There is a tribe in the Amazon, I forget their name, where the men wear nothing but a string tied around their waist, with one end tied to the foreskin of the penis, holding the penis up against the stomach. If one of these men happens to be caught in public without his penis string, he feels as embarrassed as we would if we found ourselves naked in public. Source: Peoples and Cultures of the World, a lecture series from The Teaching Company, taught by Professor Edward F. Fischer. I have also encountered reference to this tribe in a book, set in the Amazon, by Peruvian writer Mario Vargas Llosa. My own speculation is that the purpose of the penis string may be to prevent that appendage from becoming a tempting target for snakes and scorpions when the individual squats in the jungle.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Dec 3 2006, 07:14 PM) [snapback]357187[/snapback]</div> An inscrotable analysis!
I saw that somewhere! Although your speculation makes sense, what about the scrotum? If such were the case, I would imagine the scrotum lifted as well, maybe a string tied around the base, with the string going "up" the center, and so on and so fourth. On the other hand, I really can't imagine people as such (who have lived in such environment for many generations) being clumsy, unobservant/whatever, enough to actually not take note of a safe area to squat. My theory is, it's tied up in such manner to prevent it from slapping around, perhaps even painfully at some point when slapped against the scrotum, while running, or some other physical activity as such... h34r: Then again, while thinking about it some more, if they're actually "embarrassed" by it, it might be more of a cultural thing than functional. Perhaps it started as functional, and over time became cultural... But the embarrassment component leads me to believe it's deeper than just some practical device...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 4 2006, 05:55 AM) [snapback]357315[/snapback]</div> You have a point. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 4 2006, 05:55 AM) [snapback]357315[/snapback]</div> Exactly my point. It is cultural. But it probably originated because it served a function of some sort. My speculation was just that. Yours may be the correct reason. Or perhaps the clever folks here could come up with other possible functions that served to originate the now-cultural practice. But my real point was merely that these men feel clothed wearing only their penis string, and feel naked without it. We may well ask why we feel naked in our BVDs, why many women feel naked if their breasts are exposed, etc. Our clothing habits probably originated due to cold climate, but then became cultural, so that we are actually forbidden by religiously-inspired laws from going about naked in public even in fine weather.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Dec 4 2006, 01:22 PM) [snapback]357386[/snapback]</div> Hmmm, reading that suddenly generated a thought: Are we more embarassed due to some relgious core issue, OR how our bodies look (obviously it's not just one or the other? Or to phrase it another way, if everyone was perfectly fit with statue-esque proportions, would we be more or less embarassed to be naked? I'm imagining, if everyone were perfectly fit, it would be MUCH less of an issue... Or, what if we all had a coat of fur? ...on another point though, I think women today are far less embarassed to show their breasts... h34r:
Oh jeez, what did I wander in to.... What do you suppose it means to a woman if a man has his string undone? He must be either preparing to, or just having urinated, or else he has some other intention in mind. So the lack of string may indicate intention, that if that particular intention is not really there (like, say, in the presence of someone other than his mate), could be quite embarrassing. I don't have a clue about the original purpose.
Saw a documentary of some S. Pacific group that the men wore some very long thin gourds over their peni....supposedly the longer the gourd the more well endowed/viril... These, too, were held in an upright, against the abdomen, position with pieces of thong. it was quite comical watching these gourd bearing warriors dancing in preparation for battle trying to look ominous!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Dec 4 2006, 03:39 PM) [snapback]357467[/snapback]</div> Yet they'd probably kick our American-lifestyle arses with little effort!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 4 2006, 01:07 PM) [snapback]357478[/snapback]</div> LOL! no doubt...when you get down to it our prudishness clothing is probably the truely bizzare behavior.
And then on the other side of the obscenity spectrum.... India stars face obscenity case over on-screen kiss
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Dec 4 2006, 04:15 PM) [snapback]357488[/snapback]</div> You know, the Indians are funny in this respect. I saw a documentary once focusing on India's rather large prostitution problem, particularly on the highways and countrysides just outside major cities. On top of that, for various reasons I shall not get into, I was researching a particular Indian airline, and came across a stewardess application, and apparently, you have to be a nice looking "SINGLE" female to apply! lol ...and women here think they have it bad! I've always said, the more openly repressed a society is, the hornier they are, take the Japanese for example... h34r:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Dec 4 2006, 10:21 AM) [snapback]357456[/snapback]</div> Another very plausible theory for the origin of the embarrassment. Thank you, Dragonfly.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Dec 4 2006, 04:28 PM) [snapback]357498[/snapback]</div> I 2nd Daniel on this! Well, to add to this brainstorm of theories, sort of piggybacking on Dragonfly's theory, perhaps it could mean he's already taken a female as a mate (which is sort of wishy washy unless we understand their culture better, who knows, a male with no mate might be an embarassment, and to indicate such might be equally embarassing), or it could be simply be an indicator of "manhood", with no real purpose... Do you know if this is done to children as well?
I do not know if boys wear a penis string, or only men. Pre-pubescent boys might not have a long enough penis to be able to tie it up in this manner. The lecturer does not mention them, and I don't remember if the Vargas Llosa book does.
Hmmm, thinking about it more, maybe it originated from a desire to avoid tripping on it? (Sorry.) Here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanomami And here: "Within Yanomami society it is a clear indication that a boy has come of age when he begins to practice the custom of tying his penis to his waist string." http://www.pilotguides.com/destination_gui...omami_tribe.php And finally, "An interesting side note is that, among many tropical South American indians, the closure of the foreskin was regarded as the only point of propriety among the men, who otherwise were essentially naked. In other words, it was considered shameful for a man's glans penis to be seen in public, but completely acceptable for his genitals to otherwise be seen. In some tribes, such as in the Mato Grosso, the foreskin would be held shut by a clamping device made from a palm fronds. In other tribes, such as the Yanomami, the foreskin would be clamped into a string-like belt worn around the waist. In this case, the foreskin would tend to continue to grow as a result of the sustained tension, resulting in foreskins that had an overhang of possibly two inches or more." http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/lookup/encycl...o/Foreskin.html
Maggie! It's great to see your smiling face again. Could you perchance enlighten us about the latest Amazonian fashions for women?
