>When men lie together in lust, it is a surrender to the passions. And it does nothing for the excellence in us.

>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCRUg6yBTJQ

>>17795267
>This type of friendship is perfect in terms both of duration and everything else, and in all cases such friends receive from each other the same thing or something quite similar, which is indeed what ought to be shared between friends. The type of friendship formed for pleasure bears similarity to this perfect type. For indeed, good men are pleasing to one another. Likewise, too, the type of friendship forged for advantage. For good men are also advantageous to one another. And it is true also in the case of men motivated by pleasure or advantage that friendships are most likely to endure when each gets the same thing from the other, such as pleasure, and also when it flows from the same source, such as happens between witty people but not between lover and beloved. For lover and beloved do not take pleasure in the same things: rather, the lover takes pleasure in gazing at his beloved, while the latter takes pleasure in the attentions of his lover. But when the beloved’s youthful beauty fades sometimes the friendship too fades. For now the lover does not find the boy pleasing to look at, and the boy receives no attention. But many couples continue the relationship, if, as a result of spending time together, they come to love each other’s character, because they are of similar character.

>But if their erotic relationship is characterized by an exchange of advantage rather than pleasure, the two are less friendly toward each other and the friendship lasts less long. Those who are friends for advantage cease to be friends when it ceases to be advantageous. For they are not friends of each other but friends of profit.
Nicomachean Ethics 8.4.1–2

Oh no no no, 'stotlesisters... I thought Leather Apron Club said Aristotle was against pederasty...

>This type of friendship is perfect in terms both of duration and everything else, and in all cases such friends receive from each other the same thing or something quite similar, which is indeed what ought to be shared between friends. The type of friendship formed for pleasure bears similarity to this perfect type. For indeed, good men are pleasing to one another. Likewise, too, the type of friendship forged for advantage. For good men are also advantageous to one another. And it is true also in the case of men motivated by pleasure or advantage that friendships are most likely to endure when each gets the same thing from the other, such as pleasure, and also when it flows from the same source, such as happens between witty people but not between lover and beloved. For lover and beloved do not take pleasure in the same things: rather, the lover takes pleasure in gazing at his beloved, while the latter takes pleasure in the attentions of his lover. But when the beloved’s youthful beauty fades sometimes the friendship too fades. For now the lover does not find the boy pleasing to look at, and the boy receives no attention. But many couples continue the relationship, if, as a result of spending time together, they come to love each other’s character, because they are of similar character.

>But if their erotic relationship is characterized by an exchange of advantage rather than pleasure, the two are less friendly toward each other and the friendship lasts less long. Those who are friends for advantage cease to be friends when it ceases to be advantageous. For they are not friends of each other but friends of profit.

What did Aristotle mean by this, bros? I thought he was against this sort of shit.

>>17782816
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.