• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

Were females breast flogged to ribbons before crucifixion?

Go to CruxDreams.com
Some measure of propriety perhaps? There are a few things in history that particular societies didn't prefer be brought to light, and were therefore left out of their records. In the last example it is mentioned that some tried to protest the executions on the basis of gender, I'm sure there were those that supported inequality of punishment.
It is a crime to bind a Roman citizen; to scourge him is a wickedness; to put him to death is almost parricide. What shall I say of crucifying him? So guilty an action cannot by any possibility be adequately expressed by any name bad enough for it. -- Cicero
Artistic representations of any crucifixion would've been harder to imagine in Ancient Rome than, say, naturalistic scenes of Newgate hangings by Constable or Gainsborough, until Christianity took root.

Actually, there is just one ancient visual portrayal of crucifixion I can think of outside all Christian context--the Alkimilla graffito, which is commonly regarded to show a woman.
 
No...
Women were never executed by this method...
Simple rule. Females are much more valuable.

I think the ultimate answer to this is supplied by Skating Jesus. He has uncovered the chronicles of the ancient kingdom of Andaroos. In them we learn that king Vanerys has solved the value problem by conquering his neighbors to bring in innumerable, beautiful, large busted slave girls to use as sex slaves and crucify. By my count, 99.9% of crucifixions are sexy girls, many heavily whipped and tortured. The perfect answer to the question.
 
Did the Romans flog a females breasts to ribbons before crux?

Since they didn't bother documenting what they did I suspect they did whatever made sense (or pleased them) at the time.

There is no reason to believe modern cruelty is any worse or less worse than it was during the times of Rome. Sadism and sexual cruelty seem to be a universal constant therefore it is something inside humans which make (some of us) do these things and have (some of us) enjoy having things done to them.

The one thing that seems to be different about Roman law than other cultures (Carthage for example) that used cruxing as a penalty is that citizens couldn't be cruxed. However citizens were a relatively small percentage of the total population and you could be stripped of it.

As to what happened to martyrs you have to remember that their stories are religious propaganda (not that they didn't suffer and die) so that being stoic during a particularly horrific death feeds the religious mythology. You should believe everything you read on the internet, I think we can safely say that applies to every time period in history.

I'd bet good money that female martyrs weren't the only women to have their breasts cut off.

kisses

willowfall
 
Since they didn't bother documenting what they did I suspect they did whatever made sense (or pleased them) at the time.

There is no reason to believe modern cruelty is any worse or less worse than it was during the times of Rome. Sadism and sexual cruelty seem to be a universal constant therefore it is something inside humans which make (some of us) do these things and have (some of us) enjoy having things done to them.

The one thing that seems to be different about Roman law than other cultures (Carthage for example) that used cruxing as a penalty is that citizens couldn't be cruxed. However citizens were a relatively small percentage of the total population and you could be stripped of it.

As to what happened to martyrs you have to remember that their stories are religious propaganda (not that they didn't suffer and die) so that being stoic during a particularly horrific death feeds the religious mythology. You should believe everything you read on the internet, I think we can safely say that applies to every time period in history.

I'd bet good money that female martyrs weren't the only women to have their breasts cut off.

kisses

willowfall
As I noted when I quoted the Eulalia martyrdom in The Agent, The Girl, and the Fidelistas, after all those tortures, the killed her by ... she was still alive!, No one could be alive at that point! A clear bit of exaggeration in the propaganda.

I think your first sentence says it all. If you were a slave accused (same as convicted for a slave) of a bad crime like rebellion or attacking citizens, they did whatever the hell they wanted to you. The "Great Writ" (habeus corpus) despite its Latin name, was more than a dozen centuries in the future.
 
There is pretty good evidence that violence overall is much lower than it was in earlier days. https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010/
I think that is very true in London, Amsterdam, San Francisco, etc. Maybe not in some parts of Africa, Middle East and Asia.

Thomas Hobbes described the natural state of mankind (the state pertaining before a central government is formed) as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" Rather true before modern science, medicine, and Liberal political philosophy.
 
There is pretty good evidence that violence overall is much lower than it was in earlier days. https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010/

Considering that no one kept "crime statistics" until relatively recently any "evidence" we have is mostly a figment of our imagination. A belief that we are 'better' than those in the past gives us a sense of moral superiority. (An excuse by the way that has been used by every conquering power since they started recording history and most powers conducting an 'intervention'. And mosy people wanting to change another culture.)

If you add up the casualties from both World Wars (to say nothing of the rest of the 20th Century) I suspect that we'd give the Roman Empire a very good run for its money on cruelty. And they have several more centuries in the books to run up their tally.

I'd say staving millions to death (Stalin) to gassing them (Hitler) to incinerating the better part of two cities with a single bomb (Truman) doesn't indicate any obvious moral superiority of modern humans over ancient ones.

NOW before ANYBODY gets up in arms over my examples, all I am saying is that when push comes to shove even the best of our cultures can do horrible things in order to survive (or reduce its own casualties). Rome, etal, faced the same pressures and responded in the methods they thought best.

We like to fool ourselves into thinking we are better than the other guy. It helps us sleep at night.

You know when we actually are BETTER? When we remind ourselves that we aren't and we actively suppress the beast inside of us.

kisses

willowfall
 
I think that is very true in London, Amsterdam, San Francisco, etc. Maybe not in some parts of Africa, Middle East and Asia.

Thomas Hobbes described the natural state of mankind (the state pertaining before a central government is formed) as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" Rather true before modern science, medicine, and Liberal political philosophy.

And the there was period in Greek Philosophy when they considered warfare man's natural state and peace unnatural.

I don't walk down the street looking to kill people. I think if someone tried to rape or murder me, I could respond with deadly force. I know my brothers would if someone went to rape me.

Actually, I hope any decent person would be willing to use deadly force to defend the helpless or weak.

kisses

willowfall
 
Considering that no one kept "crime statistics" until relatively recently any "evidence" we have is mostly a figment of our imagination. A belief that we are 'better' than those in the past gives us a sense of moral superiority. (An excuse by the way that has been used by every conquering power since they started recording history and most powers conducting an 'intervention'. And mosy people wanting to change another culture.)

If you add up the casualties from both World Wars (to say nothing of the rest of the 20th Century) I suspect that we'd give the Roman Empire a very good run for its money on cruelty. And they have several more centuries in the books to run up their tally.

I'd say staving millions to death (Stalin) to gassing them (Hitler) to incinerating the better part of two cities with a single bomb (Truman) doesn't indicate any obvious moral superiority of modern humans over ancient ones.

NOW before ANYBODY gets up in arms over my examples, all I am saying is that when push comes to shove even the best of our cultures can do horrible things in order to survive (or reduce its own casualties). Rome, etal, faced the same pressures and responded in the methods they thought best.

We like to fool ourselves into thinking we are better than the other guy. It helps us sleep at night.

You know when we actually are BETTER? When we remind ourselves that we aren't and we actively suppress the beast inside of us.

kisses

willowfall
There is neither time nor space to summarize the data presented in a 700 page book. Read it and we can talk. The data is very strong.

The argument is not that people today are morally superior, but that structures have been put in place to curb our baser instincts.
 
I think if someone tried to rape or murder me, I could respond with deadly force. I know my brothers would if someone went to rape me.
Ingma Bergman Virgin Spring I saw it when I was 20. I went in with the callousness of an immature youth (with S&M fantasies) till to stupid to fully disconnect RL from those fantasies. I confess with terrible guilt and shame was looking forward to the rape, and not totally as fantasy rape. The film effected my deeply and started my since fully developed hatred of rape and abuse of women. I m not a violent person, I've never owned or fired a gun or even have a hunting knife. But given the chance, I would probably try to kill the rapist of someone I knew.
 
I'll make one other point-the existence of this site suggests that most of us have little real fear of ever experiencing the horrors depicted here, because I suspect that those actually facing torture, crucifixion or what have you wouldn't have much interest in discussing the fine points.
 
And crucifixion was not the only Roman horror. Have you ever looked up the punishment for patricide (poena cullei)? A vestal virgin who was defiled (had sex) was buried alive in a tomb underground. With some food and water to make it last longer!
 
Did the Romans flog a females breasts to ribbons before crux?

It would take a special whip for breast meat to be "flogged to ribbons", and an average whip would simply go on scarring the woman. The scars may mount up, but we must presume she would not have her breasts cut up using an average whip.

Certain whips could achieve such a result, but they would not be carried about my a roman soldier unless there was a need.

lasher:
Your idea is extremely erotic and I'd love to see it happen. I have fantasies related to my wife as a victim, not only of crucifixion but of severe torture. Since I'm turned on by a woman having her nipples and the front of her breasts being cut from her, and even a woman being completely debreasted, what you wrote is for me an incredible turn on.
 
It would take a special whip for breast meat to be "flogged to ribbons", and an average whip would simply go on scarring the woman. The scars may mount up, but we must presume she would not have her breasts cut up using an average whip.

Certain whips could achieve such a result, but they would not be carried about my a roman soldier unless there was a need.

lasher:
Your idea is extremely erotic and I'd love to see it happen. I have fantasies related to my wife as a victim, not only of crucifixion but of severe torture. Since I'm turned on by a woman having her nipples and the front of her breasts being cut from her, and even a woman being completely debreasted, what you wrote is for me an incredible turn on.
I too appreciate the thought. But unfortunately the wording of the question causes a problem with answering with historical accuracy. Better questions would be:
Were women crucified?
If they were, were they subjected to frontal whipping, especially sexually directed?
Finally, were their breasts "flogged to ribbons" YEAH!!!
 
Were women crucified?
Indeed...

If we are talking about the methods of tortures that were developed for women only.
Yes, breasts tortures could be obvious method. But what exactly they have been doing with breasts? Breasts ripper? Pliers? Special mashers?

Pear, you say?
No, i don't think so... Too difficult... For the dreamers and worshipers who loves to descript "bulges" on the bellies and other fantastic things this method is very lovely place for the creativity.

Everything is simple
800px-16XX_Daumenschraube_anagoria.JPG
 
I believe that in real life mutilations are ALWAYS useless. In fantasy, if minor mutilation does not interfere with the large action, the thought can be stimulating. Can it not?

Any description, for instance, of cutting of breasts (in fantasy) will totally turn me off. But my description of the hooks above arouses me. Are we allowed our own fantasies on CF, it we don't force them on others (and NEVER force anything on another person in RL)?
These have been hard to find
tumblr_nk34dhFQpw1tvmbtao1_500.jpgtumblr_ntw2a1RcEI1s39k3wo1_1280.jpgtumblr_o4uyslxYYF1uatbw8o1_500.giftumblr_ojqizk6IKS1s4jw4io1_500.giftumblr_onfpew5EGz1w250xho1_500.jpg
Although I find hooks as such don´t erotic, it´s the context that matters. In the right situation, if the scene is comprehensible, as a part of a torture it can turn me on. I´m sure there are not only guys but also women out there who think the same.
 
Indeed...

If we are talking about the methods of tortures that were developed for women only.
Yes, breasts tortures could be obvious method. But what exactly they have been doing with breasts? Breasts ripper? Pliers? Special mashers?

Pear, you say?
No, i don't think so... Too difficult... For the dreamers and worshipers who loves to descript "bulges" on the bellies and other fantastic things this method is very lovely place for the creativity.

Everything is simple
View attachment 620909
Well, everyone has their vices Alex.

Whipping breasts to shreads just seems needlessly extra. She’s already whipped and crucified. She’ll suffer just fine, anything else done to the condemned is merely to sate the bloodlust (or regular lust) of the executioner.
 
Back
Top Bottom