The mentioned sexual practice was extremely frowned upon during that period, basically only prostitutes were to do them and even in this case, only with huge amounts of received money, that, in the case they accepted, which in a lot of cases it wouldn't even happen.
Why was this? I can understan...
Hard to say how really horrible it was considered in people's actual bedrooms, but I suspect that a lot of what was outwardly looked down upon were acts that didn't require the parties involved have different gender.
Was it really considered so horrible? After all, didn't Queen Victoria's eldest son, 'Bertie' (the future King Edward VII) have a 'fellatio chair' designed for him at Le Chabanais in Paris?
Which are the reasons that practice was so frowned upon? You should also remember that hygiene was not what it is today, and that access to clean water was restricted. This alone should explain that...
What do you mean by Europe? There are many different countries here. Can you put here at least 2-3 examples of personal opinions on the subject, from different countries? In Pushkin's diaries a fellatio made by his wife was looked upon as rather a sign of excuse. No horror was meant, definitely. Maybe, it was connected with the different practice of washing in different countries? One wash in several months makes the subj really disgusting.
@Bregalad agreed with 1st part, but as for the second, do you think in England they had less water than in Sweden? No, they simply didn't wash themselves and because of that the use of water was little.
@rougon horrible it was for the active side, of course.
@sempaiscuba the question is, how much he had to pay for that? For some sums people accept horrible things.
@Gangnus Given the number of slang terms for fellatio in use in nineteenth century England, I'm guessing the act wasn't that uncommon. My understanding is that it wasn't at all uncommon in France (oral sex certainly appears in French art from the mid-nineteenth century. Perhaps not everyone shared your view of what was 'horrible'?
@sempaiscuba The term "horrible" is not mine, but belongs to the question. I am merely repeating it. But I don't like stinking unwashed body, you are right. And of course, people of XIX Cent. accepted that in more calm way, you are right, again. But I do not remember voluntary fellatio in works of De Sad. Do you?... I haven't met even a hint about fellatio in works of Zola. And sorry, about from the middle of XIX they started to wash once a month, so they could use oral sex after washing. Since those times they happened to be clean, sometimes at least.
@Gangnus Didn't Napoleon famously write "Je reviens en trois jours; ne te laves pas!" at the end of the eighteenth century? (Or it may have been "huit jours", according to Lettres d'amour à Joséphine, Fayard, 1981, p155). It seems that at least some people found the scent of the unwashed body appealing!
@sempaiscuba 1. Don't forget that smokers have very weak feeling for smell/taste. For example, my smoking friends could not distinct almost ANY herb tea except mint. So, maybe, he wanted to feel at least something. And 1wash/8 days for 1800y makes you absolutely clean. And you are right, some people like dirty smell - recall drinking from shoes. 2. Unwashed sex organs obtain not only smell, but also very unpleasant sight. 3. Does Napoleon mention fellatio in his letters?
@Gangnus I think that you (and the OP) are missing my point. Before you can say why people thought it was "horrible", you must first demonstrate that they did find it "horrible". I see plenty of indications from art and language that it happened, and there are no shortage of indicators that personal hygiene was considered less important (e.g. Napoleon's letter), but apart from the Church (who opposed any sexual activity not expressly for procreation), who was saying it was "horrible"? All I see here (and in your answer) is modern attitudes projected onto people of the past.
@Gangnus For example, in the modern world it is fairly easy to find examples where oral sex carries a stigma in particular communities - for example, Dizzee Rascal: “I'm not a Bocat, I don’t like the smell”. It is then legitimate to ask why that is the case. It's a question of evidence. If we do not have the evidence that a thing actually happened, then we cannot give a meaningful answer as to why that thing happened.
@sempaiscuba, I got the horrible point from the wikipedia entry about that in Spanish wikipedia, specially the part that explains :". It is recorded that prostitutes in Madrid could be reproached with the practice of fellatio, insultingly, against each other", I know that single fact cannot be generalized, but that even prostitutes get to insult other prostitutes for practicing fellatio gives the feeling that it was frowned upon to the extreme, I'm linking the translated entry to give context: goo.gl/BZ3ZQ7
@user2638180 The link doesn't work, but I would actually be more interested in the source cited for the quote in the Wikipedia article than the article itself. When someone says "it is recorded ...", my first question is always going to be "Where?". But you are right, I would also be concerned about generalising from a single quote on Wikipedia about something alleged to have happened in Madrid to attitudes across all of Spain, let alone all of Europe!
Discussion on question by user2638180…
Discussion on question by user2638180…