[ SECRET POST #2708 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2708 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Degrassi Junior High/Degrassi High and Saved By The Bell]


__________________________________________________



03.
[The Cinema Snob]

__________________________________________________



04.
[Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Silicon Valley]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Xavier Dolan]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Pacific Rim]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Sailor Moon]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Iwan Rheon]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Love Stage!!]


__________________________________________________



11.
[The Losers (movie)]


__________________________________________________



12.
[K-pop]










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #387.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, back then nearly everyone except priests etc was supposed to be married and have kids, so the people who were "gay" (or more accurately, participating in homosexual behavior) were mostly raping young boys. Even if they weren't, they were cheating on their wives and doing stuff that was incredibly unhealthy (unhealthy in the sense of 'likely to cause infections and spread disease') back in that era. It was a pretty valid thing to not be keen on back then -- the problem was saying "this is an ABOMINATION" because they weren't educated enough to figure out specifically *why* doing this stuff was bad, same way most people a long time ago didn't know *why* eating certain kinds of food in certain ways was bad (because they didn't know how to properly cook/preserve it), only that it acquired a blanket social taboo over time. One of those lazy social shortcuts people STILL do all the time, especially in politics.

Christians should take a leaf out of Buddhists' book: the old monks believed that all scriptures ought to be constantly updated to allow for new ideas and new information -- neither blindly clung to "just 'cuz", nor thrown out wholesale.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Huh, interesting perspective there. I always figured homosexuality was condemned more for logistical purposes (small village, need to have babies to survive, have to make love to the opposite gender) - I hadn't considered that they were also addressing rape, which definitely is NOT the same thing.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT
There was also a belief that a man only had a certain amount of sperm to last his lifetime, so spilling it in any way that didn't allow even a chance of conception was wasteful, and like you said, babies and such.

[diet_poison]

This is why I personally theorize homosexuality was outlawed in OT times (assuming literal events, etc.) - because the Israelites really needed to expand their numbers and mortality rates were super high

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

In villages and stuff it probably was mostly what you say -- logistics and all. In cities, with lots of prostitution and the like, the rape thing was a problem too, though they may not have called it "rape", more like just...debauchery or whatever they used to term adultery and sexual hedonism. (The taboo again sexual hedonism also mainly came about for health and pregnancy reasons, then was jacked up even higher by the "stop having fun! Everything that makes you feel good is a SIN!" puritan camp.)

Social dialogue around sex was basically a morass of logic!fail, communication!fail, and perpetual selective amnesia, passed through a giant game of "telephone" so that principles came out so warped that no one knew exactly how they had arisen. Still is, in some ways.

[(Anonymous)]

"Debauchery" and free love are particularly hated by authorities because social mores are a convenient means of shaming and control.

What if people wanted to cooperate and have a six person cooperative household and bang each other and share things? How would the owners of the means of production possibly control the vassals if they're not sole breadwinners?

LOL I know it sounds crazy. I can't wait for Burning Man this year.

[diet_poison]

that's not crazy, it's actually an excellent point esp. as far as non-democratic societies go.

[(Anonymous)]

This!