Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 29th, 2017, 11:05 PM   #11

cachibatches's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,263

Quote:
Originally Posted by HackneyedScribe View Post
Curious, which threads? Can you sum them up here?


I can't find them, but I will be happy to source some of it. It all comes from my own extremely extensive readings of the ancient sources and what they REALLY say, as opposed to what modern academians claim. I noted a lot as I went along because, when I started reading the classics, I was SHOCKED at how misrepresented ancient feelings on the practice were.

ROME
Almost every ancient Romans source I have every read has at least one passage describing homeosexuality as a pervserion, and not one has anything good to say about it. In fact, it was explicitly illegal in both civillian and military life. The idea that the Romans were all bi-sexual perhaps comes from the fact that like kids in a schoolyard, they denounced each other as such. Some sources:

Polybius: Says explicitly that the penalty for homosexuality in the legions was execution. Laments that some the "Greek practice" had come to Rome amongst some that he considered degenerates.

Livy: in the annals, there is a passage in which Tiberius formally charges his nephew with homosexual acts as part of the destruction of Agripina's family.

Suetonius: refers to homosexual acts by all the "bad" emperors, including Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero. Also mentions Caliguila, of all people, of banning a homsexual sect from the city. Conversely talks about the heterosexual tendencies of the deified ones, Claudius (whose greatest fault he was led too much by women) and Augustus (who we know prefered Syrian ladies, and could be bribed even by his own wife with young virgins).

Also sources Ceasar's alleged bi-sexuality to a rumor started when Ceasar spent too much time as a guest of the King of Bithynia.

Refers to Galba as prefering sex "the unnatural way."

Cicero: denounced virtually every opponnent he ever had, including Cataline, Ceasar, and Clodius, as homosexuals. Some modern scholars maintain that in Rome, it was only wrong to be the "passive" in a homosexual act, but in fact, Cicero denounces Cataline for both.

Also told a story about the virtue of a soldier who murdered his officer for trying to seduce him.

Plutarch- discusses two incidents that make it clear that Alexander detested homosexuality (there is no ancient source that says otherwise, either).

Apuleius- Long comedic section in The Golden Ass in which the main character, a man transfored into a donkey, is forced to watch homosexual acts. The homsexual cult is ultimately banished from Roman Thessaly.

The Augustine Scribe- Follows Suetonius in describing every villain as homosexual or bi-sexual. Read Heliogalbus if you want to see what Romans thought of homosexuailty.

Amminaus- It is sometimes stated that homosexuality became more acceptable in the Roman empire as time went on. The last of the great western historians, when talking of the Germans, says that they practice "unnatural lust" with boys.

Cassius Dio- Records that Octavian told his troops that they have nothing to fear from Antony because his homosexuality wore him out.

And on and on. In all of the historians that I have read, there is not a single postive or neutral mention of the practice, but the main thing that is to be understood is that it was explicitly illegal and you could be banished, charged, and executed.


SPARTA
All ancient sources that comment say that the Spartans forbade relationships with boys. The important one was Xenophon, who led Spartan troops in battle and sponsored his sons through the agoge. I admit that, though I have read the Anabasis and The Hellenica, I have not read this text, but found the quote when I reads something similar in Plutarch and researched it further:

I think I ought to say something also about intimacy with boys, since this matter also has a bearing on education. In other Greek states, for instance among the Boeotians, man and boy live together, like married people; elsewhere, among the Eleians, for example, consent is won by means of favors. Some, on the other hand, entirely forbid suitors to talk with boys.
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, Constitution of the Lacedaimonians, chapter 2


ATHENS
This will be the most controversial, but Plato wrote in the Republic that the lover must be to his beloved only as a father is to a son. Again, I have read the Republic and found this by myself, but researched it further on the internet and indeed found that he talks in Symposius (which I have not read in entirety) about the shame a boy's family feels if he succumbs to the effections of an older man. Sexuality was not regulted in Athens, but he was speaking of the cultural norms of Athens as opposed to other states which were either more or less free regarding seduction of boys and it seems to offer a good window into the society's values.

From the Republic:

Thus, then, as it seems, you will lay down the law in the city that we are founding, that the lover may kiss and pass the time with and touch the beloved as a father would a son, for honorable ends, if he persuade him. But otherwise he must so associate with the objects of his care that there should never be any suspicion of anything further, on penalty of being stigmatized for want of taste and true musical culture.
REPULBIC III
Whether these matters are to be regarded as sport, or as earnest, we must not forget that this pleasure is held to have been granted by nature to male and female when conjoined for the work of procreation; the crime of male with male, or female with female, is an outrage on nature and a capital surrender to lust of pleasure.
LawsI

Last edited by cachibatches; October 29th, 2017 at 11:14 PM.
cachibatches is offline  
Remove Ads
Old October 30th, 2017, 05:40 AM   #12

larkin's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,669
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by dagul View Post
Anyone who is gay is gay and not straight. You may be talking about pretenders.
I haven't read the book but in the Stephen King movie, “The ShawshankRedemption”, an excellent film by the way.. There is a prison rape depicted by a group called “the Sisters.” This is not characteristic of the facts. Any study about rape in prison finds that the perpetrators of prison rape are more commonly heterosexual type A, personalities or group aggression.
Homosexuality is not an invention. Men denied women will find and do find an accommodation or a substitute. Unlike female sexuality, males are driven by an urgent and precocious daily impulse.
To quote Seinfeld and Kramer, “We have to do it!”
The truth is that all men are potentially pan-sexual and respond to whatever is available.
You can't make blanket declarations about homosexuality in the ancient world because there just is not enough information. There are examples of erotic sculpture depicting both heterosexual and homosexual couplings and more famously, Greek pottery that have survived. In the ancient world sex with boys was not uncommon but disgrace would be leveled at a man that laid down with other men. These are social mores and control that human behavior often ignores.

Taking on a feminine name in prison, is inviting rape..
I believe that the erotic decorations on Greek pottery was a marketing device..
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 4918927635_256b51fd1e.jpg (105.1 KB, 4 views)
File Type: jpg a4ce226642634a0d1d31a931e0029d03.jpg (88.6 KB, 5 views)
File Type: jpg article-2346417-1A740842000005DC-67_634x571.jpg (91.9 KB, 7 views)

Last edited by larkin; October 30th, 2017 at 05:46 AM.
larkin is offline  
Old October 30th, 2017, 06:18 AM   #13

Naomasa298's Avatar
Modpool
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 30,721

And do you think these straight men who want conversion therapy start off by thinking "Hmm, what does this mean in terms of competition for mates, evolution and survival of the fittest"?
Naomasa298 is offline  
Old October 30th, 2017, 07:11 AM   #14

The Keen Edge's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jan 2016
From: United States, MO
Posts: 483

Basically the answer is that evolution stopped being the dominant factor in human reproduction with the advent of civilization.
The Keen Edge is offline  
Old October 30th, 2017, 08:09 AM   #15
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2013
From: Olisipo
Posts: 1,069

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Question is flawed because most men don't. Those that do want it for religious reasons.

The natural aversion of the heterosexual male to homosexuality, as evidenced from the most ancient times, is due to to fear, conscious or subconsious, of homexual rape. As documented in several threads, homosexuality was illegal in Rome, illegal in Sparta, and looked down upon in Athens. Contrary to modern revisionist nonsense, Alexander the Great despised homosexuality. Cicero even told a story about the nobility of a Roman soldier killing an officer (!) who was trying to seduce him.
From what i've gathered, is the concept of homosexuality that is the key for the "modern revisionist nonsense" that you refer.

What is homosexuality?

1st Is two men or two women sexually stimulating themselves once in awhile? or

2nd An homosexual couple the actually as a romantic conection and common life that a love relationship as, with full sexual intercourse? (of course natural lesbian sex can never be consider truly full sexual intercourse)

What is describe as normal in ancient times and not so normal in present times was the first description i've writen, it was perfectly acceptable for two consenting men, that were mostly old master and young student to indulge in sexual stimulation and intercourse simulation (it was indeed sometimes encouraged as a way to teach sexuality to the young men), but without actual sexual intercourse as to preserve the honour of the would be family father, this was probably not considered an homosexual act as it is today. What was forbidden and descriminated was the 2nd description i wrote. Actual intercourse (passive one being the worst) and an actual romantic and common life between the same sex. This services were mostly provided by prostitutes (men/women) or slaves.

Actually today, there is a normal aceptance of casual sex and the stimulation between women without society condemning them or labeling them from being lesbians. If a girl says that she kissed a girl or had a little bit more fun with a girl friend once or twice, most people wont label her lesbian, on the other hand in men's cases its pretty diferent.

Last edited by Medieval; October 30th, 2017 at 08:13 AM.
Medieval is offline  
Old October 30th, 2017, 11:13 AM   #16

cachibatches's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,263

Quote:
Originally Posted by Medieval View Post
From what i've gathered, is the concept of homosexuality that is the key for the "modern revisionist nonsense" that you refer.

What is homosexuality?

1st Is two men or two women sexually stimulating themselves once in awhile? or

2nd An homosexual couple the actually as a romantic conection and common life that a love relationship as, with full sexual intercourse? (of course natural lesbian sex can never be consider truly full sexual intercourse)

What is describe as normal in ancient times and not so normal in present times was the first description i've writen, it was perfectly acceptable for two consenting men, that were mostly old master and young student to indulge in sexual stimulation and intercourse simulation (it was indeed sometimes encouraged as a way to teach sexuality to the young men), but without actual sexual intercourse as to preserve the honour of the would be family father, this was probably not considered an homosexual act as it is today. What was forbidden and descriminated was the 2nd description i wrote. Actual intercourse (passive one being the worst) and an actual romantic and common life between the same sex. This services were mostly provided by prostitutes (men/women) or slaves.

Actually today, there is a normal aceptance of casual sex and the stimulation between women without society condemning them or labeling them from being lesbians. If a girl says that she kissed a girl or had a little bit more fun with a girl friend once or twice, most people wont label her lesbian, on the other hand in men's cases its pretty diferent.
I am sorry, but you are simply repeating a lot of the things are that totally fallacious and debuked.

I led you to the water. Homosexuality was illegal in Rome, illegal in Sparta, and, from the evidence that I have seen, frowned upon in Athens as a societal value, though it was not illegal, because they did not legislate sexuality.

Everyone knows what sexuality is and what homosexuality is, and there is no evidence that it was "acceptable" for a teacher and student to engage in sexual stimulation--read the quote posted by Plato that says exactly the opposite.

As for the passive-active thing, again, there is not a shred of evidence. It is a modern contrivance.The Roman authors comdemned both equally:

Cicero
Not a single act of filthy lechery had been committed without him being its guiding spirit. For no one had ever had such a talent for seducing young men. He himself became the lover of a number of them in the most repulsive fashion, and he himself disgustingly allowed others to make love to himself

Ammianus
…the Taifali are so sunk in gross sensuality that among them boys couple with men in a union of unnatural lust, and waste the flower of their youth in the polluted embraces of their lovers. But if a
young man catches a boar single-handed or kills a huge bear, he is exempt thereafter from the contamination of this lewd intercourse
cachibatches is offline  
Old October 30th, 2017, 02:27 PM   #17

Corvidius's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2017
From: Crows nest
Posts: 1,702

Nobody condemned Hadrian for his affair with Antinous, even after Hadrian had died, except of course Christians when they got power as they had hang ups about sex and nudity, which some still do. Nobody questioned that a city, Antinopolis, be founded and named for Antinous. Nobody questioned that there be a popular cult of Antinous, except to suggest, as Julian the "apostate" did, doubts about his apotheosis. Nobody condemned Trajan, who along with Hadrian are recognized as two of the best emperors, though in these odd times we live in I have no doubt that soon enough some "right on" university will declare them to be non persons, and after all, they are DWEMs, oh the horror.....
Corvidius is online now  
Old October 30th, 2017, 02:43 PM   #18

HackneyedScribe's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,563
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post

I can't find them, but I will be happy to source some of it. It all comes from my own extremely extensive readings of the ancient sources and what they REALLY say, as opposed to what modern academians claim. I noted a lot as I went along because, when I started reading the classics, I was SHOCKED at how misrepresented ancient feelings on the practice were.

ROME
Almost every ancient Romans source I have every read has at least one passage describing homeosexuality as a pervserion, and not one has anything good to say about it. In fact, it was explicitly illegal in both civillian and military life. The idea that the Romans were all bi-sexual perhaps comes from the fact that like kids in a schoolyard, they denounced each other as such. Some sources:

Polybius: Says explicitly that the penalty for homosexuality in the legions was execution. Laments that some the "Greek practice" had come to Rome amongst some that he considered degenerates.

Livy: in the annals, there is a passage in which Tiberius formally charges his nephew with homosexual acts as part of the destruction of Agripina's family.

Suetonius: refers to homosexual acts by all the "bad" emperors, including Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero. Also mentions Caliguila, of all people, of banning a homsexual sect from the city. Conversely talks about the heterosexual tendencies of the deified ones, Claudius (whose greatest fault he was led too much by women) and Augustus (who we know prefered Syrian ladies, and could be bribed even by his own wife with young virgins).

Also sources Ceasar's alleged bi-sexuality to a rumor started when Ceasar spent too much time as a guest of the King of Bithynia.

Refers to Galba as prefering sex "the unnatural way."

Cicero: denounced virtually every opponnent he ever had, including Cataline, Ceasar, and Clodius, as homosexuals. Some modern scholars maintain that in Rome, it was only wrong to be the "passive" in a homosexual act, but in fact, Cicero denounces Cataline for both.

Also told a story about the virtue of a soldier who murdered his officer for trying to seduce him.

Plutarch- discusses two incidents that make it clear that Alexander detested homosexuality (there is no ancient source that says otherwise, either).

Apuleius- Long comedic section in The Golden Ass in which the main character, a man transfored into a donkey, is forced to watch homosexual acts. The homsexual cult is ultimately banished from Roman Thessaly.

The Augustine Scribe- Follows Suetonius in describing every villain as homosexual or bi-sexual. Read Heliogalbus if you want to see what Romans thought of homosexuailty.

Amminaus- It is sometimes stated that homosexuality became more acceptable in the Roman empire as time went on. The last of the great western historians, when talking of the Germans, says that they practice "unnatural lust" with boys.

Cassius Dio- Records that Octavian told his troops that they have nothing to fear from Antony because his homosexuality wore him out.

And on and on. In all of the historians that I have read, there is not a single postive or neutral mention of the practice, but the main thing that is to be understood is that it was explicitly illegal and you could be banished, charged, and executed.


SPARTA
All ancient sources that comment say that the Spartans forbade relationships with boys. The important one was Xenophon, who led Spartan troops in battle and sponsored his sons through the agoge. I admit that, though I have read the Anabasis and The Hellenica, I have not read this text, but found the quote when I reads something similar in Plutarch and researched it further:

I think I ought to say something also about intimacy with boys, since this matter also has a bearing on education. In other Greek states, for instance among the Boeotians, man and boy live together, like married people; elsewhere, among the Eleians, for example, consent is won by means of favors. Some, on the other hand, entirely forbid suitors to talk with boys.
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, Constitution of the Lacedaimonians, chapter 2


ATHENS
This will be the most controversial, but Plato wrote in the Republic that the lover must be to his beloved only as a father is to a son. Again, I have read the Republic and found this by myself, but researched it further on the internet and indeed found that he talks in Symposius (which I have not read in entirety) about the shame a boy's family feels if he succumbs to the effections of an older man. Sexuality was not regulted in Athens, but he was speaking of the cultural norms of Athens as opposed to other states which were either more or less free regarding seduction of boys and it seems to offer a good window into the society's values.

From the Republic:

Thus, then, as it seems, you will lay down the law in the city that we are founding, that the lover may kiss and pass the time with and touch the beloved as a father would a son, for honorable ends, if he persuade him. But otherwise he must so associate with the objects of his care that there should never be any suspicion of anything further, on penalty of being stigmatized for want of taste and true musical culture.
REPULBIC III
Whether these matters are to be regarded as sport, or as earnest, we must not forget that this pleasure is held to have been granted by nature to male and female when conjoined for the work of procreation; the crime of male with male, or female with female, is an outrage on nature and a capital surrender to lust of pleasure.
LawsI
Thank you. I was under the impression that at least in Athens, homosexuality was accepted. I did read that homosexuality in Rome was considered a disgrace, but only if you are at the receiving end. I will have to look up Cicero's criticism of Cataline even when the latter was in a dominant position, for you mentioned how even the dominant position would still be looked down upon. That is, unless you have the quote to that readily available already? Would save me the trouble.

Last edited by HackneyedScribe; October 30th, 2017 at 03:01 PM.
HackneyedScribe is offline  
Old October 30th, 2017, 02:47 PM   #19

HackneyedScribe's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,563
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naomasa298 View Post
And do you think these straight men who want conversion therapy start off by thinking "Hmm, what does this mean in terms of competition for mates, evolution and survival of the fittest"?
People don't think that when they are having sex either, but the law of evolution still applies. Even though if you are thinking about survival of the fittest while in the middle of intercourse, then you probably aren't doing it right.

Evolution don't need for people to think about it. Straight men who want conversion therapy for gays is probably a by-product of the human species seeing anything different as a threat.
HackneyedScribe is offline  
Old October 30th, 2017, 04:01 PM   #20
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2013
From: Olisipo
Posts: 1,069

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
I am sorry, but you are simply repeating a lot of the things are that totally fallacious and debuked.

I led you to the water. Homosexuality was illegal in Rome, illegal in Sparta, and, from the evidence that I have seen, frowned upon in Athens as a societal value, though it was not illegal, because they did not legislate sexuality.

Everyone knows what sexuality is and what homosexuality is, and there is no evidence that it was "acceptable" for a teacher and student to engage in sexual stimulation--read the quote posted by Plato that says exactly the opposite.

As for the passive-active thing, again, there is not a shred of evidence. It is a modern contrivance.The Roman authors comdemned both equally:

Cicero
Not a single act of filthy lechery had been committed without him being its guiding spirit. For no one had ever had such a talent for seducing young men. He himself became the lover of a number of them in the most repulsive fashion, and he himself disgustingly allowed others to make love to himself

Ammianus
…the Taifali are so sunk in gross sensuality that among them boys couple with men in a union of unnatural lust, and waste the flower of their youth in the polluted embraces of their lovers. But if a
young man catches a boar single-handed or kills a huge bear, he is exempt thereafter from the contamination of this lewd intercourse
No need to be sorry its your opinion backed up by some sources, however i really don't think its quite that simple especially in the case of long term empire like Rome, the republican period wsas much diferent then the Imperial one and late christianization also changed things.
Medieval is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
conversion, evolutionarily, gay, men, straight, therapy



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gay Conversion Therapy for Teens okamido Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 190 June 14th, 2018 02:54 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.