Ok, I’ve now officially seen it all! A shit eating fetish!? :eek:
No, no…One has to be mentally ill to be into this sort of thing. There is no other explaination.
Now, excuse me while I go to the bathroom and hurl my breakfast!
At the moment, at straighdope.com, there are three classics and one staff report. And this, this, is the question Cecil chooses to answer. Criminetly.
Those who have met Cecil note he is easily recognizable by his shit-eating grin.
Well…it is gross…smearing it as part of sex play I can kinda see…but actually INGESTING it? There is a REASON why your body has that stuff in it’s out box.
ANYONE who finds it erotic must be sick…If you want to lose your lunch…check out the Wikkipedia entry on this (not linking to it b/c I have good taste)
I think actually copropagia can be seen in the S&M scene (feces ingestion as part of a severe punishment scene) but ANYONE who finds that shit (no pun intended) erotic, has to be off their rocker!
This question pops up every now and then in GQ.
Here is the last one that I can remember - Will eating your own feces make you sick?. Of course, before you head over there, you may want to check out this thread - What can I eat/drink to make my farts smell like roses?.
As I’ve noted in the past, the book End Product: The Last Taboo covers things of this nature. One of my most bizarre book purchases. I think they only cite one case of coprophagia, though, and it wasn’t in a sexual context, oddly enough.
That illustration was nasty, but oddly enchanting. I love the look on the lady pinching off a loaf on the guy’s plate.
…for an exhaustive (and, at times, exhausting) description of MANY variations on the coprophogy theme, check out the Marquis de Sade’s 120 Days of Sodom. I think it’s probably safe to say that there has never been another book in which so MUCH fecal matter is consumed. Pretty gross, but definitely interesting to the student of human nature, or pervert. I consider myself both…
Thanks to this thread, I almost wrote “defecation” in place of “desecration” on my English Lit final.
I think I need to stop doing homework while I read the SDMB. Otherwise, I might end up in one of vivalostwages’ essay threads.
Robin
To turn the subject away from mere eeuw-dom for a while, Cecil says:
Easy. Magical thinking. Had it been something else, headache, coughing, acne, well, then I’d be stumped. But dysentery? 'tsobvious.
Now, I know Cecil was just joking when he said:
But I want to know the reason why some dogs are so keen on eating shit. And why, when dogs have a sense of smell roughly almost 40 times better than us, they can put their snouts aprox half an inch from a nice steaming pile and really savour the aroma for a long time.
I’ve heard that dogs roll in various faces (and other nasty stuff, like roadkills) to hide their own smell when hunting (this makes sense), but eating it?
I always knew that Mikey would eat anything, but this is a good deal worse than Life Cereal.
And what did the inquirer have in mind by asking what is dangerous about eating shit, but specifically excluding sickness-related dangers? Moral dangers? Legal dangers?
Falling toilet seats?
At the risk of blaspheming, perhaps Cecil is not the right person to discuss this question, thus I give you:
http://www.portlandmercury.com/2001-04-26/savage.html
http://www.portlandmercury.com/2001-05-17/savage.html
http://www.portlandmercury.com/2001-05-31/savage.html
Don’t know if that helps any more, but it does suggest that Mikey is not alone (except in his willingness to talk about it to his sister.)
Anyway, sisnce no one else will, I feel I must come to the defence of the shit eaters. That is, as far as saying (unless their prediliction causes them to accoust strangers in public bathroom stalls) I don’t think they’re mentally ill. That, I should say, is as far as I defend them, my opinion is pretty much the same as Mr. Savage’s. But…
I think the idea of corprophagy is not so bizarre, at least in the already bizarre world of human sexuality. It’s about some combination of two things…
Intimacy- A basic element of sexuality, where the lover’s saliva, come, sweat…bellybutton lint? and other things that would be icky in other contexts are erotic in an erotic context. Same impulse, taken to a rather unwholesome extreme.
And Degradation - A common element of perfectly normal sadomaoschist behavior (of course if the phrase “prefectly normal sadomasochistic behavior” don’t make any sense to you then neither will anything else I say 
).
At any rate, while Ithink it’s disgusting and more importantly, unhealthy, I don’t think it’s pathological. Beyond what ever intestinal bugs you might pick up.
Oh, and Mr. Freakazoid, if you’re realy going to hurl, you know there are a quite a number of porns sites that would be interested in a download of the proceeding. Yes, NOW you’ve seen everything :D.
Well, then from various authorities that I trust (no I’m not going to go into all the, er, messy details), many if not most investment bankers are mentally ill. The reason that the article Unca Cece cited was the first non-psychotic case written up is that mose people into this have the good decency not to go, um, smearing it in everybody’s face.
I wonder how many cophiphillics are into it b/c it’s just SO KINKY!?!?!?!
It irritates the fuck out of me hearing about people who are into sex acts b/c it’s just SO KINKY!!! The link at Wikkipedia leads you to some VERY heavy stuff…look at the profiles and a lot of those folks are either people who are into the KINK scene or are the types who use uppers during sex.
In that link, a reader sent in another related question:
Sounds like this would be the “appetizer” before the main course. 
You go, Unca Cece! Stay at the top of your game.
Slug! You’re still disgusting.
You know, James Joyce was a big devotee of eproctophilia. And nobody would call him mentally ill (well, ok, anyone who’s tryed to read Finnigan’s Wake… )
No, no, NO. Sorry about the caps, but this is an extreme case.
No, for God’s sake, Mikey, does not “eat anything.” Goddamn it, people! Why, why, do I keep encountering this same mistake?
I assume we’re all familiar with the old Life Cereal commercial. But apparently a fairly large portion of the adult U.S. population has somehow completely reversed the wording and meaning of the salient line. Here’s the actual dialogue from the commercial, with the essential line bolded:
Kid 1: What’s this stuff?
Kid 2: Some cereal. It’s s’pposed to be good for you.
Kid 1: Are you gonna try it?
Kid 2: I’m not gonna try it – you try it.
Kid 1: I’m not gonna try it!
Kid 2: I know! Let’s get Mikey!
Kid 1: Yeah! He won’t eat it; he hates everything!
Mikey chows down.
Kid 2: He likes it! Hey, Mikey!
Okay; you see how that advertisement works? Life is such a tasty cereal that even a kid who “hates everything” will enjoy it! Clear, powerful message. Jupiter’s balls, everybody, how could it be any simpler?
Now substitute “he’ll eat anything” for “he hates everything” in the above dialogue. Doesn’t make any sense, does it? What kind of incompetent halfwit of an advertiser would try to sell a cereal by saying that it appeals to children who are already willing to “eat anything”? Obviously, that’s not the line.
Honestly, do people just not think about what they’re saying? It’s not a matter of remembering a specific line, but of basic logic. That’s it. Between this and the shit-eating, I’m already in mourning for our once-promising civilization.
Ah, the Christ.