Will those gay Greek units be in the next build?

I mean the units comprised entirely of gay men, i forget what they called them.

You see i've had this idea for a long time. To make a campaign story like everybody does whilst playing as the Greeks, but have 1 unit of the gay guys in an army, only one unit that never gets retrained and never gets reinforcements... And just follow that unit throughout my campaign. Their triumphs, their defeats, screenshots and a story of where they were recruited from... You know that sort of thing.

And i will call the story i make; Band of Bummers.

So will these units be in?

I believe you are referring to the Theban Sacred band which was made up of 150 gay couples, but i do not believe it was still around in the RTw time period. Plus most of the greek males at tthat time were bisexual so you could technically have any of the greek units as your "band of bummers".

You mean like the ones in my sig? :)

If you mean the Theban Sacred Band, then I wouldn't think that the EB team would include them. I think that Plutarch wrote that all of them died at Chaeronea during the battle with Macedon. I did read once, though, that 50 of them survived. Either way, I don't think that they existed in 272 BC. It would be best to get an answer from an expert on Greek history because I am not entirely certain.

If you mean the Spartans, whose Agoge training system involved relationships between two men, they should be in the game but I don't know for sure.

Ahh the old april fools day sacred band prank. I remember it like it was yesterday.:laugh4:

254 bodies of the Sacred Band were found under the monument at Chaeronea, which means 254 died at the battle. The rest were either injured or surrendered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abou

254 bodies of the Sacred Band were found under the monument at Chaeronea, which means 254 died at the battle. The rest were either injured or surrendered.

---

I thought they cremated people when they died?

I'm not quite sure how often that happened. You would have to ask someone like TK about it. I know that there were instances of opposing armies returning cremated dead of the defeated back to their respective cities (I can't remember the battle, but I think Sparta returned Athenian dead in urns during the Peloponessian war).

In the case of the Sacred Band, however, skeletons were found after excavations at the monument.

how do you say "Queens of combat" in Greek?

I seriously doubt that EB will be including a unit of pink hoplites with no pants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zorba

I seriously doubt that EB will be including a unit of pink hoplites with no pants.

---

Well, the pink part would be the hard one, because no one has pants anyway...

"Will those gay Greek units be in the next build?"

I dunno...only if their english boyfriends show up also.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Volume II

Well, the pink part would be the hard one, because no one has pants anyway...

---

I mean, no bottom. As in 300 exposed penii and 300 pairs of testicles flapping about on the battlefield. Nope. No way in hell. That kind of smut has no place in Europa Barbarorum.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://img59.imageshack.us/img59/66...taegaul9dk.gif

:wink:

Ah yes, the gay Greeks. Actually it was 150 men and their "boyfriends." The Greeks segregated women quite a lot and it meant that they didn't have meaningful relationships with their wives, just prostitutes and pubecant boys without beards.

Although Plato was gay, read the Symposium.

Xenephon on the other hand liked girls, what a wiedo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

Although Plato was gay, read the Symposium.

---

I think it goes beyond just homosexuality; in the Symposium, Plato seems to me to express a deep-seated fear and/or loathing of women. There is the discussion on how the "old" Aphrodite, the version born entirely of Kronos (or was it Oranos? I forget) was the "pure" version of love, because she came entirely from the Male gender; whereas the newer version of Aphrodite was "impure", since she arose from heterosexual love. Then there is the discussion on how people were once conjoined; the people who are now heterosexual are descended from the "third gender". the hermaphroditic combinations, rather than the all-male or all-female combinations. This seems to indicate that Plato definitely viewed heterosexual love as being abnormal, as are hermaphrodites.

The really weird part comes when Socrates speaks his part; he actually treats women and the Female gender with respect, even pointing out that he learned much of what he knew about love from a woman. Yet since this was all in Plato's head to begin with, and Socrates was dead by the time of the Symposium (I think- was he?) one begins to wonder just how Plato's mind really worked... kinda starts to remind me of "Psycho", where Norman Bates' mother lived on in his mind for the explicit purpose of tormenting him. :uhoh:

How can a whole nation treat women as lesser beings, and not just that, how can a whole nation of men be bummers? Now i have nothing against queers at all, they're people just like everybody else they have feelings and blabla, but why did the Greeks have to treat women as animals and allow them no freedom at all? And how the hell could all Greek men have been gay? I know they say 1 in every 30 men is gay... But a whole nation?

First of all, it definitely wasn't the entire nation. Second, if it works one way (how can an entire nation hate gays? and yet many do), it can work another. It's just a way people work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

How can a whole nation treat women as lesser beings, and not just that, how can a whole nation of men be bummers? Now i have nothing against queers at all, they're people just like everybody else they have feelings and blabla, but why did the Greeks have to treat women as animals and allow them no freedom at all? And how the hell could all Greek men have been gay? I know they say 1 in every 30 men is gay... But a whole nation?

---

Eh, none of the Grecco-Latin races/cultures really had 'enlightened' opinions of women. I mean the Romans were just as bad as the Greeks when it came to treating women poorly, and in some ways even worse. It's not like treating women poorly is unique to the Greeks, it's a recurring "and in my opinion, rather disturbing" trend of sorts that seems to come along with urbanization. If you look at ancient more tribal peoples they by and large held women in higher status, but when urbanization and big stone walls and "civilization" quote un quote come around, it always seems like women get turned into little more then slaves.

But that's just my two cents on that issue

Actually I think it has to do with the developement of a standing/oranised military. The Celts and Gauls were fairly civilised really but they had a far more even handed view of women. I think it basically has to do with the fact that women aren't a lot of use in an unbanised culture like Greece or Rome. All they can really do of use is make food and clothes and have children.

Men did all the fighting and building and hence they did all the law making after the fighting and building were over. Women can't really stand in a shield wall or use a war bow. Its the old "might is right."

As to Plato, it is generally considered that Socrates is used as a mouth piece for Plato's ideas in the Symposium. It is also considered that the event is quasi-historical. Plato's dialoges are not just his own ideas, they are set up as debates for a reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

How can a whole nation treat women as lesser beings, and not just that, how can a whole nation of men be bummers? Now i have nothing against queers at all, they're people just like everybody else they have feelings and blabla, but why did the Greeks have to treat women as animals and allow them no freedom at all? And how the hell could all Greek men have been gay? I know they say 1 in every 30 men is gay... But a whole nation?

---

When man started wearing clothes the main argument for being heterosexual became hidden and unkown to the masses and made it more difficult for men to realize why they should seek women rather than any body cavity to fulfill their lusts with. Thank God we have porn these days :grin:
The greeks didn't have porn, and many of their soldiers were kept away from women all their youth so that they first of all didn't really get to know the benefits of women, and secondly didn't get to know how to interact with them successfully. For men who had spent so much time with men it was probably easier to convince them of sex than it was to convince women, about which they knew nothing, to do it. Also just as with love today, it's not a matter of preference who you "choose", it's a matter of who is easiest to catch and logistically easiest to couple with. A bird in the hand, you know... If they didn't know what benefits a woman had and at the same time thought it more difficult to catch a woman, is it really that odd that they didn't bother about women as much? And after happening a while the idea of homosexuality became culture and tradition, so it remained for some time even after the causes of it had disappeared. It's no coincidence that many other cultures where women and men were distanced from each other, for example the 100-150 AD Rome, also started becoming pedophilic and homosexual.

This is from RTR gold. So dont think no one is prepared to put nude men in mods.
https://img88.imageshack.us/img88/3108/rtr5ox.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkarbiter

This is from RTR gold. So dont think no one is prepared to put nude men in mods.
https://img88.imageshack.us/img88/3108/rtr5ox.jpg

---

That is right, you got a hell of a lot "barbarian" units with NO clothes...e.g. "Naked Fanatics", right????

The Arveni already have their nude Gaesatae. It's more of the fact that the Theban Sacred Band were largely gone by the time.

By the way, about cremation. Didn't the Greeks tend to bury the dead instead? That was what the whole play Antigone was about. I guess times change though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix

When man started wearing clothes the main argument for being heterosexual became hidden and unkown to the masses and made it more difficult for men to realize why they should seek women rather than any body cavity to fulfill their lusts with. Thank God we have porn these days :grin:
The greeks didn't have porn, and many of their soldiers were kept away from women all their youth so that they first of all didn't really get to know the benefits of women, and secondly didn't get to know how to interact with them successfully. For men who had spent so much time with men it was probably easier to convince them of sex than it was to convince women, about which they knew nothing, to do it. Also just as with love today, it's not a matter of preference who you "choose", it's a matter of who is easiest to catch and logistically easiest to couple with. A bird in the hand, you know... If they didn't know what benefits a woman had and at the same time thought it more difficult to catch a woman, is it really that odd that they didn't bother about women as much? And after happening a while the idea of homosexuality became culture and tradition, so it remained for some time even after the causes of it had disappeared. It's no coincidence that many other cultures where women and men were distanced from each other, for example the 100-150 AD Rome, also started becoming pedophilic and homosexual.

---

Wow, you really hate society, don't you. Well for starters pedastry, that is a relationship between an adolecant and an adult post dates the Mycenaean Civilisation and was usually restricted to the Ionians and Dorians, whereas the Arcadians and Achaeans were somewhat homophobic.

It was a cultural developement which came about with the city state as late at 700 BC. That said homophobia is really a Christian preocupation and it had more to do with the idea that a man should not take on the role of a woman, that was the abomination.

The Greeks had porn, they had very experienced and competant female couresans and prostitutes and they put on live sex shows at their parties (Xenaphon.)

It was also considered far harder to catch a boy than a woman.

Rome was never a homosexual society or a heterosexual society until the arrival of Christianity.

Greece was homosocial they used women for sex and had meaningful relationships with men, which were also erotic. This was a result of the social segregation but there was never a physical ignorance of the images of women, Homer praised the beauty of women and there were some truly stunning sculptures of Aphroditae and other, mortal, women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lusted

I believe you are referring to the Theban Sacred band which was made up of 150 gay couples, but i do not believe it was still around in the RTw time period. Plus most of the greek males at tthat time were bisexual so you could technically have any of the greek units as your "band of bummers".

---

The Theban sacred band was slaughtered and the survivors captured by Alexander, though I forgot the site of the battle. Thebes was razed to the ground afterwards (Athens got off the hook by surrendering at the last moment)

So they obviously aren't going to be in, unless some other city state took on the concept themselves wich I'm not aware of.

IIRC it was Philip but a may be wrong, either wy its all been said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

Wow, you really hate society, don't you.

---

Define hate and define society. I'm being no more than a realist, objectively noticing the faults of our less than perfect society which has largely been formed by power struggle and random arbitrariness of our leaders, rather than by enlightenment and insight into the mind of humans. Unlike those who try to prove me wrong, I can accept the truth and live with it, so I don't have to deny it. That our societies with regular intervals give rise to a Hitler, a Stalin or any of the other all too often mentioned guys pretty much proves my point that our leadership and our society systems have been far from insightful throughout history. The rise of civilization was mankind's expulsion from Eden, and this is not a conclusion I've made from being religious, on the contrary I reached this conclusion from scientifically analysing the world and the human mind, then I noticed that it was exactly what some wise men had written in a book from thousands of years ago. If you want a discussion of benefits and curses of civilization I can take that debate in another thread in the monastery or backroom. I've not yet begun to list the arguments against civilization, but it's a long list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

The Greeks had porn, they had very experienced and competant female couresans and prostitutes and they put on live sex shows at their parties (Xenaphon.)

---

I have to be more specific I guess - high resolution porn in full 24 bit RGB color is what I meant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

It was also considered far harder to catch a boy than a woman.

---

Source? It doesn't sound logical so it sounds like something made up by someone who was in a state of denial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

Rome was never a homosexual society or a heterosexual society until the arrival of Christianity.

Greece was homosocial they used women for sex and had meaningful relationships with men, which were also erotic. This was a result of the social segregation but there was never a physical ignorance of the images of women, Homer praised the beauty of women and there were some truly stunning sculptures of Aphroditae and other, mortal, women.

---

Yes, it seems facts do agree with my view then.

Firstly, the facts do not agree with your view because you said that the focus on men was physical because of an ignorance of the female form, which personnally I think sounds homophobic. The truth is that social segregation led to male-male relationships.

The segregation in Ionian society led to the homoerotic relationships, not clothes or a lack of apreciation and Arcadian and Achaean society was the opposite, viewing relations between man and woman as preferable.

"I have to be more specific I guess - high resolution porn in full 24 bit RGB color is what I meant."

How is that better than live porn?

Some quotes:

Anacreon of Teos:

Cleobulus is the one I love
Cleobulus the one I'm mad for
Cleobulus is the one I gaze upon.

Commentary, Dr Tim Whitmarsh, from Ancient Greek Literature
"The threefold repetition of the boy's name at the beggining of eacg line...emphasizes the grip the boy has on the narrator. The syntax and poetic form lend a mesmerizing power to his name. But the narrator is also trying to control the boy.... Other prederastic poems also present the narrator's submission to the boy. In poem 357, a conventionalprayer formula is adopted to to invoke Dionysus...the god is entreated to become the 'councellor' of Cleobulus, to persuade him to 'accept' his love. In this poem, the boy is imaged as a haughty king; even the god Dionysus can only act as an intercessor."

Tim then goes on to contrast this with poems about maidens which compare them to fillies (virgins) which need to be broken in. However in Anacreon's poem the "filly" is a Thracian and therefore a coutesan, which be extension presents all heterosexual sex as male dominance anf female subjegation.

As I said, snaring a boy was considered harder and therefore worthwhile. Would you like me to quote the Symbosium on the virtue of a boy who attempts to evaid capture as well?

This was your arguement:

Quote:

---

When man started wearing clothes the main argument for being heterosexual became hidden and unkown to the masses and made it more difficult for men to realize why they should seek women rather than any body cavity to fulfill their lusts with. Thank God we have porn these days.

---

I have demonstated that ancient Greek men were fully able to interact with women, just not in an emotional way, thereby demonstrating that the homosexual relationships were a product of the segregation practiced by a particular section of Greek society and not a result of civilisation itself.

https://img133.imageshack.us/img133/...riends22ex.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

Firstly, the facts do not agree with your view because you said that the focus on men was physical because of an ignorance of the female form, which personnally I think sounds homophobic. The truth is that social segregation led to male-male relationships.

---

That's exactly what I've been saying - social segregation, but in several forms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zorba

https://img133.imageshack.us/img133/...riends22ex.jpg

---

I like to try and educate people, especially when they post things which make them sound silly.

Legio, you said that civilisation and clothes turned all the Greeks homosexual. That was wrong because.

A: It wasn't all the Greeks.

B: It was a result of later social developement, not basic civilisation.

C: You said a woman would be harder to catch.

If you want to make a sweeping statement you could say that democracy turned the Greeks gay, as it was male enfranchisement which led to female exclusion.

There's no hope in understanding the societal reasons/implications/development of Greek male-male sexual relations in antiquity without a very good understanding of the broader scope of Greek society in the home and in the agora. Any attempts to even use the term "homosexuality" to refer to it all brings so much modern baggage into the picture that it results in a very poor base with which to begin the discussion. Without a better understanding of their society in general, the whole matter is not easy for people in today's world to understand, in the end. ~;)

Just a little comment: the grin simely appears most commonly in posts with a light-hearted, sarcastic or ironic message.

Or one that was very serious but which also saw a bad pun rear its ugly head.

I think the whole male-male obsession the Greeks and other Graeco/Latin cultures seemed to have stemmed more from their un enlightened and 'barbaric' views on women. In many respects the Greeks where ahead of the curve, but when it came to women in society their culture was back-ass-wards to put it colorfully.

I mean, you didnt see the Celts or the Germanic tribes "bumming" one another, imho the male-male thing and treating women like crap went hand in hand and grew out as extentions of one another.

And if that makes me homophobic or whatever, then yes, I am a homophobe.

But you can't just choose to be gay... Society cannot make you gay... You're either gay or you aren't... Most men are straight, they reckon about 1 in 30 men are gay...

What i'm trying to say is... How can the best part of a whole nation (divided as it may have been) be homosexual? What made every Greek male so accepting of gay relationships? I'm as straight as straight gets, and the thought of sticking it in another mans arse disgusts me. I'm not homophobic... Gay men can do what they like, as long as they don't start kissing each other in front of me... But how can all Greek men have been attracted to other men? Why would any man of sound mind prefer dirty man arse to a woman?

Like i say i know about 1 in 30 men are gay, but what made all Greek men gay? If i loved in a society that treated women as little more than slaves, i still wouldn't become attracted to males...

Quote:

---

But how can all Greek men have been attracted to other men?

---

Short answer: they weren't.
It's dangerous to make general comments over Greeks, because there were so many different poleis and kingdoms with their own customs (of course there are many common traits as well)
Probably very few were exclusively attracted to men. Even if only for the reason that inter male sex doens't produce lineage, men who preferred sex with other men would still have sex with women for functional reasons.

Well gay and homosexual are modern terms with baggage which is why I said homosocial. Basically modern society conditions us towards being heterosexual, in reality we are all a bit of both. Theoretically if a modern gay man met the right woman he would turn straight, but in most cases that is virtually impossible.

The revulsion most men feel results from repressing homosexual desire in themselves, its a defence. Additionally the relationships between men and boys often didn't involve anal penatration but a different act involving the thighs. Regardless its not what we understand as a homosexual relationship, most men went both ways.

Today society forces many bisexual men into the "gay" peg hole when in fact they might go both ways.

It is all very complicated but it wasn't all about sex and it was based on the fact that Greek society was male-centric.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

How can a whole nation treat women as lesser beings, and not just that, how can a whole nation of men be bummers? Now i have nothing against queers at all, they're people just like everybody else they have feelings and blabla, but why did the Greeks have to treat women as animals and allow them no freedom at all? And how the hell could all Greek men have been gay? I know they say 1 in every 30 men is gay... But a whole nation?

---

According to what I've read, the Spartans treated their women quite nicely, allowing them to recieve physical training and education, so I guess not all Greek people treated women badly.

Also maybe they weren't gay just bisexual.

Another interesting question would be why did the Greek hoplites dress up as big roosters?

http://history.missouristate.edu/jch.../10055733a.jpg

http://www.kimani.com.au/images/rjf_rooster3.JPG

What is it about warriors and dressing up in fancy clothes?

Humans just have a thing for making themselves look fancy. It's the same thing with tattoos... Why have a tattoo? It's pointless, but we still do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zero1

I think the whole male-male obsession the Greeks and other Graeco/Latin cultures seemed to have stemmed more from their un enlightened and 'barbaric' views on women. In many respects the Greeks where ahead of the curve, but when it came to women in society their culture was back-ass-wards to put it colorfully.

I mean, you didnt see the Celts or the Germanic tribes "bumming" one another, imho the male-male thing and treating women like crap went hand in hand and grew out as extentions of one another.

And if that makes me homophobic or whatever, then yes, I am a homophobe.

---

I was reading this historians (who I forget the name off's) account on the habits of the Celts and he said that the Celtic men often prefered to go to bed with men even though their women were very beautiful.

But I think he then went on to say that they had group sex with men and women anyway.

I just checked out the name of the historian it was Athenaeus and his Deipnosophists.

Quote:

---

Yet Praxilla of Sicyorl says ; that Chrysippus was carried off by Zeus.b And among barbarians the Celts also, though they have very beautiful women, enjoy boys more; so that some of them often have two lovers to sleep with on their beds of animal skins. As for the Persians, Herodotus says c they learned the use of boys from the Greeks.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

Humans just have a thing for making themselves look fancy. It's the same thing with tattoos... Why have a tattoo? It's pointless, but we still do it.

---

I'd rather dress up like a rooster than get a tattoo.

I saw somebody wanted to know what queen of combat was in greek?
I assume it is Maches''

Basileia tes Maches

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

But you can't just choose to be gay... Society cannot make you gay... You're either gay or you aren't... Most men are straight, they reckon about 1 in 30 men are gay...

---

Participation in homo-eroticism does not require one to be "gay." If you are enculturated to find it completely repulsive, then you would only participate if forced. If your culture doesn't marginalize/demonize such behavior -- and upper strata classical Hellenic culture did not -- then it would not carry the sense of repulsion for most. It would be more akin to the dedicated pepperoni pizza fancier enjoying an occasional slice of Hawaiian pizza, even though the pineapple isn't a big hit for her/him. You are correct in suggesting that the percentage of those whose polarization is opposite the norm is rather small, but research suggests that sexuality is more of a continuum than an either/or categorization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

Like i say i know about 1 in 30 men are gay, but what made all Greek men gay? If i loved in a society that treated women as little more than slaves, i still wouldn't become attracted to males...

---

Classical Greek society down-played women's roles in society quite a lot (as noted above). In a pre-technological world, few women could stand in a shield wall and hope to hold their own -- and ability to fight was a significant element of power. Women in Greek literature are a VERY mixed lot, and not all of the archetypes presented are as flattering as Lysistrata or Penelope -- take Medea, Antigone, Helen, Clytemnestra, and Medusa for example.

While I personally agree with you (and Screamin' Sam Kinison) about the erotic impact of the male posterior, Greek culture emphasized the male and certainly accepted -- some would say condoned or in the case of Lacedaemon institutionalized -- perderasty. Republican Roman culture and most of the Barbarian cultures did not (Though there are theories about the "Berzerkers" in various Germano-Celt cultures...). Acting on one's homosexual inclinations in a Republican Roman army could earn you a painful death. How you are "hard-wired" is, no-doubt, the dominant component in your sexuality, but to ignore the impact of culture and situation is short-sighted.

Caveat: Remember, what we know of classical Hellenic culture and sexuality is restricted, in large part, to the upper economic and social classes. Then, as now, money allows for greater free time and the ability to indulge in activities simply not available to the less well-heeled.

Nah i don't buy it. I dont live in an anti-gay society... Nobody's ever forced me to believe that gay male relationships are disgusting... It's the way i have grown up. The thought of anal sex with a man repulses me, as does any form of sex with another male, but the thoughts of having these forms of sex with a female does not repulse me at all in fact it's quite attractive...

Society doesn't need to tell you gay relationships are pointless and wrong... The fact that gay sex doesn't produce a child and a continuation of our species is proof enough.

Like i say... I've nothing against gays, i could be best friends with a gay man, i could have a drink and a conversation with a gay man... They're humans just like me and you, but being gay is wrong... It isn't their fault... You're born gay due to an imbalance of hormones... You can tell if a male child is gay at the age of about 5... Sometimes sooner... It can't be helped... It is a flaw in the human reproductive process... If you believe in god, then god did a half assed job... If you don't, then it's just how we have evolved....

Aside from noting that growing up in a society one, by virtue of simply being exposed to that society, tends to adopt some or all of that societies' mores, I will simply ask that before this goes any further any who wish to continue the discussion take it to the backroom. I can see nothing good to come from a discussion on the nature or nurture of homosexuality here.

If it does continue, I will break off the related posts and move them to the backroom myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

Nah i don't buy it. I dont live in an anti-gay society... Nobody's ever forced me to believe that gay male relationships are disgusting... It's the way i have grown up. The thought of anal sex with a man repulses me, as does any form of sex with another male, but the thoughts of having these forms of sex with a female does not repulse me at all in fact it's quite attractive...

Society doesn't need to tell you gay relationships are pointless and wrong... The fact that gay sex doesn't produce a child and a continuation of our species is proof enough.

Like i say... I've nothing against gays, i could be best friends with a gay man, i could have a drink and a conversation with a gay man... They're humans just like me and you, but being gay is wrong... It isn't their fault... You're born gay due to an imbalance of hormones... You can tell if a male child is gay at the age of about 5... Sometimes sooner... It can't be helped... It is a flaw in the human reproductive process... If you believe in god, then god did a half assed job... If you don't, then it's just how we have evolved....

---

Ha ... I won't go into detail here because K. has requested us not to, but let me just say this: "pointless and wrong"! If our only reason for forming relationships was for the continuation of the species then I would understand, but we are obviously not chimpanzees! Gay relationships are hardly pointless and - "wrong"! - you have nothing againts "gays" yet you hold that their relationships are "wrong"!. Compare that with the statement of a facist: "I have nothing against blacks, but their existence is wrong."! Your reasoning is flawed, your position is disgusting and your morality (at least what i've seen) is one of naturalistic implausibility. I would have many more words to say to you but I feel that this discussion should close. We talk of EB not of the morality of society.

Foot

If you cut these posts out, the historical tenor of the discussion might better be preserved in the Monastery. As a Backroom brawler, I know what happens there.....

Umm.. this thread is getting offensive to some members. Cut that out. Dayve, how would you like to be told that your existence is wrong and repulsive?

Come on now... I didn't mean any offense by anything i said... But you have to admit that gay relationships just aren't the way it's supposed to go... Humans are built with an attraction to the opposite for a reason... Male+Female=Continuation of the species.

Male+Male=Nothing.
Female+Female=Nothing...

All i'm saying is that gay people are victims of a flaw in our design... Nothing against them at all... Maybe the way i worded it seemed offensive, sorry about that.

No, I don't have to admit anything. What about sterile people, or people with sexual disabilities? Is their existence wrong too? Thankfully, continuation of the species, in a straightforward, biological (male - ie. "we must procreate first, worry about progeny later") sense, is not ALL life is about. If homosexuality was so completely useless, it would disappear eventually in the process of evolution. In fact, there are theories that homosexuals are actually useful to the preservation of the species.

For a fan of South Park you sure have some conservative ideas :P

I don't even know what conservative means mate... Anyway we'd better drop it now, Khelvan wants it to stop.

And I agree with Khelvan. This is a subject to the Backroom not to the EB forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking

Another interesting question would be why did the Greek hoplites dress up as big roosters?

http://history.missouristate.edu/jch.../10055733a.jpg

http://www.kimani.com.au/images/rjf_rooster3.JPG

What is it about warriors and dressing up in fancy clothes?

---

Big rooster outfits make them seem bigger and scarier to the enemy, so they'll rout sooner.

Also, the Greeks at that stage were, I think, vertically challenged, and the crest would help them in that little drawback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking

According to what I've read, the Spartans treated their women quite nicely, allowing them to recieve physical training and education, so I guess not all Greek people treated women badly.

---

This is true. In a lot of ways they were more equal to men than at any time afterwards, until the 40's-60's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking

Also maybe they weren't gay just bisexual.

---

This is difficult to say. We know they had sex with men, but this was a tradition. They were also required to mate at the age of 30. 30 years old! I wouldn't wait that long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking

Another interesting question would be why did the Greek hoplites dress up as big roosters?

---

Very few ancient soldiers could afford the type of panoply you are talking about. They were vastly more symplistic than you might imagine. Just a helm, a spear and a robe would usually suffice for most of the.

It was meant to look like a horse's mane, not a rooster BTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

This is true. In a lot of ways they were more equal to men than at any time afterwards, until the 40's-60's.

---

That's giving the Spartans too much credit from our point-of-view.

The Spartans didn't allow their women to exercise because they were nice; they made them do it so they would be strong and thus bear strong children.

Spartan women may have been more "equal" with their men as compared to other Greek cities, but it would be a mistake to in any way consider that applicable to the women's right's movements of the past century or two, since Spartan society and culture as a whole are not applicable to Western (or perhaps "First-World", though the terminology is flawed either way) society and culture.



I'm not jumping into the homosexual debate. Just know that perspectives are everything.

Funny, so basically you could say that most greeks treated men very good and women like crap and the spartans treated both... half decent?
Really odd how different such things can be seen...

As mentioned members of the Spartiate class could only marry when they were about 30 (wich also explains why losses were so hard to replace)
Till they reached that age they practiced pederasty as an institutionally allowed alternative. Clearly that doesn't mean that they were gay.
Similar pracitces existed in other Dorian communities, particulary on Crete.
I'm not sure how widespread homosexual contacts were in Ionian/Attic communities, but I guess that it was mostly something only the upper class engaged in.

you know a thread sidetracked if you see the picture of a rooster...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Till they reached that age they practiced pederasty as an institutionally allowed alternative. Clearly that doesn't mean that they were gay.

---

not really an alternative:they were fined if they didn't.

The ephors fined any eligible man who did not love a boy, because, despite his own excellence, he failed to make a beloved “similar to himself.”
Aelian, Var. Hist., III.10

Some people have expressed hmmm disbelief at the concept that females could be treated so poorly by a people that are considered so civilized.

I would just like to point out that the modern islamic woman is in many parts of the world still treated like crap. Same goes for some asian cultures.

Hell.. women in the US were little more than domestic slaves until WWII forced them into the factories.

Don't be so surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking

Another interesting question would be why did the Greek hoplites dress up as big roosters?

http://history.missouristate.edu/jch.../10055733a.jpg

http://www.kimani.com.au/images/rjf_rooster3.JPG

What is it about warriors and dressing up in fancy clothes?

---

Dude I would were that armor daily, just for the hell of it

I'd pick the chicken suit...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zero1

I mean, you didnt see the Celts or the Germanic tribes "bumming" one another, imho the male-male thing and treating women like crap went hand in hand and grew out as extentions of one another.

And if that makes me homophobic or whatever, then yes, I am a homophobe.

---

"Although they have good-looking women, they pay very little attention to them, but are really crazy about having sex with men. They are accustomed to sleep on the ground on animal skins and roll around with male bed-mates on both sides. Heedless of their own dignity, they abandon without qualm the bloom of their bodies to others. And the most incredible thing is that they don’t think this is shameful. But when they proposition someone, they consider it dishonourable if he doesn’t accept the offer!"

Diodorus Siculus (1.BCE)

The translation's probably not the best, but the information is kosher. Read up on it...

http://www.philhine.org.uk/writings/flsh_bumsb.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dayve

How can a whole nation treat women as lesser beings?

---

Every nation that exists today treats women as lesser beings. See what they get paid, their rights, ect...

That picture doesn't look like it was made during the time period of EB. it looks more like a renaissance glorification of what they envisioned as ancient greece.

But no one disputes that they did wear big frilly hats.

They were silly hats so you know who to stab.
"See a red , stab him in the head. See yellow, that's your fellow"
Heheh

From Teutatis's temple describition:

Persons that have been caught in acts of martial cowardice and / or homosexuality are sacrificially slain in the name of Teutatis for the alleged good of the tribe. These crimes are shameful to Gauls Those found guilty of such are drowned in water or smothered in a bog by being tied, placed face down and trodden under foot, thus removing both they and their crimes from sight and memory.

Seems some people were touchy about homosexuality back then too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fondor_Yards

They were silly hats so you know who to stab.
"See a red , stab him in the head. See yellow, that's your fellow"
Heheh

From Teutatis's temple describition:

Persons that have been caught in acts of martial cowardice and / or homosexuality are sacrificially slain in the name of Teutatis for the alleged good of the tribe. These crimes are shameful to Gauls Those found guilty of such are drowned in water or smothered in a bog by being tied, placed face down and trodden under foot, thus removing both they and their crimes from sight and memory.

Seems some people were touchy about homosexuality back then too...

---

LOL which is it lots of man loving or this i think i will take what this temple say instead of the some outsiders :laugh4: