This thread is a continuation from >>846801 which got WAY off topic. Let's discuss homosexuality and whatnot here. Be cool to each other dudes.
>>847186
Homosexuality was an invention of medical science in the 19th century.
>>847762
>Be cool to each other dudes.
>Homosexuality was an invention of medical science in the 19th century.
lol
Go to /LGBT/
>>847782
This is /his/, not lies and fabrications. Sodomites existed. Mollies did too. I'm not sure if maiden aunts did. But homosexuals were invented by medical science in the 19th century.
>>847797
So, the thing existed but they invented the word is what you're saying?
>inb4 ancient greeks
>>847824
Are you completely uninterested in discussing history, you fucking moron? If you want to say "BUT THEY HAD ANAL SEX TOO SO THEY WERE JUST LIKE ME," then you're a fucking disgrace to this imageboard. Greek pederasty and modern gay culture are far from identical.
>>847854
Not that anon, but 'gay culture' and homosexuality existing isn't the same thing, there's plenty of homosexual behaviour documented in many other species too.
from wiki
>Homosexuality (from Ancient Greek ὁμός, meaning "same", and Latin sexus, meaning "sex") is romantic attraction, sexual attraction or sexual behavior between members of the same sex or gender.
>>847854
question and pardon my ignorance, didn't the greeks/romans simply not care for sexuality, but rather it was a things humans naturally feel/act apon? Much different culture of shame and guilt by the catholic church in europe
>>847866
>Dic def
You really don't get the history of ideas do you?
>>847854
that's true! i'm neither gay nor OP btw, but i am interested in learning more about the topic.
surely you're not saying that homosexual culture hasn't changed since the 19th century. my only connection to greek pederasty is Plato's Symposion, in which it seems love between two men is seen as more pure than between man and woman. the "homosexuals" of the time also don't seem to have to deal with the same stigma of femininity as homosexuals today, they are perfectly masculine males loving other males for their masculinity. is this correct so far? also, was this phenomenon exclusive to more wealthy greeks or were peasants and slaves also commonly homosexual? when do you think did homosexuality become associated with femininity? also, what about stuff like the gay SA myth (given what we know about Ernst Röhm it hardly seems like a myth)? what are other phases in history in which homosexuals tried to revert back to a more masculine image by taking inspiration from past "homosexuals" like the ancient greeks?
Are these questions historical enough in their nature?
>>847886
ps: I know that my use of the word homosexual may be out of place in some parts of my post but that's just for lack of a better term given my lacking education on the subject.
>>847797
The word "homosexual" was invented. That does not mean any "homosexual" themself was. The word apple did not exist prior to peoples inventing it, that does not mean apples didn't exist until they were seen by humans.
>Sodomites
>Mollies
If you're religious then everything was invented anyway, what's your point?
>>847886
They're very good questions, historical.
>>847885
I do understand, but coming from a biological view, the claim that it didn't exist is simply incorrect.
Would you call these guys homosexual but not gay?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etoro_people
>>847898
no one doubted that, actually.
now, given that you know so much about how concepts of same-sex attraction changed over the course of history, why don't you let us in on your knowledge so that we too may know how different their concept of it was from ours?
>>847898
Yeah, their concept is different. That dosen't mean the reality is different. It it's "their concept" it's by definition just "theirs"; it's a perception, not a reality. The Dict anon is talking about homosexuality itself, not homosexuality the concept.
>>847910
It it's
If it's*
>>847886
>surely you're not saying that homosexual culture hasn't changed since the 19th century.
How the hell did you get that from my post? Again, are you uninterested in discussing history?
>my only connection to greek pederasty is Plato's Symposion, in which it seems love between two men is seen as more pure than between man and woman. the "homosexuals" of the time also don't seem to have to deal with the same stigma of femininity as homosexuals today, they are perfectly masculine males loving other males for their masculinity. is this correct so far?
I wouldn't call it a stigma of femininity, I'd say gay culture has taken femininity onto itself and tried to turn it into something gay.
>also, was this phenomenon exclusive to more wealthy greeks or were peasants and slaves also commonly homosexual? when do you think did homosexuality become associated with femininity? also, what about stuff like the gay SA myth (given what we know about Ernst Röhm it hardly seems like a myth)? what are other phases in history in which homosexuals tried to revert back to a more masculine image by taking inspiration from past "homosexuals" like the ancient greeks?
I don't really think the whole feminine/masculine dichotomy is useful or interesting for this phenomenon. If you're interested in discussing the social structures these faggots lived in, I'd be interested in that discussion, but to be perfectly honest I don't care about cultural history that much. That's what these questions boil down to. I was assuming you'd read at least a little bit of Foucault.
>>847898
This times fucking ten, people put dicks in butts all the time, it just wasn't something talked about with this vocabulary. Stop thinking of things in terms of definitions and concepts you refuse to change and your life will become easier.
>>847914
Are you uninterested in discussing history, friend?
Literally all you've done up to now is that over the course of history different cultures had different words for male-on-male buttfucking.
How about you say something of substance or just leave the thread?
>>847920
*all you've said
>>847920
>
Literally all you've done up to now is that over the course of history different cultures had different words for male-on-male buttfucking.
Because you obviously didn't even understand that much about the subject.
>How about you say something of substance or just leave the thread?
I've said something of substance, you're too dense to get it. I don't even know what "SA myth" you're talking about.
>>847899
Given that the claim that some acts embody an "unnatural" response to biological behaviour is the 19th century idea, and that this embodiment uniquely rules people homosexual, the claim that "homosexuality" didn't exist. Some men put their penises in bottoms, sometimes specifically in men's or boy's bottoms. And so on. Within the delimitation of manliness and its integrated negations.
>Etoro
Notice how the anthropologists are inflicting western categories?
wow, what a shitty thread
>>847936
This is what happens when you discuss things with christfags
>>847875
That's a remarkable oversimplification. Homosexuality was common in some Greek cultures. It wasn't in the Roman Empire. The Church really didn't care that much. Sodomy in general, i.e. any sex act for purposes other than procreation, was all deviant. Gays really didn't get singled out as particularly evil. See the claims about the emergence of homosexuality in the 19th century.
>>847968
Don't post a really fucking gay image next time you want to talk about the history of gay sex and culture. Post a tasteful image of a respected historical homosexual.
>>847854
hoho boy, it's this fucking guy again.
skip ahead to the part where you call us nazis. that's my favorite.
