Gay History

"V R A QVEER LOL" - Brvtvs

Pretty sure guys have been fucking for all of history.
How widely accepted that was, however, varied wildly.

Most common and simple answer I can give you is that Christianitys and Islams spreading made it immoral as time went on.

People who could afford to be gay were often gay.

Peasants who could barely support a single wife, not so much.

Obviously the family unit for a rich person that could afford to be gay was with a wife to produce heirs since adoptions was not as common back then.

>>280226
Fags have existed a long time -
Ancient Rome and Greece for example, but not on the scale it exists today. A lot of Roman Generals had been known for touching the kids as are Rome are doing now.

I can't speak for the far east because I don't know enough. In Greece and Rome it was a bit taboo. Being the top wasn't a huge deal but being a bottom was very shameful. In Pederasty for example anal sex wasn't common for that reason. The Ottomans really didn't seem to care.

What's curious to me is that homosexuality historically has been limited to fucking, mostly. Romantic love is much rarer.

>>281358
Because romantic love is for sissies.
You aren't a sissy, are you Anon?
Real men fuck.

>>280226
fags have been around since some dainty faggot saw krug bashing rocks making sparks and thought "Id really like to hop on that dick"

>>280226

My limited knowledge of that goes along the lines that men have been fucking most anything with two or four legs forever, and that depending on culture and religion it has been seen as immoral from time to time.

I dont want to sound scientificist but this behaviour has been observed in other animals.

There have been gay people all through history. There were more than old people want to think, but much less than what is being revised today.

>>280226
also, there arent very many "Gays" mostly a lot of bisexuals, just like today

Wasn't bisexuality a part in Greek society?

>>281401
And it has almost always been looked down upon.

>>281407
taking it up the ass, yeah, but not fucking

File: Famous-Paintings-Sappho-and-Erinna-in-a-Garden-at-Mytilene.jpg (454KB, 700x610px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 700x610px

What about lesbians?

>>281424
no one cares

>>281424
Comparatively obscure. Not sure why, seems like women are more fluid with their sexuality overall.

Lmao

Who cares about disgusting queers and their "history"?

>>>/lgbt/

>>281407
By plebs, the high society has been fucking whatever they felt like for eternity.

>>281424
Nobody cares what women do.

File: Sotadic_Zone.png (23KB, 1427x628px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 1427x628px

>>280226
I'll just leave this here.

>>281435
>t. guy posting on a literal queer-machine living in a civilization created as an afterthought to buttsex

>>281358
*sexuality historically has been limited to fucking, mostly. Romantic love is much rarer.

>>281441
I'm actually a leftist

Creating whole ideology and identity over your paraphilia is just ill

>>281454
But Anon, nobody is doing that here, OP was merely asking about homos throughout history.
If you want ill people defining themselves over their paraphilia, I suggest the closest trans thread over at >>>/lgbt/

>>281436
>Nobody cares what women do.
Female sexuality is historically the most restricted aspect of human sexuality, for obvious reasons.

On the other hand, people rarely cared what a lady did with her handmaids in private.

File: l-lewd.gif (573KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 500x281px

>>281462
>Female sexuality is historically the most restricted aspect of human sexuality, for obvious reasons.
Yeah, and since women (before modernity) rarely took it (or were allowed to) upon themselves to write about their sexual exploits, we'll never really know.
On a related note, Patricia Highsmith's The Price of Salt was pretty cool in that regard.

>people rarely cared what a lady did with her handmaids in private.
L-lewd.

File: sacred gay of thebes.jpg (54KB, 480x440px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 480x440px

Would you join the Sacred Band, /his/?

>tfw no lover to die with on the battlefield

File: 1417643285728.jpg (43KB, 500x526px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x526px

>>281482
No, but it's not like I have anyone to join up with together, anyway. ;_;

>>281482
I'm only into traps, senpai

>>281482
that doesnt mean they're all 6 on the kinsey scale

>>281482
I think this would be cool, and believed it for a long time until I did a lot more reading into other things.

I don't think this would work, for the same reason why modern military doesn't take an entire division from the same town. If you saw your lover die in battle you'd literally be pepe for a long time.

>>281552
late 19th to first half 20th century militaries are pretty degenerate

File: Amulettes_phalliques_gallo-romaines_Musée_Saint-Remi_120208.jpg (1MB, 1984x1377px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1984x1377px

It was a thing in ancient rome

File: 1fc2934dc22eeed69c0f4ff0dc0aed6c.jpg (51KB, 600x361px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x361px

>>281552
It was meant to be useful in Greek style-phalanx formation, which moved on the battlefield as a compact single body. The whole lover thing was more like a morale factor to stop the formation from breaking up. In modern ranged combat it's useless, of course.

Read Plato's Symposium, he discusses the exact idea about male lovers fighting more efficiently together.

File: Sexual_scene_on_pompeian_mural_2.jpg (283KB, 514x422px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 514x422px

It's easy to forget that homosexuality and heterosexuality weren't really a thing, atleast in the same scale they are now. It was just sex back then.

>>280226

read foucault's history of sexuality, though be aware of his bias. some great material.

>>281482

>implying I'm not already a premium member with a gold card

>>281619

exactly. homosexuality is mostly a victorian-era construct.

back then homos were called "sodomites" and weren't killed because they were gay, but rather because the act of homosex was inherently sinful. attraction between two men wasn't seen as something out of the norm.

>>281622
bias is an understatement
>>281655
if youre a bisexual youd think that
>>281639
>not having a centurion card

>>281358
Didn't the Greek conception of the eromenos have strong romantic aspects?

>>281688

>if youre a bisexual youd think that

????

can you elaborate on that

>>281711
I think he's referring to the idea that some bisexuals might be biased and think that most people are (to some degree) attracted to their own gender.

File: gayhistory.jpg (66KB, 281x375px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 281x375px

As a sexuality, yeah, dudes have been fucking for pretty much forever. How much it has been accepted and how normal it was depends on time and place. Gay romance, however, is a much more complicated history. In some societies, men formed semi-romantic bonds with other men almost exclusively, for example.

>>281739
Is that a dildo or a gloryhole?

>>281718

thanks man I get it now. thats prolly it

>>281407
Because being fucked was shameful, behaving like a woman. Fucking people in the ass was weird but more or less aceptable, because a man fucks things.

>>280226
In many cases, I approve of their consistency in terms of sticking to their beliefs.

Honestly, if you're going to be misogynistic to an extreme degree, the least you can do is also give up on having sex with women except for reproductive purposes.

Its better than being like the pussies who spend all their time today complaining about women and then still pursue them.

>>281606
That is nothing to do with Homosexuality.

Wanting to fuck other guys is just a fetish, and fetishes have always existed. In the past it might've been expressed through horny guys with no access to women bonding together and experimenting with their budding sexuality because they simply needed an outlet. In other times in may have been expressed as a form of dominance and sexual tutelage as one male sexually trained a young boy in his charge. You could look into the history of foot eroticism or the development of vore but it stretches back a long time, just like wanting to stick your cock in a place where poop comes out. Humans are very creative and tend to come up with unique ways to express their sexuality.

Love between men and other men however has existed for as long as humanity, but there's nothing inherently sexual with that.

>>281462
>Female sexuality is historically the most restricted aspect of human sexuality, for obvious reasons.
No it wasn't. For instance, female homosexuality is hardly an issue in the major writings of all three Abrahamic religions; afaik the Bible doesn't even mention it once. The literal term for homosexuality in Deuteronomy is "male fornication".

>>283761
26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Romans 1:24-27

File: U1EXKTe.png (266KB, 368x657px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 368x657px

>>283729
>Wanting to fuck other guys is just a fetish

>>283849
Yes it is. Wanting to fuck women is a biological impulse that creates other humans. That's the whole reason sexual arousal exists. However, humans are very creative and come up with other ways to release those sexual feelings, each unique to everyone. Some people get turned on by feet, others get aroused by wearing fur suits, some get hot and bothered by imagining themselves getting eaten by a giant snake (vore), some have only and always wanted to fuck little children, and others want to stick their dicks in poop holes of other men. That's all homosexuality is, a fetish. Hey, I'm not judging that it's bad, I just see it for what it is.

Love between men has always existed, but it's just friendship, though friendship can indeed be deeper than even love between husband and wife. However wanting to fuck other men or be fucked by other men is no different than bestiality or pedophilia. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I honestly look forward to a future where all fetishes are openly accepted.

>>283661

Men fucked boys who would grow up to be men and fuck boys. Sex an power will always be intertwined. It was part of the culture.

>>283899
You have apparently mistook anal fetishists for gays, judging from the way you phrase it.


>Not that there's anything wrong with pedophilia
You're kidding, right?

>>283899
Not to rain on your parade, but the term "fetish" describes a strong (or exclusive) sexual attraction in relation to a nonliving object. You're looking for the broader term "paraphilia." Of course, homosexuality isn't considered a paraphilia because it's currently considered part of normal human sexuality (also because we don't live in 19th century Austria, which is where I'm guessing you learned about psychology).

>>283814
>. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;
Does it necessarily mean lesbianism though?

>>283985
I agree that it's normal human sexuality. I believe all these "paraphilias" are perfectly normal as most people have some fucked up sexual belief that they suppress because the majority finds it offensive. Homosexuality used to be suppressed for that reason, and now that the majority approves of it it is no longer necessary to suppress it. I honestly look forward to a future where none of these natural sexual urges like having sex with other men, having sex with animals, or having sex with children is suppressed. Rather than being some backwards 19th century psychologist I'm actually much more forward thinking than the psychologists of today.

Gay wasn't really a thing in ancient times.
It was normal to have sex with both men and women.

Gay culture and stuff didn't exist until same sex realtionships became oppressed. In my opinion it's time we phased them out.

>>283761
>No it wasn't.
Yes it was. You're focusing on lesbianism, which basically didn't matter to most people, when the big issue is virginity and pregnancy.

>>281619
If your topping a girl while bottoming a man at the same time are you still a catamite?

>>280226
Trying to conflate same-sex interactions of the past with today's full gay gender identity is gay agenda conspiracy. But it's not a conspiracy that people enjoyed some boypussy from time to time.

>>284189
The guy in the middle was most likely a slave used as a toy by the couple sandwiching him, so it doesn't really matter.

File: Saraceni_Carlo-Saint_Sebastian.jpg (50KB, 454x600px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 454x600px

>>280226
Have some Saint Sebastian. You can't tell me this is not gay as hell

File: Giovanni-Baglione-XX-St-Sebastian-Healed-by-an-Angel-1603-XX-Private-collection.jpg (59KB, 450x564px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 450x564px

>>284219

>>284189
Depends if you said
'Non homosexuales'

File: tumblr_lpw2vjl4dz1qhi0lbo1_500.jpg (213KB, 485x396px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 485x396px

>>284221

File: Mishima-st-sebastian[1].jpg (63KB, 502x692px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 502x692px

>tfw no qt St Sebastian twink to tie up and savagely penetrate

File: Satyricon_tailhade_rochegrosse_I.jpg (120KB, 506x700px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 506x700px

nothing wrong with some of that boipussy

>>284341
Is the love of boipussy the one thing that unites all boards on 4chan?

>>280226
>>281482
>>281739
My amateur understanding of Sparta:
At age 6 boys are thrown to the streets to learn to survive on their own. They must find shelter and food by theft or hunting, however if they are caught they will be severely beaten. At age 12 each boy continues to learn the arts of stealth and death as an apprentice to an older solider. This boy will be trained in all the manly arts and they will bend over and like it. Upon completion of their apprenticeship they will marry, but continue to live in the barracks with other men. Many only visit their wives to rape them in the middle of the night.

Somehow Sparta kept up this craziness for hundreds of years.

>>280226
You can say that there were gays but all those degenerate countries fell due to gays. Look at Rome and Greece, they were redpilled but when gays came it all fell apart.

>>280226
As far as I know in Rome the idea was fucking a man was super-manly. But getting fucked by a man was for boys and slaves unless you wanted to be a faggot or something.

>>280226
Of course this shit has been going on since forever.

But t b h, I wonder if most gays are bisexuals and modern women are too pretty for their mannish tastes.

>>283899
>However wanting to fuck other men or be fucked by other men is no different than bestiality or pedophilia

Wrong. You can argue that homosexuality follows naturally from heterosexuality; if two men are free to have sex with women, then those two men are both morally capable of consent, and can thus consent to fucking each other. This doesn't extend to bestiality of paedophilia as neither animals nor children are assumed to be capable of giving consent.

File: Swastika_night.gif (154KB, 307x475px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 307x475px

>tfw no society where all men are /fit/ no-homo cuddle-bros and women exist in some underground lab for the purpose of being artificially inseminated to make more men.