35,000-year-old Human Figurine: Oldest Ever?

1. Dave Hall
   May 13th, 2009 at 1:40 pm

   Obviously carved by a guy.

2. Gauldar
   May 13th, 2009 at 1:44 pm

   There you have it ladies, men have had their head in the gutter for 35,000 years. Abandon all hope for us, it ain't getting any better! But then again, it does prove that the whole misconception about the whole anorexic hourglass figure which has been hammered into our culture for so many years. Even men back then knew real women had curves! Damn, now I’m hungry for roasted chicken.

3. Geekazoid
   May 13th, 2009 at 2:18 pm

   Come on now, this is obviously a chicken!

4. DaveL
   May 13th, 2009 at 2:46 pm

   It is said that they eat the dead...

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5REaxl15uI&feature=PlayList&p=87EBD63B 927C0E02&index=0&playnext=1

5. Loomis
   May 13th, 2009 at 3:51 pm

   I sure do love the rubenesque woman. It's written into the genetic code of most men, seek out a nice a pair of...hips. Yeah, that too.

6. caitlin13
   May 13th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

   Are you sure? Cause it looks like a chicken.

7. Cashmere
   May 13th, 2009 at 5:18 pm

   It's pretty standard representation for neolithic female figures.

   The Venus of Willendorf is the most famous.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf

8. Byrd Brain
   May 13th, 2009 at 6:26 pm

   It’s pretty standard representation for internet know-it-alls.

   The Chasmere is not the best at it.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf_was not_made_in_the_neolithic_period,_but_upper paleolithic._And_this_roast_chicken_looking_one_is 10,000_years_older_than_that.

9. oezicomix
   May 13th, 2009 at 6:47 pm

   gotta love this: when asked about the possible meaning about the figurine (which was appearantly worn around the neck), archaeologist nicholas conrad replied: "i wasn't there 40,000 years ago, and bottom line, i haven't got a clue." (http://www.netzeitung.de/wissenschaft/1354379.html)

10. Vbnx
    May 13th, 2009 at 6:48 pm

    The well fed look was very desirable, it was a sign that life was good and there was plenty of food.

11. seefish3
    May 13th, 2009 at 7:16 pm

    I'd heard that before, Vbnx, and repeating it has caused a revelation...can we blame the media for making us fat by showing us primarily thinner people? Are we eating more because our heroes are all too thin?

    Perhaps a conspiracy theory deserving of it's own website?

    I gotta quit smokin' this stuff...

12. Gauldar
    May 13th, 2009 at 11:44 pm

    As much as I think Sigmund Freud was an idiot, sometimes a roast chicken is just a roast chicken.

13. medussa
    May 13th, 2009 at 11:44 pm

    Why are we all so convinced this was carved by a guy? Maybe this was early lesbian art? An advertising standup to inspire the girls at their Weight Watchers meeting? A kindergarten art project for Mother's Day?

14. GQ
    May 14th, 2009 at 8:10 am

    Amazing how similar it is to the The Venus of Willendorf! This is a very exciting find.

15. Foreigner1
    May 14th, 2009 at 8:38 am

    ....Soooooo Primitive.............

16. Gauldar
    May 14th, 2009 at 8:44 am

    @Medussa

    If a woman made it the head would be bigger or as big as the breasts. As for guys, we hardly notice that part until they start talking.

17. Foreigner1
    May 14th, 2009 at 9:55 am

    Why when we want to depict Christian religion, does the cross and the thorns on the head have all the attention...?

    If the priests or sjamans of this religion were women, they could also very well have made these all bums and breasts sculptures.

    In some African cultures it is still very sexy and desirable to be very fat and visibly Fertile.

18. Gauldar
    May 14th, 2009 at 10:44 am

    Baby got back!

19. Video Game Dork
    May 15th, 2009 at 1:44 am

    man, what if that's *exactly* what a woman looked like back then? AAAghhhhghhhhH!

20. an
    May 16th, 2009 at 2:10 am

    "This sculpture may look a little bit like a roast chicken, but don’t let that distract you"

    I LOL'd.

21. Ajan
    May 16th, 2009 at 3:26 am

    Obviously carved by a guy with peculiar tastes.. Ah, c'mon, women always liked to be slim

    Newaz, women back then had less work, so it is a bit obvious that all they had to do was (not watching TV) watching the drams in their villages or tribes and look after the house. No work back then (meant for laundry and stuff)

22. ted
    May 16th, 2009 at 1:03 pm

    Gauldar, they STOP talking?

23. Katey
    May 17th, 2009 at 11:02 pm

    Ajan, you're a riot.

24. Yang99Ying
    May 22nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm

    Looking at about half the comments here I think there is good evidence that evolution is running backwards.

    This figurine represents an incredible part of the common heritage of all people. There is no way to understand the context in which it was made but given that “porn” is a modern concept it is not “porn”. It reflects sexuality for sure but sexuality as it has been throughout most of the history of humanity. Mystic and spiritual, tied to pleasure and procreation, natural and supernatural. Interwoven with life.

    Over sexed nerds getting each other off with crude comments while drooling over internet images of digitally enhanced fantasy women are a new phenomenon. I doubt they will last as long as this and the other “Venus” figures.

    Some things deserve respect simply because of what they are.

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT