One of the above posters, "scotishbob" is wrong about the Spartan treatment of women.
Unlike Athenian women, Spartan women were educated, owned property, and could travel when and where they wanted. It is believed that the concept of adultery was unknown to Spartans -- Spartan women could take as many lovers as they wanted and could negotiate to bring there lover into their home. Spartan women were encouraged to have children with as many men as possible to increase the population of Spartans. Spartans placed the good of the state over jealously over their family.
No one in the ancient Greek world was homosexual as we understand the term. Instead they practiced pederasty a form of mentoring relationship between an older man and younger man. As it was practiced in most Greek states the older man would teach a younger man a trade and in exchange the younger man provided sexual services. In some states this relationship ended when the young man took a wife. In others it continued afterward. It was especially common amongst athletes and coaches of all the Greek states and men of all professions in Athens. In Sparta, where the profession was war, pederasty may have been used to build bonds between soldiers on the basis that a man was more likely to die protecting his lover than his comrade.
2007-03-21 18:02:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Cacaoatl 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
There was no such thing as homosexuality in the ancient world, nor was there any such thing as bisexuality. This is all because there was no notion of sexual orientation period. Let me explain.
In the 20th century, after the first serious study of the subject, medical science came to the realization that people had orientations. That is to say; some were attracted exclusively to the opposite sex, some exclusively to the same sex and others fit somewhere in between in a wide spectrum. Such people could be completely bisexual, others straight but bi-curious, others gay but bi-curious and so on and so forth.
Before this time, everyone was thought of as straight, there was no other way to be. (Of course, I should say every man was thought of as straight. Before the 20th century the world couldn’t care less about female sexuality, expect to keep it under wraps, God forbid that they enjoy themselves sexually.)
This notion of everyone being straight was the same for all societies, regardless of if homosexual sex was frowned upon or not. If it was, then homosexual relations were thought of in the same way drunkenness or a gambling addiction was thought of. Something that people engaged in out of a lazy, debauched mind. A death sentence or maybe just a whipping could cure it.
In the ancient world homosexual sex, sodomy, was not frowned upon as it is today. That is a result of the lack of the influence of Judeo-Christian-Islamic religion. However, there still were rules. An older man with an upper-class standing could only be the one who was penetrating a younger, lower-class man / boy, never the one being penetrated. This was because the one being penetrated was looked upon as “the woman”. And in a relatively misogynistic society, a man wanting to be a woman when he didn’t have to be would be shamed greatly. Who would want to be a woman, if they could be a man?
2007-03-21 23:28:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Raindog 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Most of the posters have answered the question well. Raindog has, however, made an error in saying homosexuality did not exist before the twentieth century, that women's seuxality was frowned upon and that being gay was looked down upon. I many civilisations, for centures, being gay was seen as normal. They may or may not have had a word for it but it was never looked down upon. Even the early church held same sex marriage ceremonies and blessed them. It was only when bigots entered the church that they forced their prejudices on generations to come. When the missionaries went all over the world, they often took their prejudices to societies where being gay was until that point okay e.g. African societies. There were societies that never had problems with female sexuality, especially the matriarchal societies.
2007-03-22 15:15:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by ellipse4 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Where there gays in Spartan society - im sure there were. Was the whole society gay - definetly not.
The spartans were a warrior ethic people, whose whole society revolved around service to the state. From the cradle to the grave, every spartan served in the army or as they got older, served in the spartan assembly.
But being gay did not stop those men or women from making active contributions to their society. Being bisexual im sure did not stop Alexander the Great from conquering, or stop Julius Caesar.
While it may have been frowned upon in public, what two men or two women did in private was their business - as long as they did not show signs of weakness in battle.
2007-03-21 22:44:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Big B 6
·
3⤊
3⤋
You are very very clever, but you speak lies.Or quote them.
Word 'lover' is only an English translation of the word 'inspirer' that was used by others when the spoke of Sparta. IT NEVER EVER had ANY SEXUAL REFERENCE TO IT.Until you people came with your ''freedom''.
Spartan boys received a mentor (which you people like to call lover) at the age of 10-12. Mentors were in mid to late 20's.(isn't it a little sick don't you think having such relations with a child,even for you guys)
I will remind you that Spartan males were expected to marry by the age of 30, and that there was no pre arranged marriage in Sparta and that we know girls married out of love (there is proof in many inscription to lovers).
We have many artistic representations of heterosexual Spartan practice but NO HOMOSEXUAL, not even an indication. THERE IS NO SUCH MENTIONING IN ENTIRE ANCIENT WORLD. Your ''quotes'' are not quotes at all but only paraphrased by using terms which gay people find serving their cause.Those quotes are so put out of context and not WELL TRANSLATED. IT IS A DISASTER what you write.
There is a strong evidence that doric Laconians had been influenced by doric Cretans in their legal system and there was the possibilty that Cretan "anti-effemination" laws were adopted also,and those strictly forbided homosexual relations with boys especially.
Plutarch in life of Lycourgos wrote that the relationship between young men and mentors was chaste.The lawmaker Lykourgos characterized as most horrid if someone desired the body of a fellow man or boy and set that ''lovers'' ''inspirers''/aka mentors should abstain from this if they happen to get the urge(in some cities in Greece it happened hence the warning)
Plutarch also (Laked. εÏιÏηδ. 7,237 c) informs us that whoever tried to ''abuse'' some man sexually was striped of his civil rights for life...that meant he could no longer be a hoplite in war,and basically all other parts of his life crumbled,that was even worse than death punishment.
"The (lycourgian) law allowed admiration towards the mental gifts of the youths but any physical desire was an abomination that declared carnal and not spiritual love . Whoever by law was condemned thus was dishonored (striped of his civil rights) for life ".
And finally there were many beautiful love quotes from Archaic Sparta,and Spartan women were known for being very healthy and good looking.There are numerous anegdotes of Herodotus about complicated love triangles in Sparta,all hetero.There are many hymns and songs to women, and NOT A SINGLE THING ABOUT MEN TO MEN.
If it was so normal as you say why would they hide it so well we did not find ANY EVIDENCE OF IT YET FOUND SO MANY AGAINST IT.
"formalize pederasty""
This is THE UGLIEST LIE WITH NO SINGLE EVIDENCE THAT EXISTS TODAY
2014-02-08 05:03:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by H 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Both the Atheneans and the Spartans agreed on this matter---women were little better than slaves and were good for only two things-running the house and procreation.....
If the men wanted sexual pleasures they got either young boys (under 13) or prostitutes.
I think that bisexual would better describe their sexual preferences with being pedifiles too
2007-03-21 23:01:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by scotishbob 5
·
1⤊
3⤋
Without doubt. It was institutionalised in their army as a means of bonding the soldiers so that would not abandon each other on the battlefield
2007-03-22 01:59:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by brainstorm 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
O.K.
2007-03-22 16:26:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by flavivs severvs 3
·
1⤊
1⤋