Greek Statues = small penises

[erratic]

I would second most of the above points (except for the above poster's bizarre drivel) and add one thing: If you're looking up at a statue the first things you see are feet, legs and crotch. Those tend to get de-emphasized on purpose so they look in proportion to the hands, torso and head, which tend to be higher up and therefore have to be over-sized to make everything look proportional.

 

[alysen6]

My theory is that there was probably a lot of pressure against displaying or depicting large penises in most "civilized" cultures, as the majority of men probably found them threatening.

 

[SirConcis]

Greek statues had no sexual connotation. So the penis was depicted it isn fully flaccid state, ad usually, if a model posed in the cold, the fully flaccid state was not very big. In africa, where men are generally taller and are in warmer weather, the flaccid penis can be bigger on average

 

[Wish-4-8]

The ancient Greeks had small penises. This is why they enjoyed sodomizing young boys over sex with their wives. Ancient Greek society also put a great deal of emphasis on domination and equated it with sexual satisfaction. Due to their small size they were often incapable of satisfying women in the way they defined satisfaction. In spite of the penis being small and unable to facilitate such "satisfaction" in grown women, sex with young boys would often result in pain to the recipient, hence domination (satisfaction). Greek statues are simply a depiction of the body type at the time.

What are you basing this on? Did you read this somewhere or are these your thoughts.
Mostly because I do not believe that any group of people are going to have a small penis. So then they get "short man's syndrome" and take out their frustations on young boys. That is like saying that having a small penis makes you gay. Wives have buttholes too. If that were the case, the statues would have huge penises to compensate for a feeling of inadequecy. Art reflects culture and life.

 

[horseHUNGandYOUNG]

it has also got to do with intelligence. a small penis meant big brains. they also showed this by making the statues with out of proportion head and hands. it had to do with intelligence and strength.

 

[CuriousNW]

It is also down to a practical reason: sculpting anything that is relatively isolated from the main body of the stone poses the risk of it snapping off. You'd be pissed off if you spent weeks on a sculpture just to accidentally wreck it by chiselling off a dangling penis just as you were doing the last bit!

 

[D_HesCrass]

Didn't women find small penisis attractive back then

 

[Marco26]

These guys look like those Greek and Roman statues you mention...
Eric Nies
Bear Pond 17
Another model
Bear Pond 16

 

[dingdong]

They aren't even small though It's average.

If we haven't seen the statues with an erect penis, we can't judge a flaccid penis as small

 

[Water dragon]

In ancient Greece an uncircumcised and small penis was culturally seen as desirable in a man, whereas a bigger or circumcised penis was viewed as comical or grotesque (at least in the high-brow view), usually being found on "fertility gods, half-animal critters such as satyrs, ugly old men, and barbarians.

Ancient Romans had a viewpoint contrary to that of the Greeks. This was also the case in medieval Arabic literature, where a longer penis was preferred, as described in an Arabian Nights tale called "Ali with the Large Member". As a witty satire of this fantasy, the 9th century Afro-Arab author Al-Jahiz wrote: "If the length of the penis were a sign of honor, then the mule would belong to the (honorable tribe of) Quraysh".

:biggrin1:

 

[Marco26]

Those guys have bodies like sculptures...and their cocks are "not small enough"...
I tried to find a few more human examples...

taille forme pénis couleur bite
taille forme pénis couleur bite
taille forme pénis couleur bite

 

[B_Just Joe]

alot of african statues that depict large endowments (male and female) were often fertility statues of varying sorts. Greek statues tended to focus more on the overall beauty, therefore large genetalia and breasts were not necessary. In addition greek and roman gods had a MAJOR influence on daily life. its possible that artists did not want to offend their gods by depicting something that could be construed as immoral (even though zeus was a philanderer). or it could be that back then the size of a flaccid (because its extremely rare to see a greek/ roman statue with an erect penis) penis was smaller. but since we have no solid proof as to the reasons all we can do is speculate.

 

[Marco26]

This guy is pretty close...If he were a little smaller then he'd be PERFECT.

Bear Pond 16

 

[pronatalist]

alot of african statues that depict large endowments (male and female) were often fertility statues of varying sorts. Greek statues tended to focus more on the overall beauty, therefore large genetalia and breasts were not necessary. In addition greek and roman gods had a MAJOR influence on daily life. its possible that artists did not want to offend their gods by depicting something that could be construed as immoral (even though zeus was a philanderer). or it could be that back then the size of a flaccid (because its extremely rare to see a greek/ roman statue with an erect penis) penis was smaller. but since we have no solid proof as to the reasons all we can do is speculate.

I wonder if it suggests humans are becoming more sexually endowed, due to natural selection, whatever reproduces more people, being passed on in the genes faster, as humans sure have reproduced, and our populations become so much larger than way back when. Perhaps the largest penises of the past, have become more the mere average of today? Meaning human penises are getting bigger? However, without sufficient evidence, and considering that humans are far different/better than mere animals, what can we do but speculate?

Another theory that could work, is that in making statue nudes, the audience was meant to focus on the "beauty" of the human form, and not be too distracted by the natural reproductive organs. So the penises could have been shrunk somewhat, on purpose? And people did often have large families way back when as well?

 

[unzipped]

I think they were all growers.... and art beauty is in the eye of the beholder... and their imaginations of dicks growing super huge... when aroused... uz

 

[pronatalist]

I think they were all growers.... and art beauty is in the eye of the beholder... and their imaginations of dicks growing super huge... when aroused... uz

Probably not much different than how guys are today.

Probably most were growers, not showers, and statues are often not of "real" people, but iconic or "average" people.

But then we see in some animals, that they are super-growers. Like with horses and ponies, not much penis is visible at all, but when ready to mate, it's amazing how fast and long it can get. But way back when, a penis wouldn't have to get all that long, to make a baby. Undersized penises can make babies too. Actually, people were smaller too, so a penis might not have had to deliver the sperm as far? They said in the commentary of the Titanic movie, they had to widen the grand stairs, because people are bigger now, due to presumably better nutrition. I think that means both taller and wider.