Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The given excerpt is serious about something actually occurring in real life. Xenophon claims to have attended, it's a work partly apologetic of Socrates, why would he tarnish the legitimacy of such a work with an off-hand comment? What use would there even possibly come from making up such a story, when there were already stories of pederasty involving Thebes? So, it's still not something made up by a gay, or not gay dude, from the 1970s. You even have material evidence, which is rare for such a thing, which I alluded to with the picture- the Chaeronean grave. There is much more evidence for the view of its existence, and some kind of homosexual practice, than that it was somehow single-handedly made up by Plato, and his circle; certainly not by a dude from the 1970s.

You can criticise the work, but Dover did not originate the idea of the homosexual Sacred Band, and similar. Those are directly from classical texts. To say they're all somehow made up (even if we reject eg. the Sacred Band), is just conspiratorial.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You have literally never heard of this shit until i just brought it up to you so how about you shut the frick up and stop pretending like you now what you are talking about?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As a matter of fact, I had, but whatever. Otoh, you falsely claim that Dover is the originator of all these ideas, because you read it online- a ridiculous apologia I am also familiar with, as I have seen this claim enough times, in the form of low quality infographics shared to 'debunk' homosexual practice in ancient Greece.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Well, again, this is not the first time I'm seeing this type of rhetoric, so I'm familiar with the claim, I'm familiar with the line of thought, etc. Although it wasn't nice of me to provoke you for your phrasing, it also wasn't nice that you're spreading a false narrative about a 'homosexual' spreading a 'homosexual agenda'.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jesus christ you are a cute twink

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:marseyshrug: I have tried to respond to every single one of your points in detail, while you dismissed my points, and you still don't admit that it's not true that it was made up by some gay agenda in the 1970s

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It was made up AND it was promoted heavily by the gay community. I messed up that it was two separate things but goddarn. you are such a goddarn redditor. All you do is go ummm source... source... do you have a source??? Then weasel out of it when given one. Go back to /r/askgaybros or where ever you come from

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It was promoted by the gay community, absolutely. It's also true that a certain narrative, not exactly accurate, formed out of this. But no, the texts about the Sacred Band were not made up, and it's not a new historiographical view :marseysquint:

Then weasel out of it when given one.

When did I do this?

You mean, when you quoted a secondary source that I am well aware of, as if Leitao is some unimpeachable authority? That I didn't even deny revisionary thought exists re. Sacred Band? This secondary source that, let me paraphrase what you said as a figure of speech, is "googled shit[sic] that agrees with you"? Unlike my literal primary sources? Lol there are plenty of articles which state otherwise, and which disagree with eg. Leitao.

Go back to /r/askgaybros or whereever you come from

We're not on Reddit anymore :marseydisagree:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments
Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.