I mean come on! if you watch Caligula: 1400 days of terror, I would say everyone back then did anything that had an opening. and back then parties practically happened every day, cause it was a sign of power. so when did it become a thing for people to hate if it was more accepted back then? did it become something to grimace at when new religions came into play? ps: and im sure homosexuality is dated even way more back then that...
Wasn't Arlo Guthrie put in the mother-raper section for littering when he attended the draft, in living memory?
more accurately, most people in the Roman empire were bisexual, the first emperor who was strictly hetero sexual was Claudius and many of the Roman citizens saw him as strange because of it The US would be very fortunate to live half as long as the Roman empire did
I recall Ceasar was gay. I think he went to visit some chap in Pergamum and they had a fun time, with Caesar being on the recieving end. Kinda gives you another picture of that brilliant statesman doesn't? As for why homosexuality started to be shunned, well why it's christianity's fault of course. Lie not with a man as ye lie with a woman for that is detestable -somewhere in deutoronomy.
Hmm i think you are confusing the ancient greek world with the roman era, which are different things. It is true that italic people are supposed to have much in common with greeks and the proof is that ancient sicily is reported to had been colonised and inhabited by greeks since very, very ancient times, but romans and greeks are NOT the same thing. In ancient greek homosexuality was seen in a very different way, it was quite common that a young adolescent had an homosexual relation with his instructor, they were literally lovers, and they were not charged of pedophilia either of course! There was even a famous batallion of elite hoplites, which it is said they were all lovers ( called " the sacred band " ). However a forced sexual relation/violence with another man/boy was rightly seen as an unfair thing and persecuted. Romans were different, terms like " twink ", " (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) " were in common use and homosexual relations were seen as disgraceful, expecially between soldiers ( as opposed to the greek elite sacred band, which were all lovers ). Homosexual relations among civilians were not however persecuted, among legionnaires and officers it was punished though.
Well homosexuality was widespread, but not in the equal partnership type of way that gay men and women have today. Like you said it was all about power, but I should point out that the relationships between men and women weren't equal either. That is also a fairly new idea.
Using Caligula as justification for anything probably won't give you the strongest argument... Homosexuality wasn't unheard of, and it didn't have the same stigma that it acquired later on during the first couple centuries of the Roman Empire. However, as some others have already said, there was no equality in the relationships. What's more, they weren't considered serious, long-term deals- it was simply sex. Just because homosexual relations were regarded with less animosity than in later centuries, that doesn't mean they had people crying out for gay marriage back then, either. There were arrangements in which such relationships were regarded as a sort of "mentor/mentee" thing (which isn't quite the correct way to describe it, but probably the closest thing to it) but they weren't meant to become anything more than that. And, of course, prostitution existed back then. For both genders. In Rome, it was a display of power and wealth for the more dominant partner. The submissive partner were typically seen as being no better than a common prostitute if they remained in a relationship with another male for longer than necessary. The Ancient Greeks treated homosexuality with a similar attitude (which may have been what carried over into Roman society years later). It was common for younger men to enter relationships with older men, though these relationships would end as soon as the younger partner married. On the same note, the Vikings also shared this attitude towards homosexuality. People looked the other way as long as a) you still settled down and raised a family, and b) you weren't the one "catching", if you can excuse the crude terminology. Male/male relationships were seen as a conquest or display of dominance, although again, not if you were recipient. The submissive partners were shamed and considered argr (adj.) or ergi (noun), which is quite derogatory when translated (I'm sure we can all figure it out). Granted, this was some time after the fall of the Roman Empire- the Viking Age lasted from the late 700s AD to the 1100s (even until the 1200s according to some historians), but their attitudes were shared by most earlier Germanic societies (some were actually even more vehemently against it, but the majority of opinions regarding the matter remained more or less the same). All of this is meant to show that while homosexual relationships occurred in different historical periods, it wasn't as if people flaunted their relationships around (usually- Caligula was insane, for one thing, and many emperors were powerful enough that they could get away with some things). There were still stigmas, and as long as you did what your society expected of you, most would simply turn a blind eye. The issues with homosexuality did not start with Christianity, either. Judaism, although a very small minority at the time (and still is a minority today) didn't permit it under any circumstances, nor did several (now dead) minor religions or many of the new philosophical doctrines that arose around the same time. Christianity gets its bad rap for homophobia simply because it got popular and spread further than any of the others. When coupled with regional (generally somewhat disdainful) opinions on the matter, things got worse. Among men, there was also the idea of masculinity that was intertwined with dominance and submission- to submit to another man was essentially the equivalent of taking up the role of a woman. Obviously, as in any patriarchal society, this was frowned upon. Women in homosexual relationships were also of some concern, though not quite for the same reasons as for men. I've spent most of this post referring to male/male relationships, but it's important to note that regardless of whatever rights women might have had (or not had), their purpose was primarily to care for a household and bear children. That was their role in society, and there wasn't much time between the ages women reached sexual maturity and the age most were married off for most to even bother. Adultery by women was treated far more strictly than adultery by men. It was easier for men to get away with side relationships, whereas women could become divorced and essentially lose everything (sometimes even her own children). Modern society has its flaws like any other, but homosexuals are WAY better off now than they ever were in history before. Their situation is improving, too. There's still progress to be made, but things are far better than they once were.
I know. lets defend homosexuality by pointing out that the same people that threw Christians to the lions engaged in it.
It's normal for there to be some people who are homosexual. It's natural. Deciding it's a taboo and a sin doesn't make it go away. There have been gay people as long as there have been people in general. They've always been here, just like straight people. Through every single age of recorded history and before. The only difference at all is in how they are and were treated by the societies they live in.
