A psychologist studying Valentine’s day imagery has declared that the traditional “heart” symbol that becomes so prolific around this time of year was not actually inspired by the actual heart, but instead is based on an idealized representation of the female tushie as viewed from behind. To quote:
Myself, I had two thoughts on reading this story:
First, I wondered what “invagination” meant, and was a little excited at potentially discovering a new word to add to the ol’ sesquipedalian vocabulary. I was somewhat apprehensive about researching it at work though, since doing a Google search for any word that similar to “vagina” might make the IT folks think I was searching for porn. Until I figure out for sure, I’m just going to assume it means the little dimpling at the top between the two alleged “butt cheeks”.
Second, I have a problem with this logic. First off, granted, the heart is never “bright red in color” but how many women’s butts has he seen that were bright red in color*? Also, he says it can’t be a male butt because it’s too round, unlike the “angular, compact and slimmer” male butt. To which I respond with the question “Dude, have you not been watching the pairs figure skating competition? Those guys asses are just as big and even rounder than their lady partners**? Besides, whoever would describe a guys butt as “angular” either never looks at them or based their assessment entirely on episodes of Superfriends featuring Bizarro Superman.
You know, if I’m the President of Roanoke College right now, I’m thinking of investigating how the psychology department picks research topics…
* Not including baboon butts, of course
** Total non-sequiteur here, but how long do you think until same-sex skating pairs become an issue at the Winter Games?
"The twin lobes of the stylized version correspond roughly to the paired auricles and ventricles (chambers) of the anatomical heart," Pranzarone said, but added that the organ "is never bright red in color" and its "shape does not have the invagination at the top nor the sharp point at the base."
Myself, I had two thoughts on reading this story:
First, I wondered what “invagination” meant, and was a little excited at potentially discovering a new word to add to the ol’ sesquipedalian vocabulary. I was somewhat apprehensive about researching it at work though, since doing a Google search for any word that similar to “vagina” might make the IT folks think I was searching for porn. Until I figure out for sure, I’m just going to assume it means the little dimpling at the top between the two alleged “butt cheeks”.
Second, I have a problem with this logic. First off, granted, the heart is never “bright red in color” but how many women’s butts has he seen that were bright red in color*? Also, he says it can’t be a male butt because it’s too round, unlike the “angular, compact and slimmer” male butt. To which I respond with the question “Dude, have you not been watching the pairs figure skating competition? Those guys asses are just as big and even rounder than their lady partners**? Besides, whoever would describe a guys butt as “angular” either never looks at them or based their assessment entirely on episodes of Superfriends featuring Bizarro Superman.
You know, if I’m the President of Roanoke College right now, I’m thinking of investigating how the psychology department picks research topics…
* Not including baboon butts, of course
** Total non-sequiteur here, but how long do you think until same-sex skating pairs become an issue at the Winter Games?
Comments
This psychologist is full of crap. He "studied" 15 century literature??? What a bunch of nonsense.
Dipictions of the classic heart shape are so ANCIENT. Having the heart nice is symmetrical is appealing - that's why it's such an easily recognizable symbol.
You draw a symbol using the real heart as its inspiration, it'll just look like a reddish piece of poop.
This psychologist is a total moron.