And the Crop Circles?

Is it possible that Stonehenge is actually intended to be a representation of a giant pussy? Anthony Perks, a professor emeritus of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver seems to think so.

Think about it. At a time when worship of an Earth Mother goddess was common, wouldn't it make just as much sense for Stonehenge and other similar stone monuments to be have been built for use in fertility ceremonies as it would for them to be used for astronomical observations and predictions?

Perks proposes that a woman's labia majora could be Stonehenge's outer stone circle (and possibly the outer surrounding mound). The inner stone circle would then be the labia minora, the altar stone the clitoris, and the empty center outlined with bluestones is the vagina/birth canal.

I just have a few questions:

1. Do gynecologists see "female sexual anatomy" everywhere they look?


2. Or is that archaeologists never get to see "female sexual anatomy" and therefore can't recognize it even when it's huge, stone, and staring them in the face for centuries?


3. Would anyone be offended if the Harvard men's crew stopped by to build a snow Stonehenge? Just checking.

Comments:

• Dr. Anthony Perks controversial theory that Stonehenge was designed to symbolically represent a vulva when viewed by an “Eye in the Sky”… is now available online, as it was published in a short article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine in February 2003, in Abobe Acrobat pdf file format here.

  I highly recommend reading the complete article and looking at the pictures it shows before coming to any final conclusions about the “Vagina Monoliths” and any possible premature ejaculation of opinions…

  Posted by Robin Edgar  on  07/29/03  at  08:46 AM
  
  

• Well put! And thanks for the link. Interesting reading and possibly a bit more convincing… and it’s a naughty bit, too… than the initial media reports.

  Posted by Prospero  on  07/29/03  at  09:00 AM
  
  

• Thanks

  These “web sights” are worth a look too. The latter is a work in progress that will evolve considerably over the coming weeks and months but is a bit sparse right now…

  Please feel free to read my letter to the editors of The Observer that denounces David Miles irresponsible gratuitous dismissal of Dr. Anthony Perks Stonehenge theory here -

  <a href="http://treasuresofdarkness.homestead.com/stonehengeletter1.html" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://treasuresofdarkness.homestead.com/stonehengeletter1.html" rel="nofollow">http://treasuresofdarkness.homestead.com/stonehengeletter1.html</a></a>

  The first page of my new “Vagina Monoliths” “web sight” dedicated to further exloring and expanding upon Dr. Perek’s Stonehenge Theory may be read here -

  <a href="http://vaginamonolithstonehenge.homestead.com/anthonyperksarticle1.html" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://vaginamonolithstonehenge.homestead.com/anthonyperksarticle1.html" rel="nofollow">http://vaginamonolithstonehenge.homestead.com/anthonyperksarticle1.html</a></a>

  Posted by Robin Edgar  on  07/31/03  at  02:01 PM
  
  
Page 1 of 1 pages

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

<< Back to main