I.E. Attitude to Homosexuality (was [tied] Re: Dolichophallic "Arya

From: wtsdv
Message: 25508
Date: 2003-09-04

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>
> As I was skimming it, it did give mention to a kind of
> machismo behind the idea of anal intercourse in Roman
> times, to the effect that it is okay to give anal sex to someone
> because you're "on top", but to _receive_ is considered a
> passive act. Passivity is then associated with weakness or
> femininity. The author goes into detail about certain rules
> like, to paraphrase: "If you're a wealthy gentleman buying a
> slave boy, don't tell anyone you're 'receiving'".

That's still generally true in the Latin cultures, as
well as in the Middle-East. Could it be some sort of
Mediterrranean thing?. The one on top, if on top of
another male, is only indulging in recreational sex,
but the one on the bottom is an object of contempt.
If I remember correctly, in one period of ancient history
in the middle-east, the rulers of conquered cities would
be publicly subjected to anal intercourse by the conquerers
as a sign of subjugation and humiliation.

> I can't help but wonder if IEs had the same sort of view
> because there are some stories in different IE cultures that
> seem to suggest 'anal is bad'. I also wonder whether this idea
> relates at all to "fire", crossdressing and deception. Just a
> thought.

That was the point of my question. What evidence is
there for similar attitudes in I.E. traditions. It
seems more likely that this is a Mediterranean substrate
thing, but I can't be sure. What stories from I.E.
cultures are you referring to? What, in this context,
are "fire" and "deception"?

> Although I may have a biased opinion here, I have to admit
> that I don't get the cutesy happy feeling that IE peoples
> in general supported homosexuality in the same way we
> might today, or even that they thought of the concept
> of 'homosexuality' like we do today. Anyone have their
> ideas?

There was probably never anywhere much support for
perceived male "passivity", as you reference above,
being as the ancients were in perpetual war mode.
For the same reason there was probably always pressure
to produce as many children as possible. However, it
seems that many ancient cultures had little problem
with the private sex lives of men who otherwise
functioned well as warriors and who fulfilled their
tribal duty to increase the herd. Our modern partial
acceptance of homosexuality goes hand in hand with
our gradual breaking away from tribalism, and the
celebration of the individual.