[ SECRET POST #2003 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2003 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 040 secrets from Secret Submission Post #286.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

For me it depends on the setting really. If it's a fantasy setting, then it's usually about the time period/place it's modeled after [since most usually have a basis somewhere]. For example something that's more say...The dark ages, or Victorean-ish era? Then I'd be more inclined to believe there's some kind of homophobia going on, even if it's not shown in canon* than say...something modeled after the Roman Empire. Even then, I'm not going to expect complete realism in how it's shown - unless it's a professional work.

*Unless the canon work actually shows the reaction the groups in it would have to someone being homosexual, I don't usually consider there to be enough basis *in* the canon to judge if it would be something like 'Oh, she's a brunette and gay' 'Really? Cool to know.' Or a far worse reaction.

[(Anonymous)]

This. A lot of fantasy settings are modeled after historical eras, so drawing a parallel between the fantasy world and the time period it's based on isn't much of a reach at all - often the authors intend for that to be the response.

[(Anonymous)]

Actually the Romans treated the 'passive' partner in a homosexual relationship (and they believed there always had to be an active and passive role, they had no concept of equality or love in such matters) with enormous contempt, such that to involve a freeborn man in such a role utterly degraded and shamed him(slaves were already degraded so that didn't count).

There is this great big myth that classical societies were just a-ok about m/m sex. Not true, there were all kinds of social, class and gender prejudices about it.

[(Anonymous)]

THIS. So much THIS. In this whole "history's sexy" approach the mainstream media is having as of late, they seem to forget that there were still appearances to upkeep (different from modern ones, but not less strict) and not everything was a big orgy back then.

Still, if you go a bit further back in history, you get the Ancient Greek's idea of perfect love only existing between men, and as a cornerstone of a young boy's education. Being the "passive" one was demeaning because the man'd be putting himself in the position of a woman or a slave (which didn't really count as proper people), and the whole point of ephebophilia wasn't about satisfying your perviness with a kid who wouldn't know better (the boy was, after all, a free citizen with full rights, and the whole point of the relationship was his education and betterment as a man, not his indoctrination as somebody's sex toy), so they did come up with ways of still having sex without one of them having to "degrade" himself. And they still wouldn't preclude heterosexual sex, since once men reached a certain age it was expected of them to settle down and churn out some offspring with a respectable wife.

tl;dr ancient sex life is wonderful and complicated and freaking fascinating

[kathkin]

It has to be said, though, they were not homophobic. Their prejudices had more to do with classism and sexism than anything else. Plus it's not clear how much of what we know about ancient Greek pederasty applied in practice or the extent to which it applied to non-aristocrats.

But yeah all societies have acceptable and taboo sexual acts. In ancient Greece and Rome certain homosexual acts were considered acceptable. That's really about all you can say.

[(Anonymous)]

OC, Actually I'm well aware of that - and the vikings were very much the same way, along with various other socities. But the point I was making in my comment was that the Romans were more accepting of it than Victorians or Dark Ages.

Also, I think you're completely missing the point of my comment: It depends on the setting.