[noemon]

Pederasty by whose definition

Legally. Legal Pederasty did not exist.

[itzar]

Legally. Legal Pederasty did not exist.

Do you really think that? Can you deny that some kinds of sexual contact between free men and free boys was legal and acceptable? I agree that some kinds of paiderasteia were illegal and frowned upon, but clearly not all of them.

[noemon]

I agree that some kinds of paiderasteia were illegal and frowned upon, but clearly not all of them.

In my dictionary paiderasteia involves penetration, and penetration was banned, now if kissing or touching the but was allowed, i sincerely haven't seen any society that punishes the act of kissing or touching when there is consent.

[Potemkin]

In my dictionary paiderasteia involves penetration, and penetration was banned, now if kissing or touching the but was allowed, i sincerely haven't seen any society that punishes the act of kissing or touching when there is consent.

Luckily for President Putin....

[Doomhammer]

The ancient world was a sausage love fest, thank god for the world of now.

Can someone please summerize the arguments to one sentence so I may ridicule them with greater ease.

"... those boy loving philosophers from Athens..."
King Leonidas, 300.

[itzar]

In my dictionary paiderasteia involves penetration, and penetration was banned, now if kissing or touching the but was allowed, i sincerely haven't seen any society that punishes the act of kissing or touching when there is consent.

alright, I don't speak Greek and I'll give you that point.

But I don't just mean kissing - I mean touching private parts and having sex between the thighs - things that you wouldn't do in public or with a straight friend today - things that count as gay sex, but are not penetration.

[akritas]

The ancient world was a sausage love fest, thank god for the world of now.

Can someone please summerize the arguments to one sentence so I may ridicule them with greater ease.

"... those boy loving philosophers from Athens..."
King Leonidas, 300.

Tell us more, what are your arguments ?
Noemon and I were clear.There are Laws in ancient Greece that forbiden the pedearsty and homosexuality.

and take please an advice.Avoid Hollywood history

[Doomhammer]

Tell us more, what are your arguments ?
Noemon and I were clear.There are Laws in ancient Greece that forbiden the pedearsty and homosexuality.

I have none, I merely wished to point out the pointlesness of this enquiry. Frankly, it doesn't matter.

I do have a theory though, if you want hear it:

In ancient times, societies were more comunitarian, a result of poor living standards and greater reliance on each other. It is theorized by social psychologists that the more communitarian (especially crowded ones) the society, the greater the interaction among people and thus greater the physical contact among them.

Ancient Greeks were rather communitarian, correct? Also, people were generally concentrated in specific urban areas, i.e. city states.

Based on these, I say that in this air of friendship and closeness, Ancient Greeks probably made a lot of physical contact with each other, but I do doubt that these were homosexual or paedophillic in nature (although modern westerners would consider this to be "gay" because western society embraces individuality). Besides, I am yet to see a society (past or present) that embraces sexual abnormalities.

Note: Btw, I'm somehow supporting your argument.

and take please an advice.Avoid Hollywood history

Have you no respect for brave Leonidas?

[Alexandros]

It's easy to go through ancient literature and cherry-pick sentences that serve your political purpose - it's another thing to try and analyze these things with a broader knowledge of what they meant to the people who wrote them.

Political purpose .. this coming from the same individual that presented us wiki articles which quote Foucault, a Foucault who has openly debated that sexual relations with boys of the age of 12 should not be forbidden, Thomas K. Hubbard, Bernard Sergent, Percy, William A that were or are practicing homosexuals, yet you speak of purpose?!?

Next time lets find something from Pauline Tarn aka Renee Vivien, her lover, Natalie Barney, Gertrude Stein, Arlene Raven, Terry Wolverton in support of the distortion of Sappho's texts or what about the original fathers of this theory, Walter Pater, his "lover" John Addington Symonds and their little gang composed of Walt Whitman, Charles Kains-Jackson, Edward Carpenter, Graham Dakyns, Edmund Gosse, Horatio Brown, Joseph Ishill and last but not least, their publisher Henry Havelock Ellis..

That were the promoters of the distorted version originally suggested by yet another homosexual, Marsilio Ficino (1500's), in which the notion of Platonic love had nothing to do with the soul which was but a mere misconception, but instead bodily pleasure (to be exact, homosexual) were the only objective..

Throughout, the person who compiles this list fails to distinguish between those kinds of homosexual relations that are forbidden (penetration of freeborn males) and those that are not (with slaves, non-penetrative sex of freeborn youths).

This is the most common misconception that wiki intentionally promotes. Simple because those that seek knowledge from it, simply neglect to read the originals..

Demosthenes, "Against Meidias" 47

Law

If anyone assaults any child or woman or man, whether free or slave, or commits any unlawful act against anyone of these, any Athenian citizen who desires so to do, being qualified, may indict him before the Judges; and the Judges shall bring the case before the Heliastic Court within thirty days from the date of the indictment, unless some public business prevents, in which case it shall be brought on the earliest possible date.

I see that the translation I found may be a problem since the word presented is 'assault' while the original uses (hubrizêi).




And from my favorite,

Aeschines, "Against Timarchus" 16-17


[16]If any Athenian shall outrage a free-born child, the parent or guardian of the child shall demand a specific penalty. If the court condemn the accused to death, he shall be delivered to the constables and be put to death the same day. If he be condemned to pay a fine, and be unable to pay the fine immediately, he must pay within eleven days after the trial, and he shall remain in prison until payment is made. The same action shall hold against those who abuse the persons of slaves.

[17]Now perhaps some one, on first hearing this law, may wonder for what possible reason this word “slaves” was added in the law against outrage. But if you reflect on the matter, fellow citizens, you will find this to be the best provision of all. For it was not for the slaves that the lawgiver was concerned, but he wished to accustom you to keep a long distance away from the crime of outraging free men, and so he added the prohibition against the outraging even of slaves. In a word, he was convinced that in a democracy that man is unfit for citizenship who outrages any person whatsoever.

One huge glaring problem is where the compiler cites the prosecution of Timarchus by Aeschines - but fails to mention that elsewhere in the speech Aeschines himself admits to have repeated love affairs with boys and having made a nuissance of himself at the gymnasium following them.

You conveniently misquote Aeschines, I can only hope not intentionally.. Aeschines indeed does mention being a "lover" and a nuissance in gynasia, but you totally missed the specific description he provides for his conduct

15 The distinction which I draw is this: to be in love with those who are beautiful and chaste is the experience of a kind-hearted and generous soul; but to hire for money and to indulge in licentiousness is the act of a man who is wanton and ill-bred. And whereas it is an honor to be the object of a pure love, I declare that he who has played the prostitute by inducement of wages is disgraced. How wide indeed is the distinction between these two acts and how great the difference, I will try to show you in what I shall next say.

He then continues by the above reference to slaves..
So, in short, he's describing the true essence of the "erastes-eromenos" relationship which is expressed through Platonic love.

That said - Greek attitudes toward gay sex aren't exactly everything modern gay rights advocates are looking for either - but all together the point stands:

DON'T USE ANCIENT HISTORY TO SCORE POLITICAL POINTS

Actually the intentional manipulation of ancient Hellenic texts has become a nessecity for the homosexual community. By presenting it as accepted in ancient Hellas which is indeed perceived as the model for western civilization they attempt to justify their preference..

You seem to have forgotten that the topic is history..

You're not distinguishing between homosexual contact in general and the specific kinds of homosexual contact which were forbidden (whether they were called lewdness or hubris).

It was not ok to pay a citizen male for sex, or if one was a citizen male to be payed for sex, or to allow oneself to be penetrated. that was what stripped a man of his citizenship.

It was entirely ok to have sex with male slaves or foreigners for payment or not, so long as the citizen was the active partner. Doing so was not a crime.

ALL types of homosexual contact WERE forbidden, Aeschines clarifies that prostitution and homosexual relationships are banned, free-born or slave, ALL against laws.

It was also entirely ok to pursue citizen youths and have non-penetrative sexual contact with them, so long as no force or payment was involved. Aeschines admits to doing so, and is unashamed. He distinguishes acceptable homosexual contact from unnaceptable:

So he persued youths, does he not clearly mention chaste, kind-hearted and generous soul??
He does, so where his admittance to have participated in homosexual relations ??

Gork
I have always been a hetero supporter of gay rights up to and including full marriage in a church with no distinctions between gay and straight marriage. I guess since homosexuality isn't a big deal to me, I don't have encyclopedic knowledge of it.

Why is it that there must be some form of acceptance or disgust towards this preference in order to be interested in the topic in question ??
Is it really impossible to accept that someone is interested because he detests the intentional manipulation and exploitation of his history to promote someone's sexual preference ??

If you really think the ancient Greeks found homosexuality as abhorrent as you seem to, how do you explain all the vase paintings depicting gay sex? It seems to me that they must have considered these acts a normal and acceptable part of life to depict them on their pottery. I'd like to post some pictures here, but they are pretty explicit.

This is good.. so you have what is it, 20, 30, 50, 100 vases out of a total of over 100.000 vases unearther all over Hellas.. yeah that a huge percentage.. NOT EVEN A 0.000

This is the motto of those with a true political purpose..

It was perfectly acceptable for them to do the penetrating, so long as the man on the other end was a slave for a foreigner.

Aeschines trashed this..

And as for Aeschines, if the jury he was speaking to would be shocked and horrified by his admission that he enjoyed sexual contact with young men, why would he put that in his speech? As well, if gay sex was illegal, why wouldn't someone turn around and do to him what he was trying to do to Timarchus?

You resort to INTENTIONALLY MANIPULATING THE TEXT TO SUPPORT YOUR THESIS.. This is exactly how homosexuals try to legitimize their sexual preference or to suit the title "Abnormity"

"... those boy loving philosophers from Athens..."
King Leonidas, 300.

Finally a true historian..
HOLLYWOOD my fav kind of historians.

[Doomhammer]

Finally a true historian..
HOLLYWOOD my fav kind of historians.

Finally, someone who appreciates my sarcastic remarks.

[Alexandros]

Finally, someone who appreciates my sarcastic remarks. Laugh out loud

I can only hope it was indeed sarcasm.

[ruudgirl]

greeks encouraged pairings between men in their army, and certainly many of these relationships were sexual. it was thought that each man would fight better if he had someone he loved by his side that he was fighting for.

in ancient rome, often a younger well-born lad would be given a "patron," an older gentleman who would introduce him to social circles, sometimes arrange his marriage, and more often than not, engage in sexual activity with him.

i think that "homosexuality" is a fairly recent concept. sexual relations with members of either sex were not seen as mutually exclusive in these cultures. there was no pressure to "identify" as either gay or straight, in the way that we have come to define them.

an interesting study on sexuality was recently released: summarized here.

[noemon]

greeks encouraged pairings between men in their army, and certainly many of these relationships were sexual. it was thought that each man would fight better if he had someone he loved by his side that he was fighting for.

Symposium Of Plato.

This is the opinion of a man who has an open homo-sexual relationship and is under the influence of alcohol.

The Law did not allow it.

[ruudgirl]

The Law did not allow it.

source? i think we've established already that all of greece cannot be characterized by sparta.

and think of all the poems, the epics... if it were so frowned upon, why glorify achilles and patrocles? or... let's see, i can't remember where the story is from, but i remember listening to my sister translate it... a runner in the olympics and his lover in the same race, the one is out front, but slips on some blood from the earlier fights, and as he falls brings down the man in second place so that the lover could win??? (beautiful story, i've loved it from the first...)

[noemon]

source? i think we've established already that all of greece cannot be characterized by sparta.

Read the thread, Athens, Sparta, Thebes, Crete. sources have been established.

Not just Sparta.

By Law Homosexuality was banned. Penetration was banned both for underaged as well as among adults.

Some poems speak of love not of sexual love.

[ruudgirl]

laws concerning homosexuality came anno domini. my sister was a classics scholar. for clarification:

The earliest western documents (in the form of literary works, art objects, as well as mythographic materials) concerning same-sex relationships are derived from ancient Greece. They depict a world in which relationships with women and relationships with youths were the essential foundation of a normal man's love life. Same-sex relationships were a social institution variously constructed over time and from one city to another. The practice, a system of relationships between an adult male and an adolescent coming of age, was often valued for its pedagogic benefits and as a means of population control, and occasionally blamed for causing disorder. Plato praised its benefits in his early writings[citation needed], but in his late works proposed its prohibition.

In Rome, the pagan emperor Hadrian allegedly practiced homosexuality himself, but the Christian emperor Theodosius I decreed a law, on August 6th, 390, condemning passive homosexual people to be burned at the stake. Justinian, towards the end of his reign, expanded the proscription to the active partner as well (in 558) warning that such conduct can lead to the destruction of cities through the "wrath of God." Notwithstanding these regulations, taxes on brothels of boys available for homosexual sex continued to be collected until the end of the reign of Anastasius I in 518.

source=wikipedia[/url]

[Alexandros]

ruudgirl

source?

This is good, "my sis, translated a text which I can't remember but I on the other hand demand that you present a source !

How bout posting the exact text so we take it apart word by word.. Hey, by all means do invite your sis to aprove the accurate translation.

there was no pressure to "identify" as either gay or straight, in the way that we have come to define them.

Please do ask sis to translate and provide you with the etymology of the term "kunaidos" and then advise you on which would be the term they used to define "hetero-"
You'll see that in the future, you'll prefer reading someone that hasn't been totally discredited like J. Michael Bailey.

Good day.

[ruudgirl]

all right, alexandros, no need to get pissy. i am perfectly willing to admit my contradictions when they are pointed out to me. unlike SOME people, i do not always need to be "right" to be okay with myself.

anyway, i was not demanding a quote. simply where he had heard/read what he was asserting.

[Alexandros]

ruudgirl

I mean please.. your sis was a classics scholar and all you can come up with is wiki ?

Hell they ignore the very basics..
The very first artifact depicting a homosexual scene derives from Egypt and is dated to the 2nd mil.

[Alexandros]

all right, alexandros, no need to get pissy. i am perfectly willing to admit my contradictions when they are pointed out to me. unlike SOME people, i do not always need to be "right" to be okay with myself.

anyway, i was not demanding a quote. simply where he had heard/read what he was asserting.

Noone's getting "pissy" (well at least not yet ) . But my "request" (since thats how you'd prefer it titled) wasn't any different to yours.
So please do provide.