>reading ancient Greek shit
>"to enjoy women and boys" dropped like it's the most normal thing ever
But I thought they weren't actually gay and it was all a leftist psyop

>>17782816 (OP)
They meant enjoying boys in a purely platonic sense, of course. That's where we get the concept of platonic love. Homosexuality in the vile sense we know today did not exist in antiquity, that is a perversion of modernity. Pederasty was a spiritual love, not a sensual one. They enjoyed boys in the sense that they enjoyed inculcating them with virtue, enjoyed abetting their proper development into upstanding citizens. This contrasts with their enjoyment of women, which was carnal in nature.

>>17782816 (OP)
If you want to continue your bloodline you fuck your wife, if you want to satiate your lust without creating bastards you fuck a boy, what's so hard to understand? They were not gay.

think of it this way.
if i say "op is a femboy" everyone will know what i mean, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you are an actual faggot (although you most likely are).
similarly, in ancient greece pederasty was a well known practice, though far from universally approved, much less universally practiced. in ionia, it was criminal under the law. elsewhere, it was subject to various forms of social censure. some parents would hire bodyguards to slam dunk would-be groomers into the ground. children would also bully any boy willing to give himself up sexually to an adult. there were many limits imposed, many having to do with personal integrity or the desire to avoid dishonour.
in truth, sexual pederasty was not much more popular than NAMBA faggotry is today. it wasn't even that much less stigmatised. but it was less persecuted. stalking boys or having a melty in public because your eromenos told you to go kick rocks was relatively permissible.
likewise, pederasty also had non-sexual forms that were considered an integral part of civic culture and were closer to a form of mentorship. the first post in this thread makes reference to this, and this is indeed where the term "platonic love" comes from.
keep in mind also that certain forms of prostitution were not regulated or forbidden and were therefore more prolific. sodomising effeminate (and probably groomed) twinks for money or favours was quite a different thing from sodomising a well-born aristocratic youth. very different standards applied.

>>17782821
Uhmm, platonic beddings of boys and women...?

>>17782874
As you can see, the author clearly states that a pleasant life is not produced by bedding boys (in the vulgar sense). This suggests to the reader that the author finds the thought of having sexual intercourse with a boy to be preposterous. Sodomy was almost unknown to the ancients, as this was before the mass domestic ownership of cats spread the toxoplasmosis infection which causes the vile disease of homosexuality.

The Greeks understood the value in bedding boys, in the metaphysical and spiritual sense. This to them, was the way to eudaimonia. To make love to the soul of your beloved, to perform intercourse with his mind and not his corporeal body, is what elevates the both of you to a higher spiritual level and leads to virtue.

>>17782884
That's not what it suggests at all since he equates bedding boys with bedding women or eating expensive food.

>>17782845
That is very gay you retarded faggot

>>17782887
And he uses this as an example of what to avoid if you seek a pleasant life. There are trillions of possible things to avoid if you seek a pleasant life, the mere mention of which wouldn't imply it were common. Had he suggested that doing backflips off of cliffs should be avoided if you desired a pleasant life, would you assume that the Greeks routinely did backflips off of cliffs? Of course not. If you had suggested to the author of that text that the society in which he was situated practiced rampant pederasty, he would be appalled. They did no such thing.

The Greeks often contrasted the base, instinctive, sexual "love" of women, to the noble, intellectual, non-sexual love of boys, which served a higher purpose than mere reproduction or the satiation of sexual impulses.

>>17782901
He mentioned it amongst common excesses that people engaged in without offering any additional context or clarification or taking a moral stance on it as being particularly bad so the only logical assumption is that this too was one of the common excesses that the Greeks engaged in.

People who tell you they weren't into dudes are just lying, that simple
Christians will lie most often since they want to use their philosophy but hate the culture

>>17782903
He means it's a common excess in an allegorical sense. The Greeks would often use allegory to portray utopian or dystopian societies, such as Atlantis, which they would compare themselves to. Sometimes this allegory can be subtle, and if you don't read carefully, you might mistake it for a description of their own society. In a hypothetical dystopian society, a sexual form of pederasty would be rampant, which the Greeks, virtuous as they were, were expressly opposed to, and the author of the text you posted concurs. The form of pederasty which the Greeks practiced was non-sexual. This form of pederasty, the non-sexual love of boys, is what was rampant.

>>17782910
Ok at least make it less obvious you're trolling bro

>>17782913
The Bible uses the exact same sort of allegory with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

>>17782889
Cope, tranny

>>17782821
Can't tell if this is actual cope or parody.

Why do people fight against the fact that a pre-abrahamic society had different views on sex?

>>17782874
>boys and women
>it doesn't even say women first

>>17783439
You're the one coping. Homosexuality was unknown to the ancient Greeks.

>>17782816 (OP)
They didn't approve of homosexuality in the modern sense of the term. It was seen as shameful for a man to be a bottom and allow another man to fuck him in the ass

>>17783574
>Why do people fight against the fact that a pre-abrahamic society had different views on sex?
Religion is all about sex. It’s the only thing they actually care about. I don’t even know what Evangelicals talk about once they get married are sex is suddenly okay.

Just kidding, my church would always talk at length about what sexual acts are permissible in marriage. No anal, no oral. How much sex in marriage is too little? How much sex is too much? Ask your pastor, because he has an opinion he can’t wait to share. Masturbation is off the table, but what about your wife jacking you off? That’s a grey area, of course, according to our young adult’s ministry leader. Porn is obviously a no-go, but make sure you don’t “use your wife as porn” whatever the fuck that means.

Don’t forget to get your son a purity ring, and make sure he’s not jacking it either.

Life is just an endless battle of tormenting yourself over your body’s desire to shoot cum in fleshy holes. Yes, feel bad about sex. The reproductive cycle means you’re dirty and weird. Feel bad. Feel bad. Feel bad.

Did we mention sexual sin? Let’s talk about sexual sin again?
What’s that? You wanna discuss some topic other than sex? What are you? Some degenerate pervert?

>picrel
Anyone else ever have to read this schizo book in highschool?