NSG, is it gay to be gay?

[Senkaku]

You can say whatever you want about a historical figure's sexuality if you're the one writing the fanfic.

[Atheris]

You can say whatever you want about a historical figure's sexuality if you're the one writing the fanfic.

Can confirm.

Source: I write fanfiction.

[Adamede]

Short of situations like Alexander the Great where it’s told that they had non-hetero lovers there’s no real way to be 100% sure if some historical figures lgbt status really. Whatever floats your boat essentially.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Short of situations like Alexander the Great where it’s told that they had non-hetero lovers there’s no real way to be 100% sure if some historical figures lgbt status really. Whatever floats your boat essentially.

More like Alexander the Gay am I right? Lmfao.

The ancient Greeks proved that doing non-heterosexual stuff doesn't make someone weak. Those guys were fierce fighters.

[The Archregimancy]

Illustrating same-sex sexual activity in the Classical period is always slightly complicated in NSG in that much of the art isn't PG-13; a lot of it skirts the line between (in 21st-century terms) art, erotica, and outright pornography. There's also the awkward point that much of the surviving art involves pederasty, so depicts acts that wouldn't have fussed Socrates, but are point-blank illegal in modern terms. As a site moderator, I feel like I have to be particularly careful here.

That said, I think I can offer a Wikipedia link to the British Museum's Warren Cup without ruffling too many feathers. Just to show how even modern attitudes change, the United States refused entry to the Warren Cup for a museum exhibit in 1953, but you can now buy a replica via the British Museum's gift shop - described as 'an exquisite ornament for the home'.

The point I'm making slightly obliquely here is that it's much, much easier to prove that homosexuality was present in the past than it is to prove that specific historical figures were gay. This is an important distinction since it allows us discuss the existence of same-sex attraction - even allowing for changes over time in social perception of that attraction - without getting bogged down in the more complex discussion of whether individual people were gay (see my post at the top of the first page for that topic).

[Washington Resistance Army]

Short of situations like Alexander the Great where it’s told that they had non-hetero lovers there’s no real way to be 100% sure if some historical figures lgbt status really. Whatever floats your boat essentially.

More like Alexander the Gay am I right? Lmfao.

The ancient Greeks proved that doing non-heterosexual stuff doesn't make someone weak. Those guys were fierce fighters.

Fwiw in Greek perceptions Alexander wouldn't have been gay even if he was banging Hephaestion. While as Arch said above this is a bit of a difficult topic to discuss in a PG-13 setting at times it can kinda be summed up with "it wasn't gay as long as you weren't receiving" as a general rule, though perceptions throughout time and locale can vary so ymmv and all that.

[New haven america]

If we go by the logic presented by OP's opinion, then the majority of American males in the 1800's-mid 1900's were at the very least bi (Which would be strange considering LGBT rights weren't even a concept for most of the US' history). It used to be totally normal for men to cuddle and sleep in the same bed, hold hands, sit on each others laps, etc... (This changed around the time of The Great Depression and Cold War, with the former foregoing emotional connections in order to survive and the latter because the US government thought Communists were gay. Yes, you did read that correctly)

So yeah, it does depend on the context and culture. Eleanor Roosevelt was totally gay, no question, but FDR wasn't trans just because he wore dresses as a kid, due to the fact that most children regardless of sex/gender did due to them being easier to clean while potty-training.

[The Archregimancy]

More like Alexander the Gay am I right? Lmfao.

The ancient Greeks proved that doing non-heterosexual stuff doesn't make someone weak. Those guys were fierce fighters.

Fwiw in Greek perceptions Alexander wouldn't have been gay even if he was banging Hephaestion. While as Arch said above this is a bit of a difficult topic to discuss in a PG-13 setting at times it can kinda be summed up with "it wasn't gay as long as you weren't receiving" as a general rule, though perceptions throughout time and locale can vary so ymmv and all that.

Ah, a slight - though understandable - misconception here.

It's the Romans who believed that, quoting the Warren Cup article in my previous post, it was fine 'to engage in same-sex relations without a perceived loss of masculinity only as long as they took the penetrative role and their partner was a social inferior such as a slave or male prostitute'.

Many Greeks in contrast - and it's worth remembering that more that three centuries separate Alexander the Great and the Warren Cup - held that 'pederasty was a socially acknowledged relationship between freeborn males of equal social status', and that it was possible to both give and receive without impacting perceptions of masculinity.

Anyway, the relationship between Alexander and Hephaestion was, like the fictional relationship between Achilles and Patroclus that it was so often compared to, ambiguous and particularly prone to subsequent political emphasis. It offers an excellent example of discussing this sexuality of specific historical figures who are so distant from us in time. We know that Alexander and Hephaestion were exceptionally close, even by contemporary standards, and given what we know about close male friendships between young men in Macedonian Greece, and the common acceptance of what we would consider bisexuality (and it's worth remembering that Alexander was heterosexually polygamous, with one posthumous child), it's not improbable that their relationship had a sexual element. But it's also completely unprovable, not least because even the Classical-period sources that overtly mention the possibility all post-date Alexander by two to three centuries.

[New haven america]

Why the focus on sexuality? I guess it is the Zeitgeist of the times. There are a lot more important things to a culture than how it views sexuality such as its view on authority and religious practices.

Did you even read what you wrote?

Last time I checked, most religions and countries have regulations on sexuality, do they not?

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

I can tell you, it's not very gay to be gray.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

If we go by the logic presented by OP's opinion, then the majority of American males in the 1800's-mid 1900's were at the very least bi (Which would be strange considering LGBT rights weren't even a concept for most of the US' history). It used to be totally normal for men to cuddle and sleep in the same bed, hold hands, sit on each others laps, etc... (This changed around the time of The Great Depression and Cold War, with the former foregoing emotional connections in order to survive and the latter because the US government thought Communists were gay. Yes, you did read that correctly)

So yeah, it does depend on the context and culture. Eleanor Roosevelt was totally gay, no question, but FDR wasn't trans just because he wore dresses as a kid, due to the fact that most children regardless of sex/gender did due to them being easier to clean while potty-training.

Men in the 1800s cuddling? As far as I can recall, they weren't doing that. Men on road trips did sleep in the same bed then but then again so did me and the homies on our Florida trip cause there was 5 of us in the room and 2 beds, so we had to put 2 guys in one bed, 2 in the other and 1 on the ottoman.

We made sure to leave like a mile of space between each other.

[The New California Republic]

If we go by the logic presented by OP's opinion, then the majority of American males in the 1800's-mid 1900's were at the very least bi (Which would be strange considering LGBT rights weren't even a concept for most of the US' history). It used to be totally normal for men to cuddle and sleep in the same bed, hold hands, sit on each others laps, etc... (This changed around the time of The Great Depression and Cold War, with the former foregoing emotional connections in order to survive and the latter because the US government thought Communists were gay. Yes, you did read that correctly)

So yeah, it does depend on the context and culture. Eleanor Roosevelt was totally gay, no question, but FDR wasn't trans just because he wore dresses as a kid, due to the fact that most children regardless of sex/gender did due to them being easier to clean while potty-training.

Men in the 1800s cuddling? As far as I can recall, they weren't doing that. Men on road trips did sleep in the same bed then but then again so did me and the homies on our Florida trip cause there was 5 of us in the room and 2 beds, so we had to put 2 guys in one bed, 2 in the other and 1 on the ottoman.

We made sure to leave like a mile of space between each other.

If you don't have a pillow wedged as a barrier then you'll tend to drift into each other when sleeping. And then the magic happens.

[New haven america]

If we go by the logic presented by OP's opinion, then the majority of American males in the 1800's-mid 1900's were at the very least bi (Which would be strange considering LGBT rights weren't even a concept for most of the US' history). It used to be totally normal for men to cuddle and sleep in the same bed, hold hands, sit on each others laps, etc... (This changed around the time of The Great Depression and Cold War, with the former foregoing emotional connections in order to survive and the latter because the US government thought Communists were gay. Yes, you did read that correctly)

So yeah, it does depend on the context and culture. Eleanor Roosevelt was totally gay, no question, but FDR wasn't trans just because he wore dresses as a kid, due to the fact that most children regardless of sex/gender did due to them being easier to clean while potty-training.

Men in the 1800s cuddling? As far as I can recall, they weren't doing that. Men on road trips did sleep in the same bed then but then again so did me and the homies on our Florida trip cause there was 5 of us in the room and 2 beds, so we had to put 2 guys in one bed, 2 in the other and 1 on the ottoman.

We made sure to leave like a mile of space between each other.

They did actually!

It was considered more socially appropriate to cuddle with your male friends than if it was between unmarried men and women.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Men in the 1800s cuddling? As far as I can recall, they weren't doing that. Men on road trips did sleep in the same bed then but then again so did me and the homies on our Florida trip cause there was 5 of us in the room and 2 beds, so we had to put 2 guys in one bed, 2 in the other and 1 on the ottoman.

We made sure to leave like a mile of space between each other.

"I bags the ottoman!" ... but you can't take that back when the ottoman turns out to be a Turkish guy.

[SD_Film Artists]

A significant difference is that being gay was something that you did, whereas today it's something that you are.

Also judging historical figures by modern standards is generally a silly thing to do and ends up in things like removing statues of people for reasons unrelated to the reason why they're celebrated and ignoring their culture.

[Nolo gap]

it is illogical to look upon diversity as a negative. any diversity. not just sexual.

as for judging the sexuality of historical figures (the current poll in this thread as of my this posting to it)
sorry, what logical reason was there for doing so at all?

[New haven america]

A significant difference is that being gay was something that you did, whereas today it's something that you are.

Also judging historical figures by modern standards is generally a silly thing to do and ends up in things like removing statues of people for reasons unrelated to the reason why they're celebrated and ignoring their culture.

Hey, did you know that the majority of confederate statues were put up around the 1930's-60 around the time of racial civil unrest and The Civil Right Movement, and that the people who commissioned the statues were organizations like the KKK and Daughters of the Confederacy who put them up as a show of force and to continue the idea that the only place a black person belongs is under the boots of white people?

Didjya?

[Ifreann]

A significant difference is that being gay was something that you did, whereas today it's something that you are.

Do gay, be crimes.

[Ethel mermania]

To be serious for a moment, context is the issue. If we are talking about Alexander the great his sexuality doesn't matter very much, If we are talking about Oscar wilde it does.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

A significant difference is that being gay was something that you did, whereas today it's something that you are.

Granted for the sake of argument, that means "people who have gay sex" (incl. lesbians) need some other name. Something a little better than Men Who Have Sex With Men, and preferably unisex to cover Women Who Have Sex With Women.

This was discovered by doctors who had a legitimate reason to ask men (in particular) whether they have "gay" encounters, and found that quite a few did while also not identifying as Gay.

Personally I identify as Bisexual. It's a very rough description of what I'm like, but I don't care. It's not as if I'd go to a party with an invitation like "Gay and Curious only" or "Gay, Lesbian and Queer only". But "Bisexuals only" sounds like a good time, maybe a bit adventurous. "Metrosexuals only" would be perfect: sexuality doesn't matter, but must be tolerant of other sexualities.

Also judging historical figures by modern standards is generally a silly thing to do and ends up in things like removing statues of people for reasons unrelated to the reason why they're celebrated and ignoring their culture.

Judging historical figures by modern standards is perfectly fine. Immorality by modern standards is immorality when applied to someone present or someone in the past.

Don't let your apologist position on slavery lead you to an apologist position on homophobia. It was wrong, whoever did it. Straights who helped cover up, or cover for, lesbian or gay family and friends, were just being protective of them. I think similar people today get suspected of "passive homophobia" for denying a friend is gay, or not wanting to talk about it.

[Atheris]

I can tell you, it's not very gay to be gray.

Can not confirm.

[Stellar Colonies]

Men in the 1800s cuddling? As far as I can recall, they weren't doing that. Men on road trips did sleep in the same bed then but then again so did me and the homies on our Florida trip cause there was 5 of us in the room and 2 beds, so we had to put 2 guys in one bed, 2 in the other and 1 on the ottoman.

We made sure to leave like a mile of space between each other.

They did actually!

It was considered more socially appropriate to cuddle with your male friends than if it was between unmarried men and women.

It really is a shame that there is barely any concept of platonic contact between men currently.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were some issues coming from that.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Men in the 1800s cuddling? As far as I can recall, they weren't doing that. Men on road trips did sleep in the same bed then but then again so did me and the homies on our Florida trip cause there was 5 of us in the room and 2 beds, so we had to put 2 guys in one bed, 2 in the other and 1 on the ottoman.

We made sure to leave like a mile of space between each other.

They did actually!

It was considered more socially appropriate to cuddle with your male friends than if it was between unmarried men and women.

What in the actual fuck?

[Borderlands of Rojava]

They did actually!

It was considered more socially appropriate to cuddle with your male friends than if it was between unmarried men and women.

It really is a shame that there is barely any concept of platonic contact between men currently.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were some issues coming from that.

I mean me and my male friends have a very strong bond but not like that. Maybe we'll hug once in a while, or you'll get a pat on the back or a hi five or whatever but I don't even cuddle with my male relatives, let alone my friends.

Tbh I'm not a really cuddly type though unless there's a dog in the room. Then I am but it's different, you know?

[Stellar Colonies]

It really is a shame that there is barely any concept of platonic contact between men currently.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were some issues coming from that.

I mean me and my male friends have a very strong bond but not like that. Maybe we'll hug once in a while, or you'll get a pat on the back or a hi five or whatever but I don't even cuddle with my male relatives, let alone my friends.

Tbh I'm not a really cuddly type though unless there's a dog in the room. Then I am but it's different, you know?

Oh yeah, I'm not really either. Just in general for those that would like it.