• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How “Gibson’s law” makes it hard to trust experts

Homosexuality in ancient Greece​


In classical antiquity, writers such as Herodotus,[1] Plato,[2] Xenophon,[3] Athenaeus[4] and many others explored aspects of homosexuality in Greek society. The most widespread and socially significant form of same-sex sexual relations in ancient Greece amongst elite circles was between adult men and pubescent or adolescent boys, known as pederasty (marriages in Ancient Greece between men and women were also age structured, with men in their thirties commonly taking wives in their early teens).[5] Nevertheless, homosexuality and its practices were still wide-spread as certain city-states allowed it while others were ambiguous or prohibited it.[6] Though sexual relationships between adult men did exist, it is possible at least one member of each of these relationships flouted social conventions by assuming a passive sexual role according to Kenneth Dover, though this has been questioned by recent scholars. It is unclear how such relations between same-sex partners were regarded in the general society, especially for women, but examples do exist as far back as the time of Sappho.[7]

The ancient Greeks did not conceive of sexual orientation as a social identifier as modern Western societies have done. Greek society did not distinguish sexual desire or behavior by the gender of the participants, but rather by the role that each participant played in the sex act, that of active penetrator or passive penetrated




Oops!

Methinks someone spoke out of turn

I never said Romans "turned' Vestial virgins into nuns, I intoned that Nuns replaced the role of ancient Rome.

It seems Ancient Greece was a little ahead of us way back when!

I suggest you read more.
Nearly all of this claim is based on half truths. Pedarasty was supposed to be mentorship and when it was sexual it was condemned as child rape which it was. (Oddly enough modern homosexual activists will insist boy rape isn’t really gay, but also defend their practice by pointing to pedarasty) many Greek city states criminalized sodomy and Plato wrote that such a practice should be universally illegal. In many Greek cities homosexuals were not allowed citizenship. Most claims of Greek homosexuality were invented by modern homosexual activists and most are quite dumb claims when looked at. The claims about Sappho are similarly weak. She was accused contemporaneously of being a slut and not a homosexual, and very little of her original works survive. The idea she was a “lesbian” arises many centuries after her death.

Also the three quotes cited to Xenophon, Plato and Herodutus in your Wikipedia cite do not actually reference homosexual behavior, that is purely inference and Weak ones at that.

You seem to just believe claims of modern gay activists and academics uncritically without looking at the actual works and writings of Greeks, who regarded homosexuality as a disease and non-virtuous practice
 
Last edited:
Okay, this is even dumber than your other post. You're on a roll.

The Sacred Band of Thebes is laughing at you from the grave.
There is no primary source evidence showing the “sacred band of Thebes” even existed, the one literary source alluding to it never mentions homosexual behavior and was written hundreds of years later
 
There is no primary source evidence showing the “sacred band of Thebes” even existed, the one literary source alluding to it never mentions homosexual behavior and was written hundreds of years later
I can trust you or I can trust Xenophon.

GUESS WHICH ONE I'M PICKING, EMN?
 
Nearly all of this claim is based on half truths. Pedarasty was supposed to be mentorship and when it was sexual it was condemned as child rape which it was. (Oddly enough modern homosexual activists will insist boy rape isn’t really gay, but also defend their practice by pointing to pedarasty) many Greek city states criminalized sodomy and Plato wrote that such a practice should be universally illegal. In many Greek cities homosexuals were not allowed citizenship. Most claims of Greek homosexuality were invented by modern homosexual activists and most are quite dumb claims when looked at. The claims about Sappho are similarly weak. She was accused contemporaneously of being a slut and not a homosexual, and very little of her original works survive. The idea she was a “lesbian” arises many centuries after her death.

Also the three quotes cited to Xenophon, Plato and Herodutus in your Wikipedia cite do not actually reference homosexual behavior, that is purely inference and Weak ones at that.

You seem to just believe claims of modern gay activists and academics uncritically without looking at the actual works and writings of Greeks, who regarded homosexuality as a disease and non-virtuous practice


BULLSHIT!!!!!


First you claimed it never happened now you say its "half true", and claim Wiki is wrong!!!!!!

Not even a contest. You lose!
 
I can trust you or I can trust Xenophon.

GUESS WHICH ONE I'M PICKING, EMN?
Xenophon doesn’t reference the “sacred band” by name. The idea they were homosexual comes from Plutarch who wrote 300 years later and described them as “lovers bonded by mutual commitment” but this does not mean they were sodomites, Plutarch never describes this and neither does Xenophon
 
Xenophon doesn’t reference the “sacred band” by name. The idea they were homosexual comes from Plutarch who wrote 300 years later and described them as “lovers bonded by mutual commitment” but this does not mean they were sodomites, Plutarch never describes this and neither does Xenophon
What do you assume they meant?
 
Okay, this is even dumber than your other post. You're on a roll.

The Sacred Band of Thebes is laughing at you from the grave.


You just have to love "...nearly all the claims are half truths"

Now that's what I call a 'qualified' response.


What are the others..........?
 
What do you assume they meant?
That men who go to battle together have a bond driven by service in combat? Like in every military ever to exist?
 
I never called my squaddies my lovers.
You also don’t speak English as translated from classical Greek.

The Greeks didn’t speak English, so they wouldn’t call their comrades “squaddies” either.

Imagine if hundreds of years from now archeologists are reading your posts and declare you must be a guy really into receiving anal because they translate “squaddie” as “homosexual ”.

Obviously you’re deciding to accept a term that is translated from a different language into “lover” to mean being homosexual without even bothering to understand cultural context or the original language
 
You also don’t speak English as translated from classical Greek.

The Greeks didn’t speak English, so they wouldn’t call their comrades “squaddies” either.

Imagine if hundreds of years from now archeologists are reading your posts and declare you must be a guy really into receiving anal because they translate “squaddie” as “homosexual ”.

Obviously you’re deciding to accept a term that is translated from a different language into “lover” to mean being homosexual without even bothering to understand cultural context or the original language
You're reaching here, dude. None of the other Greek hoplite units referred to "lovers".

Your wrong, and that's all there is to it.
 
The following is a bit long but makes for an interesting analysis of something called "Gibson's law."


I love the parts I highlighted in red, so apropos on debate forums. :sneaky:
Thus the "experts" who claim climate change is a hoax and dueling "experts" in criminal trials.
 
BULLSHIT!!!!!


First you claimed it never happened
No, I said Greece wasn’t “gay”.
now you say its "half true",
Yes, you read cherry picked texts incorrectly then fill in your desire that platonic relationships be construed as “gay”
and claim Wiki is wrong!!!!!!
To the extent it makes false claims it is wrong
Not even a contest. You lose!
🙄
 
You're reaching here, dude. None of the other Greek hoplite units referred to "lovers".
Greeks never referred to anyone as “lovers” because that word is from language they didn’t speak. The term lover is a translation from various forms of Eros, often simplistically translated as “lover” or “love” but in fact refers to “passion” or “desire” (and not always in a sexual sense. Eros is used to refer to Food, and not in the American pie sense, or desire for knowledge)

In fact this term is used in Sparta to describe a form of Pedarasty for training soldiers, and also Spartans had laws punishing gay sex by death. So clearly they would not sanction sexual Pedarasty while the behavior of anal sex was a capital offense
Your wrong, and that's all there is to it.

Really this entire argument is just gross. The argument that left is seem to make about ancient Greece and homosexuality, is that the instances of grooming and sexual abuse the boys by older men justifies reforming sexual mores in Christian society.
It’s really a gross argument when you think about it

And most of the time, the argument is based off of a misunderstanding of Greek society, the Greek language, and very fanciful interpretations of writings The argument isn’t even accurate to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Greeks never referred to anyone as “lovers” because that word is from language they didn’t speak. The term lover is a translation from various forms of Eros, often simplistically translated as “lover” or “love” but in fact refers to “passion” or “desire” (and not always in a sexual sense. Eros is used to refer to Food, and not in the American pie sense, or desire for knowledge)

In fact this term is used in Sparta to describe a form of Pedarasty for training soldiers, and also Spartans had laws punishing gay sex by death. So clearly they would not sanction sexual Pedarasty while the behavior of anal sex was a capital offense


Really this entire argument is just gross. The argument that left is seem to make about ancient Greece and homosexuality, is that the instances of grooming and sexual abuse the boys by older men justifies reforming sexual mores in Christian society.
It’s really a gross argument when you think about it
Who mentioned boys? You did. I mentioned the Sacred Banders, who were grown men, the core of Thebes' army. Why bring up boys in that context, EMN?
And most of the time, the argument is based off of a misunderstanding of Greek society, the Greek language, and very fanciful interpretations of writings The argument isn’t even accurate to begin with.
Or that you're deliberately misrepresenting things to avoid a truth you don't want to deal with.
 
The following is a bit long but makes for an interesting analysis of something called "Gibson's law."


I love the parts I highlighted in red, so apropos on debate forums. :sneaky:
Yet libs trusted the "experts" , and still do, where Covid was concerned. They were wrong all along.
 
Xenophon doesn’t reference the “sacred band” by name.
WRONG
Xenophon, another Athenian, is the only contemporary who grudgingly notes some Theban accomplishments, and even then, never in-depth and with numerous omissions. His only mentions of Pelopidas and Epaminondas by name, for example, were very brief and shed no light on their previous accomplishments.[1] Indeed, the historians Bruce LaForse and John Buckler have noted that the character and accomplishments of Epaminondas were so unassailable that there is no known hostile account of him in ancient sources. The most unfriendly writers like Xenophon and Isocrates could do was omit his accomplishments in their work altogether.[76]

1677945435280.webp

And before you get all ****ed up about wikipedia, check their embedded sources at the bottom of each article.
 
Yet libs trusted the "experts" , and still do, where Covid was concerned. They were wrong all along.
Oh brother: I guess you totally "missed" what the article had to say. That is an ignorant reply that proves you read only the headline and not the article.
So let me repeat what you missed:
Let’s say you meet an expert in some area, and they present a fact or argument that you simply cannot tolerate. Fuming, but unable to articulate your counterargument, you go home to Google the expert’s position. To your great annoyance, the entire first page of search results validate the expert. You still hunt, determined to be right. Nestled in the forgotten abyss of Google’s page 4, you find Dr. Clutching Straws. You drag out Dr. Straws whenever you can.
Maybe this meme will help edumacate you:



ab1.webp
 
🙄Who mentioned boys? You did. I mentioned the Sacred Banders, who were grown men,
Says who? You know nothing about the sacred band except what modern homosexuals misrepresent about Plutarch. The type of relationship Plutarch describes is one resembling Athenian Pederasty. With a pair of “lovers” being an erastes and eremenos.
the core of Thebes' army. Why bring up boys in that context, EMN?

Or that you're deliberately misrepresenting things to avoid a truth you don't want to deal with.
🙄
 
WRONG


View attachment 67439404

And before you get all ****ed up about wikipedia, check their embedded sources at the bottom of each article.
Why don’t you read the sources which you clearly haven’t read and use them to make your own argument?

I don’t think you’ve read much primary sourcing at all and what you have read you are misinterpreting to support your political beliefs

You’re basing your entire belief on the idea that “lover” and “sleep with” meant the same thing in colloquial Ancient Greek that it does in modern English

Spartans did not engage in sexual “love” with men, not openly anyway. It was an actual crime punished by exile or death so Xenophons statements cannot be seen in that way unless he’s lying
 
Why don’t you read the sources which you clearly haven’t read and use them to make your own argument?

I don’t think you’ve read much primary sourcing at all and what you have read you are misinterpreting to support your political beliefs
In other words, you have nothing and have been beaten.
 
Back
Top Bottom