phallus found in a German cave, provide the earliest direct evidence that sex was about far more than babies.

Timothy Taylor, reader in archeology at Bradford University, reviewed evidence from dozens of archeological finds and scientific studies for his research.

He argues that monogamy only became established as hunter-gatherer societies took up agriculture and settled in houses, allowing the social roles of men and women to become more fixed.

Taylor, whose research is published by Haworth Press in the Handbook of the Evolution of Human Sexuality, says the human attitude to sex arose from the complex interaction of physical and mental development. By comparison with modern humans, who appeared about 300,000-100,000 years ago, apes have tiny male genitals, no female breasts and are hairy. But they are easily able to distinguish the sexes because males can weigh up to three times as much as females.

Humans, by contrast, are far less easy to distinguish by size. Taylor says that prominent male genitals and female breasts developed to aid recognition of the opposite sex in creatures of similar size and shape. The similarity in size, combined with the ease of face-to-face sex, allowed intercourse to become a vital part of social interaction, communication and inventiveness.
For more, see Times On Line.

<< MIT Students build Inca rope bridge to study the past

Living Landscapes:Exploring Neolithic Ireland and its Wider Context, 31st May >>

Please add your thoughts on this site

Inside the Neolithic Mind: Consciousness, Cosmos and the Realm of the Gods

Inside the Neolithic Mind: Consciousness, Cosmos and the Realm of the Gods

Sponsors

More News

See all News →

Latest Visit Logs

  • Dolmen des Coutoux
    “As per the French language comment of La Dragonne, you can park by the open barns and then wander do…”
    by Mick_Connor · 25 Aug 2026
  • Beauroulet Dolmen
    “Interesting to see the strong contrast between the strong red of the capstone, and the pale grey pro…”
    by Mick_Connor · 25 Aug 2026
  • Alignement de Leintant
    “With better info than in 2005, I managed to find this in June 2016, not far off the lane and at the …”
    by TheCaptain · 24 Aug 2026
  • Leintant menhir
    “With better info than in 2005, I managed to find this menhir this time, not far off the lane and at …”
    by TheCaptain · 24 Aug 2026
  • Pierre Tourneresse, Cairon
    “This site seems well cared for and the paths have been kept clear for walking. The trees around the …”
    by brianlavelle · 24 Aug 2026

"The oldest swingers: sex games of Stone Age exposed" | Login/Create an Account | 3 News and Comments
  
Go back to top of page    Comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
Mystery of the fat Venus by coldrum on Tuesday, 22 May 2007
(User Info | Send a Message)
Mystery of the fat Venus

They're known as Palaeolithic Venuses and they raise a lot of puzzling questions: How come these almost identical figurines were found all the way from France to Siberia? How come this stylised carving tradition was practised and passed down over 20,000 years? What purpose did they serve?

There are as many answers to these questions as there are archaeologists and art critics. Frankly, the Venuses are a mystery. But the mystery has just deepened and widened.

The latest issue of the journal Antiquity tells of dozens of small portable statuettes recently unearthed in Germany, France, Poland, and the Czech Republic.

The figurines, chipped in flint, or carved in ivory or bone between 14,000 and 16,000 years ago, are of stylised women, or parts of women, with over- sized buttocks, long straight or arched trunks, small or missing breasts, and no heads, arms or feet. At Wilczyce, in Poland, the archeologists have also dug up more than 100 ancient stylised pictures of these women's long straight backs and large bustles engraved on schist plaques.

Some of these strangely-shaped flint objects were discovered years ago when archaeologists misidentified them as early tools, and called them "strangled blades". Last year, however, the research team, led by Romuald Schild at the Polish Academy of Sciences, discovered the tools are all in mint condition. They have never been used to scrape, cut, or hammer anything.

Professor Dale Guthrie, from the university of Alaska, and author of The Nature of Paleolithic Art, is surprised that while Paleolithic people were surrounded by plenty of things – babies, men, animals, plants, battle scenes, clan symbols – these things were never represented in their art, only well-endowed women. Guthrie suggests that all the figurines were made by young men and "it's not too difficult to theorise about what was on their minds in their free time". He thinks the similarly stylised Venus figures represent a cross-cultural view of women shared by prehistoric Europeans – well prehistoric men – for more than 20,000 years.

That a fashionable body shape should persist for 20,000 years is almost beyond the comprehension of modern Europeans. Our fashionable shape- shifting ladies have rapidly morphed from the Belle Epoche hourglass, to the Edwardian bustle shape, to the curveless boy-like creatures of the 1920s, to today's skeletal catwalk strutters foisted on us by women and poofter fashion designers.

These days a red-blooded man can lose all respectability by admitting to a penchant for well-endowed women. But, underground, hankering after Ice Age beauties is alive and well.

A minute on the Internet will reveal about a million adult sites displaying beckoning super-curvy ladies with acres of arched backs and Paleolithic backsides.

But back to the figurines. Other schools of archaeologists don't go along with the caveman porn theory. They suggest these carvings served as fertility symbols or for some mystical or religious purpose.



http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/4020623a1861.html
[ Reply to This ]

The evolution of sex roles by coldrum on Tuesday, 22 May 2007
(User Info | Send a Message)
The evolution of sex roles

Could it be that Neanderthal females achieved an equality that is rare even by today's standards?
Some anthropologists make a case that our extinct female cousins hunted alongside the males during an epoch when our own ancestral women were gathering plants and doing other (essential) work. They argue that the appearance of gender roles was critical to humans' eventual domination of the globe - and that the importance of the women of the Pleistocene period has been vastly understated.

These assertions, controversial to be sure, play into growing scientific interest in prehistoric sex roles: How did our male and female ancestors divvy up the tasks of getting food, clothing and shelter, and how did those roles shape the evolving species? Did primitive peoples form relationships, the males playing father to sons and daughters, or did we act more like our chimpanzee and gorilla cousins - promiscuous, violent, with males fighting over the females?

Groping toward a fuller understanding of how we became human, some researchers are looking at how and when we came to act as women and men.

Hominids diverged from the chimp branch of the family tree roughly six million years ago, producing a series of evolutionary dead-ends before the ultimately successful genus Homo emerged. H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens grew out of the same line at different times.

The Neanderthals' ancestors diverged first, and they left Africa a couple of hundred thousand years ahead of ours. Homo sapiens arrived in Europe about 50,000 years ago. The two species overlapped for perhaps 20,000 years before the Neanderthals went extinct. Scientists still aren't sure why.

A lack of all but the most primitive weapons found at Neanderthal sites suggests they may have had to band together to kill large animals, says Steve Kuhn, an anthropologist at the University of Arizona. And numerous fractures found in skeletons of Neanderthal females, just like the males, indicate that both sexes may have participated in dangerous work.

Kuhn and his wife, anthropologist Mary Stiner, are the main proponents of a theory that says Neanderthals engaged in coed hunting - and did so, in part, because they lacked other options. Archaic humans, by contrast, came out of Africa with the ability to fashion early traps, nets and clothes, and to grind seeds into edible form.

In present-day hunter-gatherer societies, the women collect and process most of the plants, trap small game, and sew most of the clothes, says James Adovasio, director of the Mercyhurst Archaeological Institute in Erie, Pa., and one of three authors of the new The Invisible Sex: Uncovering the True Roles of Women in Prehistory. (Men apparently make most of the shoes.)

Adovasio didn't set out to enter the battle of the sexes. He's best known for finding artifacts in Western Pennsylvania that push back estimated dates for the peopling of the Americas. Through chance events, he also came to specialize in relatively perishable artifacts - baskets, blankets, fishing nets, shoes and textiles.

What little is preserved is surprisingly well-made, he says. Some Stone Age impressions left in clay show fabrics woven as fine as Brooks Brothers shirts.

Most of these items, crucial for survival in harsh times, would have been created by women, he says. Yet virtually all texts and exhibits emphasize men hunting cave bears or mammoths or some other ridiculously oversize prey.

"If you pick up even some of the most recent prehistory books you'll rarely see any images of females doing anything," Adovasio says. (Also left out of the limelight were the men who made the shoes.)

A majority of researchers believe the roots of separate sex roles date far back in human evolution, probably to the time when the size ratio of male to female reached something close to our current differential.

In other animals, this ratio can reveal something about the relationship between the sexes. In species with a big difference, such as gorillas, the males often fight to control harems.

In species with males and females closer to the same size, the sexes are more likely to work in pairs, cooperate, and share the burden of protecting their young.

Modern men and women are similar in body size compared with our closest relatives. So determining how long ago we reached our current ratio should point to when our ancestors stopped organizing themselves like apes and started acting more like people, says Stanford University anthropologist Richard Klein.

Some researchers see evidence placing this date at least 3.2 million years ago, the age of the diminutive australopithicine known as Lucy. Others favor a mere 1.7 million or 1.8 million years.

At any rate, by half a million years ago, our evolutionary limb had separated from the Neanderthals'. Their ancestors migrated from Africa to the Middle East and Europe by 250,000 years ago, while ours stayed put. When so-called modern Homo sapiens did reach Europe and Asia, others were already settled in.

Klein is skeptical of the claim that Neanderthals had no division of labor.

But the husband-and-wife team from Arizona, in a paper published in December's issue of Current Anthropology, contend that Neanderthals may have had no other way to survive. They had grown to depend on big game for food: deer, horses, cattle, bison and, very occasionally, a mammoth.

Our ancestors, on the other hand, may not have gone after much big game, says Adovasio. In fact, the fossil record hints that not all meat was hunted. At some hominid sites, animal bones show signs of having been gnawed first by other, fiercer creatures. In other words, Adovasio says, our ancestors were scavengers at least some of the time.

He believes that a more appealing picture - Paleolithic man (not woman) as macho hunter - is partly a product of 20th-century culture.

"Nobody wants to be based on road kill," Adovasio says. Plus, exhibit curators may have figured there was little excitement in the gathering of fruits and roots: "Who wants to see a diorama of people hunting a wild pumpkin?"

Hunting animals did become more important for both Neanderthals and modern humans as they moved from the plant-rich tropics to more northern climes. Weapons and protection provided an edge.

"What women do then is go heavily into technology," says Kuhn, the Arizona anthropologist. "They make water- and wind-proof clothes," he says, as well as devices for trapping small animals.

Olga Soffer, an anthropologist at the University of Illinois and an author, with Adovasio and Jake Page, of The Invisible Sex, says it was our ancestors' understanding of gender and gender roles that made us fully, cognitively human as recently as 40,000 to 50,000 years ago - the time that cave art and jewelry start to appear.

Before that time, she says, mothers cared for their children but males and females largely fended for themselves, finding food however they could.

Seeing themselves as men and women, she says, served as a catalyst for the emergence of other forms of symbolic thinking. It was sort of a Helen Keller moment for the species: As the word "water" written into Keller's hand opened up the concept of symbolic language to a deaf and blind girl, so the idea of gender introduced the world of conceptual thinking to humanity.

Most researchers agree that something dramatic changed around this time. But what?

Stanford's Klein sees no connection with sex roles. Gender distinctions, in his more mainstream view, go back more than a million years. He believes a genetic change spurred artistic and cultural advances.

A mutation in the DNA, he says, might have reorganized the brain without changing its size. It may have helped humans create more complex communication - thus offering an advantage that would spread through the population.

A mutation like he envisions having hit modern humans would have contributed to our survival and the Neanderthals' demise. Klein is hoping the actual mutation will surface as scientists continue to decode bits of DNA scraped from Neanderthals' bones, and compare them with our own.

Such a mutation, he says, would have spread not just because it made men better, more specialized hunters. It would have helped both men and women do almost everything better.

http://www.philly.com/philly/health_and_science/20070402_The_evolution_of_sex_roles.html
[ Reply to This ]

Re: The oldest swingers: sex games of Stone Age exposed by Aluta on Tuesday, 15 May 2007
(User Info | Send a Message)
Not surprising that they had sex for fun. You can bet animals don't know that they're making babies when they do it, and I imagine it took a while for people to catch on to that, too. Sexual pleasure is what nature has always used to lure creatures into reproduction. Child rearing requires so much of the caretaking parent(s) that many animals and humans alike would not choose to do it given the choice.
[ Reply to This ]

Your Name: Anonymous [ Register Now ]
Subject:


Add your comment or contribution to this page. Spam or offensive posts are deleted immediately, don't even bother

<<< What is five plus one as a number? (Please type the answer to this question in the little box on the left)
You can also embed videos and other things. For Youtube please copy and paste the 'embed code'.
For Google Street View please include Street View in the text.
Create a web link like this: <a href="https://www.megalithic.co.uk">This is a link</a>  

Allowed HTML is:
<p> <b> <i> <a> <img> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <tt> <li> <ol> <ul> <object> <param> <embed> <iframe>

We would like to know more about this location. Please feel free to add a brief description and any relevant information in your own language.
Wir möchten mehr über diese Stätte erfahren. Bitte zögern Sie nicht, eine kurze Beschreibung und relevante Informationen in Deutsch hinzuzufügen.
Nous aimerions en savoir encore un peu sur les lieux. S'il vous plaît n'hesitez pas à ajouter une courte description et tous les renseignements pertinents dans votre propre langue.
Quisieramos informarnos un poco más de las lugares. No dude en añadir una breve descripción y otros datos relevantes en su propio idioma.