Ancient Homosexuality

Started by SaTsuJiN6 pages
SaTsuJiN Wielder of Thunder Seal

the only reason (in my opinion) why society doesnt accept homosexuality.. is because if they accept one 'abnormality' then they must accept others .. such as elders in love with minors... people who are sexually attracted to animals.. it would just go on and on til there is no order left..

Shakyamunison Nam Myoho Renge Kyo
Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
the only reason (in my opinion) why society doesnt accept homosexuality.. is because if they accept one 'abnormality' then they must accept others .. such as elders in love with minors... people who are sexually attracted to animals.. it would just go on and on til there is no order left..

And you think that is a bad thing (ha ha).

SaTsuJiN Wielder of Thunder Seal

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And you think that is a bad thing (ha ha).
You assume I do.. which isnt the case.. but what I'm saying is if left unchecked.. meeting one demand spirals into a chain of demands thats seemingly neverending

look at clothing style.. in the 50's if you wore a bikini you were a total skank.. today they're as commonplace as corn flakes and orange juice.... as a result fashions become more and more revealing.. (hopefully not to the point where the world becomes a nudist colony 😮 ) I know its not directly related.. but its the closest example I could think of

yerssot Senior Member

Originally posted by Echuu
What inventions are you talking about?

windmills for example

Originally posted by Echuu
Barbarians accepting the Roman ways is not universal; tribes differed in that respect.

Don't forget we're talking about thousands of people, of course not every single tribe that got in the Roman Empire listened to their ways, that's a natural.
In these modern times where we are bombarded with tv-ads, promotions for tv's etc; there are still plenty of people that don't have one, that's the same idea. It's about when most of them (and in this case we're definitly talking about only exceptions not following) that you can say "they"... but yeah, probably some didn't follow though I don't instantly know an example of such a tribe...

Originally posted by Echuu
EXACTLY- then you add a little plague and famine here and there and you have massive amounts of death.

don't forget the cheating husbands that get killed in action 😉

Originally posted by Echuu
"The first thing you'll learn in history is that there is no 'Greek time' or 'roman time; or "medieval time",

"Clearly before what humans have decided is the end of the Roman time."

Don't these two kind of contradict each other?


no, what I mean is: if you look at history, there is not a single "time" that's clearly definable, so "there is no greek time, roman time,..."
but we still use it because humans need organisation to learn this.
So it exists solely as two reference dates, which were obviously important for that civilsation, all that's in between mainly focuses on that one i.e. the greek one.
In that last phrase you quote, it was to situate it again into the context on which we focus since you made it sound that the church got in europe in the medieval times while it is in the roman time.

Originally posted by Echuu
Also; no the church didn't sweep through Europe like that.

then I simply misunderstood you

bilb vixen
Originally posted by Echuu
Dark Ages have anything to do with it? Yes. Over that time the church gained more power in peoples lives in a 'religious' sort of way and implemented the anti-homo ways (Even though the church seemed to ignore scriptures on not judging people of the world).
It was easy for the church to do this because of the crappy lives most people lived. The masses would flock to any sort of comfort.

any sort of comfort?? thats incredibly shortsighted and not a little bit offensive...

the fact is that Lil B is right on part of this.. homosexuality has been around since Old Testament times.. it has nothing to do with any particular 'age'.. to think that is just to discount an entire area of the human psyche.. as far as 'the church' goes.. Yes Jesus did represent every marginalized person but he was also here to reiterate and reinterpret all of Jewish law.. and the scriptures that refer to homosexuality go back WAAAY past the 'dark ages' .. thousands of years in fact...

As far as the bigger issue as to why the church frowns on homosexuality.. I dunno.. thats a larger issue to be dealt with elsewhere.. but yes there was infact alot of homosexuality around during the days of Jesus and way befoe his time as well

Echuu Master Jedi
Originally posted by bilb
any sort of comfort?? thats incredibly shortsighted and not a little bit offensive...

How?

bilb vixen

it trivializes and marginalizes a deeply held belief is how.. nothing personal i just think it was a rather mean thing to say

fanny_adams Junior Member

(quote)the only reason (in my opinion) why society doesnt accept homosexuality.. is because if they accept one 'abnormality' then they must accept others .. such as elders in love with minors... people who are sexually attracted to animals.. it would just go on and on til there is no order left..(/quote)
(quote)You assume I do.. which isnt the case.. but what I'm saying is if left unchecked.. meeting one demand spirals into a chain of demands thats seemingly neverending

look at clothing style.. in the 50's if you wore a bikini you were a total skank.. today they're as commonplace as corn flakes and orange juice.... as a result fashions become more and more revealing.. (hopefully not to the point where the world becomes a nudist colony ) I know its not directly related.. but its the closest example I could think of(/quote)

i understand what you are trying to say but there is a very big difference between two consenting adults and an adult with a minor. that is destroying the life of a child how is unable to give consent. and as for people with animals again there is a big difference between two humans and a human with another species.

Dagons Blade I'll Take The Job

Well, one thing is for sure...no matter who it is, with homosexuality, sooner or later someone wind sup getting the shitty end of the stick.. 😉

Jackie Malfoy Jacks

The romes or greeks were always in history gay in a way.That was in BC through so that really exclaims alot.JM

Clovie -~=¤=~-

Originally posted by Jackie Malfoy
The romes or greeks were always in history gay in a way.That was in BC through so that really exclaims alot.JM
no. it does not explain a lot 🤨

SaTsuJiN Wielder of Thunder Seal
Originally posted by fanny_adams
i understand what you are trying to say but there is a very big difference between two consenting adults and an adult with a minor. that is destroying the life of a child how is unable to give consent. and as for people with animals again there is a big difference between two humans and a human with another species.

well according to http://nambla.org/ there were many instances in the past where a man loving a boy was totally acceptable.. however today it is not.. I believe the same thing would happen with people and animals eventually (although accepting both these instances would obviously be farther down the timeline, than simply accepting gayiety)

Bardock42 Junior Member
Originally posted by Jackie Malfoy
The romes or greeks were always in history gay in a way.That was in BC through so that really exclaims alot.JM

Oh you mean it exclaims that they were the greatest societies ever exsisting...I thought you would be against Homosexuality, but you are right.....

Line Sarkz

Re: Ancient Homosexuality

Originally posted by silver_tears
What happened through the ages?

I mean if you think about it, homosexuality or bisexuality was greatly accepted early on in history....ancient Greece, and Rome for example....

So what changed that?
Wouldn't it be safe to assume that in that time and age, even one of the apostles could have been gay stemming from the lack of females around them and such?
Why do you think now something is so taboo, when once it was so widely accepted?

*In no way am I being sacreligious here or whatever, I was just using that as an example.

as I've understood it ( and I may have understood it incorrectly, as I might better add before my long rambling), homosexuality as such was never really accepted. the man/boy-relationship had to work as a schooling of the boy, but never were they meant to have a sexual relationship, because penetration meant 'feminization' and the entire idea was to make the boy a man, not a 'woman'. in the book 'symposium', which is an account of various Greek philosophers, including Socrates, getting pissed and discussing love, it appears to be accepted that men may love one another. actually, the love between men is thought highly of, but only as long as it's not physical. physical love was only to be had with a woman, since she was all body and no spirit. love between men was supposed to be all spirit, no body, and thus more divine.
my guess why ( physical) homosexuality was therefore frowned upon, both then and now, is that it tends to 'blend' the usual gender patterns by 'feminizing' a man; he can be penetrated and therefore doesn't match the idea of masculinity as being activity. he's regarded as 'passive', which is regarded as 'feminine'.

Echuu Master Jedi
Originally posted by bilb
it trivializes and marginalizes a deeply held belief is how.. nothing personal i just think it was a rather mean thing to say

I'm a Christian.

I just think in some cases it can be easier to accept religion as a way out when your life sucks. And that's not a bad thing.

Adam_PoE Senior Member
Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
well according to http://nambla.org/ there were many instances in the past where a man loving a boy was totally acceptable.. however today it is not.. I believe the same thing would happen with people and animals eventually (although accepting both these instances would obviously be farther down the timeline, than simply accepting gayiety)

This argument committs the logic fallacy of Slippery Slope; In order to show that a proposition is unacceptable, a sequence of increasingly unacceptable events is shown to follow from it. This however, is an illegitimate use of the "if-then" operator. There is no reason to believe that a relationship exists between the two propositions you have presented, let alone that accepting one proposition will lead to the acceptance of the other.

Dagons Blade I'll Take The Job
Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
well according to http://nambla.org/ there were many instances in the past where a man loving a boy was totally acceptable.. however today it is not.. gayiety)

Perhaps someone should have told Michael Jackson sooner...

SaTsuJiN Wielder of Thunder Seal

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
This argument committs the logic fallacy of Slippery Slope; In order to show that a proposition is unacceptable, a sequence of increasingly unacceptable events is shown to follow from it. This however, is an illegitimate use of the "if-then" operator. There is no reason to believe that a relationship exists between the two propositions you have presented, let alone that accepting one proposition will lead to the acceptance of the other.
why is it so hard to believe? men enjoy lesbianism, and now we have Girls Gone Wild videos ( I might also add that these people went so far as to even call me on the phone to ask if I wanted a girls gone wild video )... wasnt that basically the next extreme step?... today is all about being more 'off the hook'.. I never said one would be instantly after the other.. but when people pioneer the pathway for the taboo.. other things will follow

Bardock42 Junior Member

But the difference is
Men like Lesbian scenes so "Girls Gone Wild" videos with lesbian Scenes apper

On the other hand
Homosexuality has nothing to do with Pedophilia that why it doesn't necessarily lead to the other.

SaTsuJiN Wielder of Thunder Seal

I was pretty certain namblas argument was that if the child gives consent to the relationship then it should be allowed

I wasnt necessarily trying to say they were related, but the thing they have in common is that they are taboo in current society (in terms of sexual orientation issues)