Talk:Pederasty in ancient Greece

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pederasty in ancient Greece article.
Article policies

Older discussion has been archived: Archive 1

Contents


To-do list for Pederasty in ancient Greece: edit · history · watch · refresh
Tyranny
The rise of democracy

[edit] on a lighter note

I really have nothing to contribute other than this article sure puts a spin on the Monty Python philosopher song lyrics "Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle". 64.173.240.130 18:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anonymous complaints

This article is very misleading, it makes it sound like everyone was homosexual, when in fact homosexuality was against the law in Athens and Sparta, pederasty was punishable by death. Why is that not mentioned in the article ? Who wrote this article ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.22.98.162 (talk • contribs) .

And who posted the note, asserting that pederasty was punishable by death? --Wetman 02:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Both Aristotle and Plato's Laws unequivocably condemn homosexuality. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.22.98.162 (talk • contribs) .

That is a vague and misleading formulation, since Plato in the Laws was condemning anal intercourse with boys (please quote source for Aristotle). That is not inconsistent with his support for chaste pederasty in Phaedrus and the Symposium. It is also demonstrably false, since what is currently understood by "homosexuality" and what Plato wrote about are two very different things. Haiduc 09:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I checked the article and noticed that some important material on opposition was removed when breaking out the article on Philosophy of Greek pederasty. I have restored the part about Plato's Laws. If you have other material that you feel needs to be quoted here please discuss. Haiduc 10:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

There are more homosexuals in the United States today than in all of Ancient Greece, and homosexuality was considered normal in Ancient Judaea and Jerusalem, which was the San Francisco of that time, and still is.

Wikipedia is packed with homosexuals, more than even Jerusalem. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.22.98.162 (talk • contribs) .

This subject requires attention away from personal belief systems. There are several points to make with reference to the above:

Most Greek men expressed their bisexuality through this relationship. Please note that sexual intimacy itself was not frowned upon, if it was processed in the "correct" manner. Anal penetration was stigmatised, a citizen caught in the passive act would find himself in the courts. The reason? To make yourself a passive partner and allow yourself to be penetrated was mimicing the female sexual role. In a mysoginistic society this was a cardinal sin. For metics, or any other males, it was acceptable. The ideal pederastic relationship saw the young boy receive attention from an older male, he was meant to play "hard to get" and thus test the resolve and intention of the older man. The young boy would receive instruction from his older lover, and as such importance was stressed at the suitablility of him.

True the older lover was expected to house sexual motives, but they would not involve penetration. That was the "ideal" to what extent this happened is up for debate.

One theory is that this relationship took the place of the father/son relationship as there was a large age-gap between both. If you assume the average male married when he was expected to (around 30) and add to this that his son would be looked after mostly by his mother till the age of 7 it is possible that many fathers never really bonded with their sons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scamander (talk • contribs) .

I think in the West we are brought up in Judaeo-Christian belief system which is somewhat narrow minded when it comes to the subject of love. People fail to realize that words such as "Phila Delphia" once existed, which referred to loving someone as a brother or brotherly love. Is it not possible that the Sacred Band of Thebes were some of the closest of friends, who became so close through their living, fighting and suffering together that they saw and loved one another as Brothers? Where one soldier of the band would sacrifice his own life to save his Friends', so close was their bond? Or are we supposed to mindlessly believe that they were all penetrating one another? I think the perversion of modern Western thinking has changed the actual meaning of what the Sacred Band really was and the purpose it served. --Xenophonos 02:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Quite so. Yet most people now fall in line and obediently believe that male love in Greece was about "penetration" and about "dominance." It clearly was first and foremost about love. But, what kind of love? One based on the dogmatic denial of eros, or one honoring eros and also the bounds of moderation, as Philip Macedon implies? Carnal relations were often condemned or avoided, but that did not diminish the erotic nature of the relationship. It may have heightened it. The Thebans were subject to Greek ideals, not Judaeo-Christian ones. Haiduc 12:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seminal matters

Removed this from text: Some research has shown that ancient Greeks believed semen, more specifically sperm, to be the source of knowledge, and that these relationships served to pass wisdom on from the erastes to the eromenos within society. Didn't find any sources. Haiduc 13:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it was Bethe who mentioned that the man's arete (Αρετή) was believed to
be transferred to the boy via anal penetration. I don't know for sure, but this may
have also been the case with the ancient Persians.
Dan Asad 06:41, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution of pederasty

"Greek pederasty went through a series of changes over the millennium from its entry into the historical record and its final demise as an official institution. In some areas, such as Athens, the construction of the relationship seems to have gone from greater modesty in the early days to a freer physicality and lack of restraint in classical times, followed by a return to a more spiritual form in the early fifth century. Its formal end resembled its beginning, in that it came by official decree – that of emperor Justinian, who also put an end to other institutions that sustained ancient culture, such as Plato's Academy and the Olympic Games."

Does anyone know where i can find more information regarding the evolution of greek pederasty? This paragraph is all there is in the article. Thanks. (66.189.104.220 15:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

There is little specific material out there, rather there are different presentations at different times, from Homer (Telemachos & Pisistratos in the Oddysey, not properly addressed yet in the literature) to pseudo-Lucian's Erotes, eleven or twelve hundred years later. Read Percy and Sergent. Haiduc 23:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charioteers at Chaeronea

The article asserts that the Sacred Band of Thebes at the Battle of Chaeronea consisted of 150 warriors "each assisted by his beloved charioteer". Surely war chariots had been obsolete in Greece for at least three hundred years before Chaeronea (338 BC). Nor does any description of the battle mention chariots. My impression of the Sacred Band is that they fought as hoplites, with erastes and eromenos fighting side-by-side. If they used chariots, and if the eromenoi were charioteers, this remarkable fact ought to be supported by a citation. Agemegos 03:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I just don't get it

I like this article very much. I think I understand what it says, but it leaves gaps which I can't reconcile with my own experience. As a parent, I've read child rearing books which emphasize the value of a male mentor for adolescent boys. Our society has recognized that the root cause of many social ills is the lack of male role models and fathers for our adolescent boys. Charity groups such as Big Brothers Big Sisters, attempt to fill this gap, so to that point, I can see how this institution served the Greeks very well. But our society has also identified the sexual abuse of children to be a root cause of many social ills. Sexually abused children grow up to have all kinds of emotional and developmental problems. The article mentions that Greek men were seen to be deficient if they did have boys as lovers. Many of these men are mentioned by name – names I recognize as prominent men and heroes, but what of the boys? Did they grow up to achieve such status? How could this have possibly been good for the boys? It seems to me that an entire generation would have grown up irreparably damaged, but of course Greek society flourished for hundreds of years, so that's what I just can't see, and that's my suggestion for improving the article. -ErinHowarth 00:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure I understand your suggestion. The evidence points both ways - some boys were abused and hurt, others were loved unabusively and helped. The Greeks were quite conscious of the abuse issue. Haiduc 04:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
The deal was not abusing little boys, the deal was to take care of their whole education including sexual education. As the article points out, the boys were courted and could choose their mate. Unlike nowadays, after 2000 years of judeo-christianism, the Greeks did not consider sexuality as a sin. But they didn't like the idea of unrestrained passion. They didn't like people unable to control their body or mind. Got it ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.195.40.92 (talk) 18:00, 1 August 2007
The answer to Erin's question probably should be in a separate article that talks about how cultural views of Pederasty might or might not have an impact on the psychological experience pederasty has on boys, both historically and today. The current article is focused on history and associated analysis of that history.
However, given how fraught the issue of pedophilia is today, and the ways this article will undoubtedly be read and refered to beyond its proper scope, I'd strongly suggest a prominent see-also pointing to articles that examine larger cultural aspects of abuse and/or non-abuse. In other words a clear disclaimer along the lines of "This scope of this article is limited to discussing scholarship on historical evidence for practices in ancient Greece, and on their presumed meanings to those that actually practiced them. Articles on pederasty in other cultures or historical periods, including discussions on how contemporary society views the ancient Greek practices can be found here, here, and here..." I know that that's annoyingly meta and silly, but I think it's responsible to include it in the article in order to prevent irresponsible or out-of scope readings of it. --Ajasen 18:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Solon

In the section 'Regional characteristics - Athens', it is asserted that Solon is the founder of the 'pederastic tradition' in Athens. This is unsubstantiated. Elsewhere at Wiki, the assertion is sometimes wrongly supported by citing Aeschines. This needs to be cleared up.Lucretius (talk) 09:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Why are they called boys?

Something of note is that these men were not having sex with children they would enter these relationships at the age of marriage for young woman which was around 16 they were not small children and i think it is a disgusting lie and a shame we would dishonor such an amazing ancient civilization by calling them pedophiles which they were not if the age was truly 16. 16 is the legal age of consent of many countries around the world today why do we not call them pedophiles?

In the section Social Aspects it reads,

"Boys entered into such relationships in their teens, around the same age that Greek girls were given in marriage" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.203.179.156 (talk) 10:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

That is very true, but the fact remains that males in adolescence are by that very definition not yet men. The whole point of the regulation of Greek pederasty is that it was a regulated relationship where only males old enough but not too old could participate as beloveds. However, a relationship with an adolescent is not pedophilic in the modern sense of the word. Haiduc (talk) 10:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
A sixteen y/o is in my eyes both: a boy and a young man. However, when such a teen later developed a real growth of beard, the erotic part of the relationship was expected to end, so it was actually a rather short time span that is relavant here. Greek homosexuality was basically a case of Ephebophilia, which is not the same phenomenom as Pedophilia. Here you can see how these youths looked like: http://www.androphile.org/preview/Museum/Greece/indexGreece.htm Fulcher (talk) 11:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)