It sounds odd and funny at the same time but many guys, on social media, admitted their habit to get naked before sitting on the toilet to poop.
What comes out of the conversations is that this habit is not something casual but a real need, otherwise, it would be hard for them to poop.
However, each case is different: some do this only at home but others get naked every time they need to go to the toilet to take a poop whether they are at work, at friends’ houses, or in public bathrooms.
Some explained this practice started when they were children, during their potty training, to prevent their clothes from being covered in poop. So, since then, the habit has kept going.
Nevertheless, reading the other experiences turns out that preventing clothes from getting dirty is not the only explanation. Another reason seems to prevent clothes to stink with poop but someone else wrote that wearing clothes doesn’t make him feel comfortable because they compress too much.
While many express their motivations, everybody seems to share the feeling of being more comfortable when totally naked on the bowl and this also reduces stress and loosens muscles, including the sphincter. So, removing clothing can send your body a message that it’s time to relax and have a bowel movement.
Allegedly, this practice looks natural for men, even for those who don’t do it at all but it seems more strange for women instead.
Anyway, everybody seems to agree that pooping while naked brings men back to their animal instinct and makes them feel completely free from any rules when on the toilet. The toilet is a sort of island where men feel free to be like animals: relaxed but also wild.
Psychologist Dr. Stauffer-Kruse believes that for some men, their need to get naked stems from childhood toilet experiences.
“Some people may feel shame while on the toilet. It all stems back to their parents’ reactions to them when they are potty training and how they felt at that time”, the doctor said.
“They may have been told that poop and getting messy from it is shameful so they may react by wanting to get rid of their clothes: it makes them feel less psychologically, as well as physically, restricted”.
Stauffer-Kruse then explains that this can be because of “men’s fascination with being ‘primal’ and wanting to escape the roles that modern life has bestowed on them, and these roles are often connected to our clothes”.
“Some people just like being naked. You hear about people who sleep naked, clean naked, and of course, nudists: these people just like to celebrate their core selves without any constraints”.
So, the toilet is not just a place to take some time to be alone from the rest of the world and do things we can’t do outside like just reading without being disturbed. To this, we can add the connection to our deep self where our animal instinct lives, an instinct that wants: to be free from ordinary life rules, to be relaxed, to be disconnected from social roles and duties, but this instinct itself also wants to make us break taboos. And sitting naked on the bowl while pooping is the maximum expression of this idea. Maybe that’s the correlation with men having a boner while pooping because this feeling of freedom includes sex.
Source NYpost.com
Conservation biologist Joe Roman reveals how whale poop led to groundbreaking discoveries about ocean ecosystems…
A satirical art installation near the US Capitol features a poop-shaped monument mocking rioters and…
A concise history of Japanese toilets, highlighting Toto's role in revolutionizing bathroom culture and boosting…
LIXIL partners with Georgia Tech to develop G2RT, an off-grid toilet revolutionizing sanitation for billions…
8 strategies to muffling farts when you are in public or in front of the…
Innovative technological urinals in China can help men monitor their health by analysing their pee…
View Comments
"Everybody seems to agree" while completely made it up the statement yourself, not even in the NYT original article I found that "animal instinct" phrase thing.
Also, following the original article poster you kept mentioning "men" while the Mr. psychologist always went with the "people". There would be no reason for him to be weirdly indirect here, if what he meant was for it to be "men" he would've said it just like that.
Also again, he never said that "primal fascination" thing, that's completely bogus.
But it's NYT, can totally see that coming, but I don't know what you're up to by having made an even worse version of that article.