# How Can This Stupid Sears Catalog Be An Enduring Controversy? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [August 21, 2008, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839 "2008-08-21T19:52:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/1 "2008-08-21T19:52:35Z")
[http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5\_186.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5_186.html) (1) I agree with Cecil that it probably ain’t a male organ. (2) If it were, it’s barely visible. (3) If it were visible, so what? The picture for the briefs shows a telltale bulge. Men have penises. So what? (4) Unless I’m mistaken, I’ve seen more than a few newspaper circulars or catalogs hawking lacy/translucent women’s undergarments in which nipples or pubes are pretty clearly discernible. Why no controversy from those? ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/2 "2008-08-21T19:53:41Z")
Because, penises, ew. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/3 "2008-08-21T19:55:26Z")
[QUOTE=Cervaise] Because, penises, ew. [/QUOTE] And, I forgot to mention the entire canon of Eastern and Western statuary and art in which they are blithely and without much controversy on display. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2008, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/4 "2008-08-21T21:44:46Z")
Except for the ones that were fitted with plaster leaves during the Victorian era… ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2008, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/5 "2008-08-22T18:59:10Z")
Because, Sears didn’t carry penises in the Seventies. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2008, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/6 "2008-08-22T19:04:09Z")
[QUOTE=Thudlow Boink] Because, Sears didn’t carry penises in the Seventies. [/QUOTE] That didn’t keep all of us little gay boys from adding imaginary parts to the underwear models, though…I’m still surprised my mother didn’t wonder about me when I took the Sears and Penneys catalogs into the bathroom for 40 minutes at a time. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2008, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/7 "2008-08-22T19:51:39Z")
What makes you think it’s an enduring controversy? The only reason it’s coming up again now is because that old Cecil column came up in the rotation. All that says is that it was a controversy, once. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2008, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-this-stupid-sears-catalog-be-an-enduring-controversy/460839/8 "2008-08-22T21:24:31Z")
[QUOTE=Chronos] What makes you think it’s an enduring controversy? The only reason it’s coming up again now is because that old Cecil column came up in the rotation. All that says is that it was a controversy, once. [/QUOTE] Well, even his old column was prompted 22 years after the fact. Seems like it endured at least a lot longer than I would ever have imagined.