>>17890610
>The practice of Greek pederasty is objectively morally repugnant
No it isn't, this is your personal, subjective opinion.
>Take the slave trade for example, another objectively morally repugnant characteristic of the ancient world
This is a false equivalence, as pederastic relationships in Greece were not between men and unwilling boys, nor was the practice harmful, and in no sense should be considered morally repugnant.
>Making a website called greek-servitude with the home page hyper-linking to explanations of why slavery is actually totally cool
Slavery is totally cool, actually. As long as slaves aren't mistreated, it is perfectly moral. Ancient slavery was essentially a pre-modern form of welfare. But this doesn't matter anyway, as this was a false equivalence.
>anything which portrays pederastic relationships in a positive light is inherently biased for the reasons mentioned above
No, this is just your personal opinion. Also, the website in question presents a wide array of historical and cross-cultural sources relating to pederasty, whether these sources express neutral, positive, or negative sentiments towards the practice, which is as unbiased as you can be (they are not selectively presented, as you will claim without evidence). You take objection to the website because you are a historical revisionist who would rather pretend that the practice of pederasty was non-existent in the past. Also, the historical sources are unedited, and you can appreciate them while ignoring the editorial content.
