Tollerance of Sexual Abnormities in Ancient Greek and Rome - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Rome, Greece, Egypt & other ancient history (c 4000 BCE - 476 CE) and pre-history.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By marlin33
#1178397
I just know that the two different cultures, though both containing homosexual vibes, treated homesexulaity very differently.
From my limited base of knoledge, it seems that it was ok for Romans to "give it" but not "take it". It was a power thing, act of submission etc.
Greeks seemed to use it for instruction and growth.
That is just what I know, I hope somebody else can elaborate, or prove me wrong.
By itzar
#1179215
homosexuality in ancient Greece and Rome is a pretty complicated topic.

For the Greeks (which really means 'Athenians' because they're the Greeks we know the most about) - homosexual love was the highest kind (even the only kind). relationships between an older man and a younger man of equal status where no one was being forced or payed to do anything (and where no acutal anal sex happened) were idealized. These relationships were viewed as central to a young man's education - and the older man served as the younger man's patron and teacher, introducing him around and giving him a start in life. These relationships were called 'paiderasteia' (love of boys/youths).


One pair of male lovers was credited with brining down an Athenian tyrant (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmodius_and_Aristogeiton). Male-male relations between freeborn men were seen as closely connected to freedom.

In Rome these relationship were frowned upon. however, in both Greece and Rome there was no shame attached to being attracted to members of the same sex, or with sleeping with them so long as they were your social inferiors and you were giving, not taking.

It's important to note that ancient people had no concept of 'gay' or 'straight' people - they didn't define people by their sexual attractions. Men who preferred sleeping with other men were still expected to marry and carry on the family - but they were not shamed or looked down on for their desires.

I hope that answers your question. For more info this article is good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece
User avatar
By Sandzaklija
#1179238
Thank you for your post.


I read that in Olympic Games in Greece, had homosexuals no acces even to view. Is this true?
User avatar
By noemon
#1183665
Homo-sexuality was banned in Ancient Greece by Law.

Spartan Laws:

Xenophon, Constitution of the Lacedaemonians
2.13

[13] The customs instituted by Lycurgus were opposed to all of these. If someone, being himself an honest man, admired a boy's soul and tried to make of him an ideal friend without reproach and to associate with him, he approved, and believed in the excellence of this kind of training. But if it was clear that the attraction lay in the boy's outward beauty, he banned the connexion as an abomination; and thus he caused lovers to abstain from boys no less than parents abstain from sexual intercourse with their children and brothers and sisters with each other.


Xenophon, Symposium (The Banquet)
8.70

But the men of Lacedaemon, holding that "if a man but lay his hand upon the body and for lustful purpose, he shall thereby forfeit claim to what is beautiful and noble"--do, in the spirit of their creed, contrive to mould and fashion their "beloved ones" to such height of virtue,[71] that should these find themselves drawn up with foreigners, albeit no longer side by side with their own lovers,[72] conscience will make desertion of their present friends impossible. Self-respect constrains them: since the goddess whom the men of Lacedaemon worship is not "Shamelessness," but "Reverence.


Plutarch’s Lives Lycurgus
XVII 4

Their lovers and favorers, too, had a share in the young boy’s honor or disgrace; and there goes a story that one of them was fined by the magistrates, because the lad whom he loved cried out effeminately as he was fighting.



Plutarch’s Lives Lycurgus
XIV. 4

Nor was there any thing shameful in this nakedness of the young women; modesty attended them, and all wantonness was excluded. It taught them simplicity and a care for good health, and gave them some taste of higher feelings, admitted as they thus were to the field of noble action and glory. Hence it was natural for them to think and speak as Gorgo, for example, the wife of Leonidas, is said to have done, when some foreign lady, as it would seem, told her that the women of Lacedæmon were the only women of the world who could rule men; “With good reason,” she said, “for we are the only women who bring forth men.”


Claudius Ailianus 'History' III.12

Spartan 'love' had nothing to do with shamefulness, if there ever was any such a suspicion since they would have brought shame upon Sparta. The result would be the exile of both of the loss of their lives..


Maximus of Tyre "Declamations' 20.e

'Any male Sparta that admires a Lakonian youth, admires him only as we would a very beautiful statue. For bodily pleasures of this type are brought upon them by Hubris and are forbidden..

A few Athenian Laws:

It is forbidden to whoever has given himself as prostitute or a girl or boy to be a council of the state

Aischines Against Timarch 5.2

Whoever Athenian gives his body to be had(sexually) by another man is forbidden to be elected as one of the nine lords and be a priest or lawyer or any place in public office or any other position internal or external by voting or chance and never to be sent as messenger never to speak before the parliament or the forum (Agora) or to enter in public temples or take part in public festivals or wear the festive ring of Demeter and enter the market.
Whoever condemned thus breaks the following prohibitions must be tied <<δησαντων αυτον>> and once the civilians have tied him to be delivered to the eleven to be slain before the day has passed

Aischines Against Timarch 52. 1



Contemporary Historians on the Myth of Homo Sexuality:

Adonis Georgiadis:

We learn as well that "Athens had the strictest laws pertaining to homosexuality of any democracy that has ever existed" (62). In non-democratic Sparta, as well as in democratic Crete and the rest of democratic Hellas, there were similar prohibitions with similar punishments as that meted out in Athens, and Georgiades gives us citations galore to prove his main thesis: "At no time, and in no place, was this practice considered normal behavior, or those engaged in it allowed to go unpunished" (passim). In order to remove any doubt whatsoever, he draws on such ancient luminaries as Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Diodorus Seculus, Euripides, Homer, Lysias, Plato, Plutarch and Xenophon, all of whom have left a written record as to what the prevailing norms were concerning this behavior. He also covers Greek vase painting, Mythology and Lesbianism, while not neglecting to reveal the truth about such much-maligned personalities from Hellas' glorious past as Achilles and Patroclus, Alcibiades and Socrates, Alexander the Great and Hephaestion, and the woman that the later Greeks regarded as "the greatest of the lyric poets," Sappho.



Greek vase painting has been a favorite source for the distorters of Greek culture and civilization. Georgiades points out that, of the tens of thousands of vases unearthed so far (the count for just the province of Attica, where Athens is located, is over 80,000), only 30 or so have an overtly homosexual theme; representing, in other words, just .01% of the total (127). When one compares this small percentage to what we see today on TV, in ads, books, magazines, the cinema, etc., one can just imagine what future generations will think of us. There is more, much more, but the purpose of this review is to stimulate the reader to order the book to see for himself just how Georgiades has managed to shed the light of truth on this important aspect of Greek history.



There is one more thing, however, that must be said. Georgiades has -- in a clear and easy-to-comprehend manner -- delineated the difference between what the ancients meant when they used the words "Erastis" and "Eromenos," and the way these words are translated and used in our time. This alone is worth the price of the book. Briefly, to the ancient Greeks, the term Erastis denoted a man who mentored, in a non-physical way, an Eromenos. The Eromenos was in all cases a beardless youth who looked up to and respected his mentor, and who had been commissioned by the boy's parents to take on the vital chore of preparing him to assume the roles of husband, father, soldier, and active citizen in the affairs of his community. Georgiades delves deeply into this relationship, and explains how and why these terms have come today to be confused with the "dominant" and "passive" partners in an homosexual union.



We can only be grateful that there are still young men around like Adonis Georgiades who want only to see that the truth is told about the country they love. This book is highly recommended, and though it has been published only in Greek to date, we sincerely hope to see an English language edition in the near future.


Adonis Georgiades, Debunking the Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece (Omofilofilía Stín Archéa Ellátha: O Mýthos Katareëi).


W.C. Lacey (1968), a brilliant Cambridge classical scholar wrote, in his comprehensive examination of family life of ancient Greece:


"We are sometimes told that the Greeks were fully bisexual, enjoying both homosexual and heterosexual intercourse, and that romantic love in Greece was associated with attachments to boys and not to girls. Whatever the truth of the latter statement, there can be no doubt that, while the Greeks had a deep admiration for the physical beauty of the young male, in Athens the practice of sodomy was strictly circumscribed by law.
Boys still at school were protected against sexual assaults by a law (said to go as far back as Dracon and Solon), and we hear of strict regulations about schools with this in mind; schoolboys always had a paidagogos escorting them; in art the paidagogos is always depicted as carrying a long and heavy stick; what was this for if not to protect their charges?"[62]



Crete:

Again, in Plato's Laws, in a scene laid in Crete, and on a walk from Cnosus to the grotto of Zeus on Mount Ida on a long midsummer's day, the conversation related here between three old men took place.
Of the three, one is an Athenian (Stranger), one (Clinias) a Cretan, and one (Megillus) a Spartan. The protagonist is the Athenian (Stanger), and nearly all the talking is done by him. ...

"The choice of their nationality, however, is significant, since the main body of the laws framed for the Model City [in their dialogue] is derived from the codes actually in force in Athens, Sparta, and Crete" (p. viii in the introduction. Emphasis added).

The three elderly men are discussing the ways that which is "honorable and shameful" shall be established. And [the ways] those who are "of depraved character, whom we describe as 'self-inferior,'... shall be hemmed in by three kinds of force and compelled to refrain from law-breaking."

Clinias: "What kinds?"

Athenian Stranger:
"That of godly fear, and that of love of honor, and that which is desirous of fair forms of soul, not of fair bodies. The things I now mention are, perhaps, like the visionary ideals in a story; yet in fair truth, if only they were realized, they would prove a great blessing in every State. Possibly, should God so grant, we might forcibly effect one of two things in this matter of sex-relations, -- either that no one should venture to touch any of the noble and freeborn save his own wedded wife, nor sow any unholy and bastard seed in fornication, nor any unnatural and barren seed in sodomy, -- or else we should entirely abolish love for males, and in regard to that for women, if we enact a law that any man who has intercourse with any women save those who have been brought to his house under the sanction of Heaven and holy marriage, whether purchased or otherwise acquired, if detected in such intercourse by any man or woman, shall be disqualified from any civic commendation, as being really an alien, -- probably such a law would be approved as right. So let this law -- Whether we ought to call it one law or two -- be laid down concerning sexual commerce and love affairs in general, as regards right and wrong conduct in our mutual intercourse due to these desires."

Megillus: "For my own part, Stranger, I should warmly welcome this law"
(VIII. 841 c - e).

-----------

Sparta:

Plutarch wrote:
Affectionate regard for boys of good character was permissible, but embracing them was held to be disgraceful, on the ground that the affection was for the body and not for the mind. Any man against whom complaint was made of any disgraceful embracing was deprived of all civic rights for life. (Ancient Customs of the Spartans, 7. 237 - c.)



Macedonia:

About Alexander the Great, Plutarch wrote:
When ... the governor of the coast-lands of Asia Minor wrote to Alexander that there was in Ionia a youth, the like of whom for bloom and beauty did not exist, and inquired in his letter whether he should send the boy on to him, Alexander wrote bitterly in reply, "Vilest of men, what deed of this sort have you ever been privy to in my past that now you would flatter me with the offer of such pleasures?"
(On The Fortune of Alexander, 333 a - b.)

Thebes:

Here in Thebes we find the first seen "strying from normality" is Laios. Laios, known to most because of his son Oidipus. Laios was the first "kunaidos" according to Hellinic mythology/history.
Laios had abducted and raped Chrysippos, for this, Pelops cursed him to be killed by his own son.
So we find that the first ever recorded "pederast" was cursed and due to this curse, his whole family line was wiped out thanks to his "unatural activity".

We find that Oidipus married his mother (without knowing it) she kills herself and he blinds himself never to be heard of again.
The 4 children born by this unwanted marriage are also doomed, the brothers Eteocles and Polynices fall in battle killed by eachother's hand. Antigone is sentenced to death and Ismene asks for the same fate as her sister.

Justice is served for what their sick grandfather (Laios) had done.


When we know of such customs being passed down from generation to generation and plays written pertaining this exact myth. It is hard to believe that they would go against these traditions..
Last edited by noemon on 22 Apr 2007 03:40, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By noemon
#1183666
The Gay Manifesto

by Michael Swift
First Published in Gay Community News, Feb. 15-21, 1987


We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too, and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand the depth and feeling, the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.

All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.

If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies.

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man; we shall make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas. The museums of the world will be filled only with paintings of graceful, naked lads.

Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable and de rigueur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule, devices which we are skilled in employing.

We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you find that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar, bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled.

We shall raise vast private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.

The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence--will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.

All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society of homoeroticism will be indulgence in the Greek passion. Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.

We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.
User avatar
By noemon
#1183685
There has been a lot of effort by Homosexuals to justify their sexual preference by claiming that the Ancient Greeks were massively Homo-sexuals. This is false.

Homo-sexuality existed in Greece as it still exists and it always exist. But the Ancient Greeks did not consider it normal, nor did their laws permit it.

Ancient Greek History contains a lot of information, and contains information that Homo-Sexuality existed, from all the people of that era, we do not have such information if it existed or not, because they didn't leave any records.

For the Greeks we have records, and we know that Homo-sexuality existed, that doesn't mean that it was normal for the Greeks.

We also have records that show that Homo-sexuality was looked down upon.

There has been a great misunderstanding with the terms erastis(Lover) eromenos(loved), for the Ancient Greeks erastis(lover) and eromenos(loved) did not mean they had sexual intercourse, because Eros was not the god of Sex, but the god of love and friendship god of wisdom god of intellectual(see Symposium of Plato), not in the corrupt way, this has been misinterpreted greatly by Pro-Homosexuals in order to justify their nature.

Wiki's article is a celebration of this misunderstanding.

Greek Law banned Homosexuality, Greek law did not encourage homo-sexuality.
User avatar
By Unperson-SN
#1183761
:lol: Looks like somebody has some internal issues.

Sparta (the ancient North Korea) by no means represents ancient Greece, please detach yourself from Hollywood-generated delusions.
By itzar
#1183848
Homo-sexuality was banned in Ancient Greece by Law.


That's an impressive list - but unfortunately it's put together by people with an agenda rather then people looking dispassionately at the issue.

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.

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).

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.

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
User avatar
By akritas
#1183867
The problem is that the policy administrators use the ancient(and modern) History in order to create tensions and conflicts between the people.

In Athens. as already noemon clerly said, any citizen could accuse, in front of justice. a lewd person of unchastity (grafe peri eteriseos) and ask his expulsion from the group of citizens or his conviction to death. We know that not only from Aeschines, but also from Demosthenes, Timarchus defender. In his speech Against Androtion he makes a reference to the same law (paragraph 21) and further (paragraph 30) to a law of Solon, which said that those, who were found unchaste should not speak nor accuse anybody in a court ot law.

Finally
Aeschines, Against Timarchus, 72:
" I , at least, do not think that you forget so easily, as to not remember what you have heard a little while ago, during the reading of the laws. in which it is said that whoever pays an Athenian to do such things, or gets paid [for the same reason], is guilty and severely punished. in both cases."

Summirized , in ancient Athens, he who had a homosexual inclination, could not have an affair with another man. nor could he pay somebody to have sex with, and maintain, at the same, time his rights as an Athenian citizen.
This does not mean that there were no homosexuals. The so far quoted laws with their many details point out, as I (and noemon) did from the very beginning, that there were.
Yet, they had to declare it in public and consequently, loose their civic rights. They ccould continue on living in Athens, since no one would harm them, but they could not be a part of the political, social and religious life of the city. They were becoming private individuals and doing what they were away from limelight.
By itzar
#1183927
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.

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:

"[135] And just here I understand he is going to carry the war into my territory, and ask me if I am not ashamed on my own part, after having made a nuisance of myself in the gymnasia and having been many times a lover, now to be bringing the practice into reproach and danger. And finally--so I am told--in an attempt to raise a laugh and start silly talk among you, he says he is going to exhibit all the erotic poems I have ever addressed to one person or another, and he promises to call witnesses to certain quarrels and pommellings in which I have been involved in consequence of this habit.

[136] Now as for me, I neither find fault with love that is honorable, nor do I say that those who surpass in beauty are prostitutes. I do not deny that I myself have been a lover and am a lover to this day, nor do I deny that the jealousies and quarrels that commonly arise from the practice have happened in my case. As to the poems which they say I have composed, some I acknowledge, but as to others I deny that they are of the character that these people will impute to them, for they will tamper with them.

[137] 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."

-Aeschines, Against Timarchus

You're right that penalties for citizens who submitted to anal penetration, especially for money or under compulsion, were harsh. But that's not the same thing as saying 'gay sex was illegal'. It's a lot more nuanced and (I think) more interesting then that.[/i]
User avatar
By noemon
#1183949
You're right that penalties for citizens who submitted to anal penetration, especially for money or under compulsion, were harsh. But that's not the same thing as saying 'gay sex was illegal'. It's a lot more nuanced and (I think) more interesting then that.


Compared with our current society, whereas in America Homosexual marriage is legal, and homosexual breeding of children is legal.

Yet, they had to declare it in public and consequently, loose their civic rights


If we are to classify that the Ancient Greeks embraced Homosexuality as a norm, then how should we classify the American society?

Which contains laws much more encouraging to Homosexuals?

As i said Homo-sexuality existed, it was never encouraged by the rule of Law as is the case of America and a few others.

As for if the Greeks considered it normal, or not?

Look at the Oedipus myth, what happened.

or to allow oneself to be penetrated. that was what stripped a man of his citizenship.


Exactly, with payment or nor, allowing oneself to be penetrated stripped of your civic rights. This is not encouragement, this is discouragement.

How more clear can it be?

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.


Exactly that non-penetrative sexual contact. not penetrative. And if Aeschines is unashamed that means that the whole of the Greek society was unashamed?

The collection of these quotes show that, penetration was discouraged not encouraged.
Last edited by noemon on 22 Apr 2007 13:36, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By noemon
#1183954
DON'T USE ANCIENT HISTORY TO SCORE POLITICAL POINTS


The discussion is about Ancient Greece. What history am i supposed to use, Modern history?

Political points?

:?:
User avatar
By Potemkin
#1183965
We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.

Ooo, 'ark at 'im! :rainbow:

:lol:
User avatar
By Gork
#1184042
It seems to me any time someone knows so much about this topic as noemon seems to, and extolls that knowledge casually in posts that take 45 minutes to read, with references, perhaps there's an underlying cause.

Sure the quest for truth is great, but we got a master's thesis. It would be one thing if he is homosexual and knows about homosexuality's history, but entirely different if he's heterosexual and is obsessed with this topic.

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.

Only reason I can see to know that much about it is if noemon is gay, or if he is for some reason obsessed with it.

But his post and the things he highlighted seemed to support, morally, that homosex was illegal, pointing to him being straight and anti-gay.
By itzar
#1184279
The discussion is about Ancient Greece. What history am i supposed to use, Modern history?

Political points?


What I mean is that you're using ancient history as a way to make a point about modern attitudes towards homosexuality (namely, that gay activists are wrong when they point to ancient Greece as a place where homosexuals were tolerated).

The problem is that ancient Greece doesn't measure up to your expectations or to those of gay activists. Gay sex was illegal in some circumstances, idealized in others.

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.

So check out this website http://www.utexas.edu/courses/cc348hubb ... ?cat_id=17
(although I imagine you've seen it before).

Exactly that non-penetrative sexual contact. not penetrative. And if Aeschines is unashamed that means that the whole of the Greek society was unashamed?

The collection of these quotes show that, penetration was discouraged not encouraged.


It was forbidden for freeborn men to allow themselves to be penetrated yes. But obviously that's only half the story. 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.

It was also acceptable for freeborn men and youths to touch each other sexually in a variety of ways that did not involve penetration. By any definition, that's homosexual contact right there.

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?
User avatar
By noemon
#1184344
What I mean is that you're using ancient history as a way to make a point about modern attitudes towards homosexuality (namely, that gay activists are wrong when they point to ancient Greece as a place where homosexuals were tolerated).


In fact, no.

Those gay activists are going political and am simply pointing it out.

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?


"the count for just the province of Attica, where Athens is located, is over 80,000), only 30 or so have an overtly homosexual theme; representing, in other words, just .01% of the total (127). When one compares this small percentage to what we see today on TV, in ads, books, magazines, the cinema, etc., one can just imagine what future generations will think of us."

"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. "

Explicity chasts "justified" kinaidismo (legal homosexuality)?

Since which era of this planet and which civilization exactly?

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.

It was also acceptable for freeborn men and youths to touch each other sexually in a variety of ways that did not involve penetration. By any definition, that's homosexual contact right there.


HMM, for how many people are we able to say this?

For how many people to we have artists named:

Deipnosophists:

Dinner wise crackers.

This is a good thing(the fact that so much have survived, every little detail of the society), is not something ascribing legal pederasty on a popular level as is the case of Wikipedia article for example.
By itzar
#1184359
HMM, for how many people are we able to say this?


You know as well as I do that that's an impossible question to answer. Evidence for the non-elite is scarce on this topic as on all others. I'll concede that it's as likely as not that non-elite Athenians disapproved of the pederasty of their social superiors.
Still, I don't think you can really deny that pederasty was legal and encouraged among the elite - or that male-male attraction was not seen as shameful.

[/quote]
User avatar
By Gork
#1184363
Pederasty by whose definition?

Greeks and Romans began to groom children for adulthood at 7. Boys when off to train for war at 12., if they didn't go off to train they were married off and had children. Our western society is the first time when a person of 13 was seen as anything less than an adult.

Is it worse to be a moral relativist or to judge ancient societies by modern standards?
By itzar
#1184405
Pederasty by whose definition?

the greek definition (sex with 'boys'). It's the way the practice was described in antiquity and is usually described today. I don't use it as a judgement, and I don't feel the need to judge ancient Greek society.

Oh, so now you don't believe Amit Soussana, @Pant[…]

Oh please post those too :lol: Very obvious p[…]

No, it does not. It is governed by the rather vagu[…]

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we[…]