Was Ancient Greek Education a Rape institution?

Sep 2014
797
Texas
#71
The noses thing is just an example. If your mind literally can't wrap around it being done safely, pick something different like the removal of an ear, and assume there was a relatively safe way to do it, perhaps numbed beforehand (or not, like circumcisions, tattoos, ear elongation, bone piercings, and other body modifications that were part of being accepted into a culture, etc). The point you seem to be vaguely aware of, and trying to avoid, is that it wouldn't be psychologically scarring at all; it would be far worse if they didn't go through that short term pain, and were left as freakish outsiders to the group. That's the context your latest post continues to emphasise is irrelevant. Unfortunately for you it's extremely relevant when discussing it historically.


Does the character in your story have a name? If not I vote for calling him "Staff Master". Please, stop fictionalizing history on here without giving us creative input. We want to contribute to your story too.
Actually I would just as soon you not contribute to the story. I am always disturbed by people who snear at protecting children... and I am a mean old broad where children are concerned.
 
Feb 2013
4,263
Coastal Florida
#73
The noses thing is just an example. If your mind literally can't wrap around it being done safely, pick something different like the removal of an ear, and assume there was a relatively safe way to do it, perhaps numbed beforehand (or not, like circumcisions, tattoos, ear elongation, bone piercings, and other body modifications that were part of being accepted into a culture, etc).
There are different degrees of harm. Clearly, cutting off someone's nose is far more invasive than getting a tattoo or being circumcised. Although, anything like that can be extremely dangerous and harmful if inadequate care is provided. Consider the relatively common devastating injuries associated with traditional circumcision among the Xhosa people of South Africa. Hundreds of young men and boys have died as a result...hundreds have also had their penises amputated.

The point you seem to be vaguely aware of, and trying to avoid, is that it wouldn't be psychologically scarring at all; it would be far worse if they didn't go through that short term pain, and were left as freakish outsiders to the group. That's the context your latest post continues to emphasise is irrelevant. Unfortunately for you it's extremely relevant when discussing it historically.
I wonder how well the Xhosa individuals mentioned above feel they fit in after gangrene sets in and their manhood rots away.

Please, stop fictionalizing history on here without giving us creative input.
You don't really have any room to talk here. Throughout this thread, you've essentially asserted pederasty gained wholesale approval by ancient greek society and there is simply no logical basis for that conclusion. I would note we have evidence that significant objections were raised about the practice and it was routinely criticized. Indeed, we even have evidence that laws were enacted to protect children from being exploited in this manner. The degree to which these strictures were enforced as well as the periods and locales to which they applied are debatable. However, the idea this practice was generally deemed socially acceptable throughout ancient Greek society is unfounded. We don't have any evidence showing this was "normal" for the Greek populace either. The extant body of evidence shows only that a subgroup of the wealthy class thought this was a good idea. Otherwise, we have a lot of criticism of the practice and no indication that the populace as a whole even engaged in it, much less approved of it.
 
Last edited:
Likes: bedb
Jan 2015
3,439
Australia
#74
If you don't think homosexuality from a young age had mainstream approval in ancient Greece I don't know what to tell you. I recommend reading this for the cliff notes, and then following the links it provides to various books and articles (for more in depth, sourced material).
Homosexuality in ancient Greece - Wikipedia
I'm frankly stunned that this is the new turn you're taking in this thread. It's one thing to not understand the historical context of Greek homosexual practices, but to assert it wasn't really approved by mainstream ancient greek society is simply a fantasy that has no place on this board. It was an ingrained part of ancient Greek life, and while some people in society may not have approved (some people in society don't approve of most things), there's insufficient evidence of some widespread disapproval for what we know to be an ingrained and widespread practice. You're projecting your own disapproval onto an ancient society on the slenderest of evidence probably, without understanding that said society had very different values to us.
 
Last edited:
Sep 2014
797
Texas
#75
If you don't think homosexuality from a young age had mainstream approval in ancient Greece I don't know what to tell you. I recommend reading this for the cliff notes, and then following the links it provides to various books and articles (for more in depth, sourced material).
Homosexuality in ancient Greece - Wikipedia
I'm frankly stunned that this is the new turn you're taking in this thread. It's one thing to not understand the historical context of Greek homosexual practices, but to assert it wasn't really approved by mainstream ancient greek society is simply a fantasy that has no place on this board. It was an ingrained part of ancient Greek life, and while some people in society may not have approved (some people in society don't approve of most things), there's insufficient evidence of some widespread disapproval for what we know to be an ingrained and widespread practice. You're projecting your own disapproval onto an ancient society on the slenderest of evidence probably, without understanding that said society had very different values to us.
Actually the Athenians made their disapproval very clear. When Nicias lost the Athenian fleet, the Athenians went after the gay elite. Socrates paid with his life and years late Aristotle was treated like crap. Just because gay men enjoyed boys doesn't mean everyone did. Pericles was famous for loving his wife, and while Alcibiades became the darling of gay imaginations, it was women that got him killed.
 
Jan 2015
3,439
Australia
#76
Actually the Athenians made their disapproval very clear. When Nicias lost the Athenian fleet, the Athenians went after the gay elite. Socrates paid with his life and years late Aristotle was treated like crap. Just because gay men enjoyed boys doesn't mean everyone did. Pericles was famous for loving his wife, and while Alcibiades became the darling of gay imaginations, it was women that got him killed.
Wow. Had no idea Socrates was killed for being gay. I wish I had studied under you, I could have learned so much (don't worry, not a metaphor). Do you just live in Texas, or were you educated there too? Go read the wiki page, and links from it, so you can get a proper grounding in the subject matter. You don't have institutions like the Sacred Band of Thebes and the like that perpetuate themselves, and are held in high esteem in society, without popular support; just as you don't remain the elite of a city state if your lifestyle practices are widely disapproved of. We can see this in a society that actually disapproved of homosexual love (of all ages); namely ancient Republican Rome. There an accusation of homosexuality was damaging, and used as a political weapon (usually against public figures who there is no evidence were homosexual, and much evidence to suggest they weren't). Openly homosexual public figures simply did not exist in Ancient Republican Rome. It would have been completely unfeasible, which is why when Sulla (who was bisexual at the very least) wanted to come out he did it right before retiring from public life (and immediately left Rome to go live in a Villa in Italy, where he could do what he wanted free from public criticism).
 
Sep 2014
797
Texas
#77
Wow. Had no idea Socrates was killed for being gay. I wish I had studied under you, I could have learned so much (don't worry, not a metaphor). Do you just live in Texas, or were you educated there too? Go read the wiki page, and links from it, so you can get a proper grounding in the subject matter. You don't have institutions like the Sacred Band of Thebes and the like that perpetuate themselves, and are held in high esteem in society, without popular support; just as you don't remain the elite of a city state if your lifestyle practices are widely disapproved of. We can see this in a society that actually disapproved of homosexual love (of all ages); namely ancient Republican Rome. There an accusation of homosexuality was damaging, and used as a political weapon (usually against public figures who there is no evidence were homosexual, and much evidence to suggest they weren't). Openly homosexual public figures simply did not exist in Ancient Republican Rome. It would have been completely unfeasible, which is why when Sulla (who was bisexual at the very least) wanted to come out he did it right before retiring from public life (and immediately left Rome to go live in a Villa in Italy, where he could do what he wanted free from public criticism).
Socrates was killed for teaching contrary ways....most Athenians did not belong to the eiltie club. And Nicias was gay. Alicibiades was killed for being a womanizer, but the Athenisans blamed Socrates for what Alcibiades did (betraying them)...and with Plato running around saying Socrates and Alcibiades were lovers.... this belief was already in the Athenian imagination. So yes, that contributed to Socrates getting killed. He was Alcibiades' teacher, a lot more people that Plato believed he and Al were lovers. Cause and effect. And before you get all excited on Wkipedia, I have contributed to it. Does that change your opinion.

I really have a thick skin.

As for the Lover's Brigade, yes they were an elite band of warriors who handed Sparta their butts. What you don't apparently understand is that defending women does not mean I hate gay men. But that is not really important. The truth is important. Women did not have to trick men into being with them.

Tell you what give me ONE Spartan gay romance...just one...with names and specifics. Now it has to be positive and not some generalization based on heresay. Give me the source so I can verify it.

As for the Romans...lead poisoning drove many of the elite insane. Hadrian was a great emperor unless you were one of his boy toys.
 
Feb 2013
4,263
Coastal Florida
#78
If you don't think homosexuality from a young age had mainstream approval in ancient Greece I don't know what to tell you. I recommend reading this for the cliff notes, and then following the links it provides to various books and articles (for more in depth, sourced material).
Homosexuality in ancient Greece - Wikipedia
I'm frankly stunned that this is the new turn you're taking in this thread. It's one thing to not understand the historical context of Greek homosexual practices, but to assert it wasn't really approved by mainstream ancient greek society is simply a fantasy that has no place on this board. It was an ingrained part of ancient Greek life, and while some people in society may not have approved (some people in society don't approve of most things), there's insufficient evidence of some widespread disapproval for what we know to be an ingrained and widespread practice.
So, for evidence you cite the wiki. And not only is it a Wikipedia article, many of the paragraphs are followed by [citation needed], particularly under the section on pederasty. Why don't we consider where you can find real evidence? I can think of two primary bodies evidence, the pottery assemblage and extant written works. Only the finer pottery is going to have scenes showing something which speaks to this and the vast majority of people would not be able to afford fine pottery so the pottery assemblage isn't the least bit helpful in giving us an idea about what most people believed. And we run into a similar problem with written works. Methinks literacy was concentrated in the wealthier segments of society so we are limited to what relatively better off people wrote in order to determine what the poor masses thought. Hmmm...where might we find stuff like that? My understanding is that juries were typically composed of common people so you might look at legal cases which would have been heard by a jury. I've also seen mentioned that works of certain playwrights were intended for common audiences so you might look there. However, I think you'll find these sources often include much criticism of pederasty and homosexuality in general, if mentioned at all.

At least since the 1980s, the conventional wisdom was that it was usually only the person playing the passive role who was denigrated. But scholars have been reexamining that assessment more recently.

You're projecting your own disapproval onto an ancient society on the slenderest of evidence probably, without understanding that said society had very different values to us.
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

That's so ridiculous. I'm as gay as a 3-dollar bill. I would much rather believe that being gay was generally found to be acceptable at some point in the past. I've even spent many years searching extensively for evidence of this. However, I've yet to find much evidence where homosexuality was widely approved of. Of course it existed and I can certainly find evidence of its existence. But that's not the same thing as broad approval by society.
 
Likes: bedb
Sep 2014
797
Texas
#79
So, for evidence you cite the wiki. And not only is it a Wikipedia article, many of the paragraphs are followed by [citation needed], particularly under the section on pederasty. Why don't we consider where you can find real evidence? I can think of two primary bodies evidence, the pottery assemblage and extant written works. Only the finer pottery is going to have scenes showing something which speaks to this and the vast majority of people would not be able to afford fine pottery so the pottery assemblage isn't the least bit helpful in giving us an idea about what most people believed. And we run into a similar problem with written works. Methinks literacy was concentrated in the wealthier segments of society so we are limited to what relatively better off people wrote in order to determine what the poor masses thought. Hmmm...where might we find stuff like that? My understanding is that juries were typically composed of common people so you might look at legal cases which would have been heard by a jury. I've also seen mentioned that works of certain playwrights were intended for common audiences so you might look there. However, I think you'll find these sources often include much criticism of pederasty and homosexuality in general, if mentioned at all.

At least since the 1980s, the conventional wisdom was that it was usually only the person playing the passive role who was denigrated. But scholars have been reexamining that assessment more recently.



:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

That's so ridiculous. I'm as gay as a 3-dollar bill. I would much rather believe that being gay was generally found to be acceptable at some point in the past. I've even spent many years searching extensively for evidence of this. However, I've yet to find much evidence where homosexuality was widely approved of. Of course it existed and I can certainly find evidence of its existence. But that's not the same thing as broad approval by society.
In ancient times powerful men took advantage of weaker men or purchased boys. It was not the same as we see today where gay men live as equals. Today is better all the way around. I have a story in my world lit book that was written in Roman times. The boy in the story, the favorite of the man giving the dinner party, is bitter and angry all the time. He was a slave and had no say in his life. If men had been allowed to live as equals, I don't think all the antihomosexual stuff would have made it into Christianity.

Was not Thebes the best place to be a gay man? I know Sparta was the worst.
 
May 2015
270
villa of Lucullus
#80
I don't think the attitudes of a majority of society are the only criteria we can use when judging the actions of people in ancient societies. There are often people within society who disagree with the prevailing social norms. Shouldn't their opinions also be considered?

There is also the issue of lack of feedback. Catholic priests who abused young boys may not have realized what they were doing was wrong given the lack of consequences and the fact their actions were swept under the rug for so long.
 
Likes: bedb

Similar History Discussions