So it was only gay if you were the one taking it in the ass, right?

Stop looking for loopholes anon. You're gay.

>>1933172
Both partners are gay, Anon. You are putting your dick up a man's ass.

What if you're taking it in the ass FROM a girl?

>>1933203
Then that's not a girl

File: 1157677_10151996938337873_317955931_n.jpg (47KB, 400x414px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 400x414px

>>1933172
yes.

>>1933205

Why not?

>>1933203
Thats 100% hetero sex, fully sanctioned by the catholic church.

File: big brother's duty.jpg (50KB, 463x116px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 463x116px

>>1933205
rude

Who cares, if you are gay you are gay. Live your life, enjoy it while you can.

>>1933172
It depends, do you feel any kind of romantic non-platonic love for the fuckee or you just want a warm hole to pump?

>>1933205
>strap ons don't exist

The fucker is necessarily gay, the fuckee is potentially gay

>>1933172
Gay as an identity didn't exist. There were instead roles, the pitcher (masculine) and the catcher (feminine)

Pitching was socially acceptable as you're just doing man stuff. Catching, as an adult male, was taboo.

But you could and were still expected to fuck your wife and produce children, regardless of preference. There are few recorded cases in antiquity of men who were strictly homosexual through their lives.

Serious question: did oral sex exist in ancient Greece? I can't find any direct reference to it.

>>1934290
>Pitching was socially acceptable as you're just doing man stuff. Catching, as an adult male, was taboo.

And who are these pitchers supposed to be pitching to if catching is taboo? I don't think taboo is the right word.

>>1935136
Slaves duhh
any free men or boys weren't allowed to get the buttsex, not even in the pederastic relations between a free man and a free boy was buttsex allowed

>>1935136
It was unbecoming of a proper man.

>>1935136
slaves, plebs, young boys and beta cucks

>>1934290
>Pitching was socially acceptable as you're just doing man stuff.
Pitching didn't automatically disqualify you from society, but it was still very much frowned upon in most environments. A pitcher in the army for example faced the same consequences as the catcher.
Also a known pitcher would automatically become suspect of catching too, so eh.
>Catching, as an adult male, was taboo.
Catching was a taboo always, regardless of age and social status.

File: 1472317603595.jpg (102KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 600x600px

Sexual orientation is a spook

File: 1285374293853.jpg (17KB, 279x291px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 279x291px

>your tutor and surrogate father figure will never slip it between your oiled thighs

>>1933172

Surely the one who wants an orgasm by fucking another man, is the gay one?

>>1935129
If it's like in Rome, it was the lewdest thing you could ever do and considered to be very degrading. It was one of the most expensive services in whorehouses.

>>1935935
>oral was more expensive than other services
Interesting contrast with modern attitudes.

>>1935964
indeed

>>1935935
Did Romans eat pussy?

>>1936045
No, that was doubly degrading.

File: 1474479110486.png (47KB, 1854x280px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1854x280px

>>1936045
Going down on a woman was literally gayer than having sex with a man. The ultimate in debasing yourself.

>>1935935
Yet anal was commonplace? Perhaps that had to do with the unwillingness to perform oral.

>>1936065
I'd rather take it up the ass then suck a smelly dick or eat some musky pussy back then desu

>>1936065

not anal, intercrural sex. they'd slip their dick between juicy, oiled up boythighs like this kyonposter mentioned >>1935914.

also oral sex was likely degrading because it defaced the mouth. the breath was considered to be an essential part of a human's life force up until a certain point (i forget when exactly), so naturally the more spiritually oriented person might take offense to using their mouth as a sexual organ.

using today's jargon, it would be the equivalent of someone wanting to stick their dick in your soul.

>>1937116
I'd stick my dick in somebody's soul. Sounds rad as fuck

>>1937116
>stick dick in soul

Sounds good to me desu

>tfw nobody to soulfuck

>>1933172
you wouldn't be considered a faggot if you were on top if you were in ancient greece or rome.
you'd still be gay though, even if you weren't percieved as one.

>>1936060
>The ultimate in debasing yourself.
which men love. Men have always loved to eat pussy just for pleasure

>>1937116
>using today's jargon, it would be the equivalent of someone wanting to stick their dick in your soul.
New fetish acquired.

>>1933194
This is not how people in prison think.

File: lazytown88.jpg (7KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 259x194px

it was considered less than manly

they called them "catamites" and not in the good way