they were absolutely more than best friends. no label required, no need to label his sexuality. bottomline is that they loved each other

@anarchyasher8327

Жыл бұрын

As it should be! Labels just over complicate everything.

@nerp27

Жыл бұрын

Bottom, top and vers line.

@houndgirl7365

Жыл бұрын

​@AnarchyAsher except labels are needed in today's society to protect people who aren't cis or straight. In a perfect world yeah screw labels, but that's not today where people who live the same gender or both are demonized and even barred from doing certain things in society. It's complex and yet stupid that people care so much about what another does -_-

@woadblue

Жыл бұрын

​@@houndgirl7365 it's so much easier to not give a shit, isn't it? Edit: since my intent is completely and utterly fucked up, just read on a bit before you judge me, please for the love of f-

@itrnallilst640

Жыл бұрын

​@@houndgirl7365ehhh, often times people who use labels get attacked for using them, which is why a lot of ppl started taking pronouns and sexual orientation out of their bio bcs they would get doxxed/d3ath threats, so tht kinda doesn't make sense.

"achilles wasn't bisexual since there wasn't labels, and getting dick was the normal manly thing to do."

@lagg1e

Жыл бұрын

They were gay, but in the ancient greek style.

@greyfox4838

Жыл бұрын

Yeah the logic doesn't really make sense. Modern words like "gay" or "bisexual" only exist to describe things that have always existed. Even if that word didn't exist back then, the Greeks didn't just choose their sexuality, Achilles was definitely bisexual while others weren't. Like, straight wasn't a word during Jesus's time but that doesn't mean we can't describe him as straight. But I appreciate this guy at least debunking the homophobes.

@imtimbabay6583

Жыл бұрын

Nah. Bro, GIVING dick was manly. Getting it was fem…. OR THE EQUIVALENT FOR THE TIME whatever

@aster1760

Жыл бұрын

​@@greyfox4838 it makes full and logical sense, as the concept itself was not a thing then. It wasn't that there were no gay people, but instead that the word was unnecessary as their concept of normalcy included same sex orientation, thus the need to label and and separate was not there. Being gay wasn't a thing, you simply loved someone.

@NihongoWakannai

Жыл бұрын

​@@greyfox4838 "gay" and "bisexual" don't accurately represent the complexity of sexuality though. it just focuses on the one aspect of sexuality that our culture thinks is most important, which is if you engage in sexual relations with people of a different or similar gender.

Actually I, my fellow students and myself had the most hilarious conversation with our ancient Greek professor when we were in second year of university. She was a severe old lady in her early 60's and overheard our conversation about homosexuality in the Iliad and specifically the case of Patrocle and Achille. ''Of course they were lovers, she said, the specialist are agreeing on this since decades. Now, the real debate nowadays is who was on top? Because you see, Achille is the hero and the way he displays his feelings after Patrocle' s death seems to indicate that he was the one. But Patrocle is older and in the ancient Greek culture, it's the older one who is supposed to be on top. Furthermore, Achille has been raised in the sea so Patrocle could be the one to introduce him to the world of adulthood. But then, Achille shouldn't show that much grief after his lover death since the bottom is not supposed to display his love in the tradition. The battle is fierce between the two theories and no winner has been found yet ''. What an unforgettable afternoon 😂.

@greyfox4838

Жыл бұрын

The Greeks were like "it's gay to be the bottom" while railing their bros.

@orelliaorellia142

Жыл бұрын

@@greyfox4838 More for the Romans actually. For the Greeks it was like '' it's gay to show you are in love '' if you are the bottom.

@Oakette

Жыл бұрын

It's such a sick joke how deeply corrupted academia has become due to mentally ill professors pushing their agenda.

@BooTheEater

Жыл бұрын

BAAHAHAHHAB OH MY GODD this so fucking hilarious, you totally made my day!

@labellelace

Жыл бұрын

Potential solution: they were a switch couple lmfao. Truly a funny academic discussion though haha, thanks for sharing :)

The ancient Greeks didn't debate if they were lovers or not, they debated who bottomed

This is an old joke, but you pretty much covered all of my thoughts on the matter, so- Achilles: When I die, mix our ashes so we can be together forever. Historians: Aw, what great friends! 😊

@kobaltkween

Жыл бұрын

Ironically, though, IIRC, the whole reason he wasn't fighting and was sulking in his tent was Agamemnon having sex with a woman he preferred and wouldn't give her up.

@Cheezbuckets

Жыл бұрын

@@kobaltkween Yeah, Agamemnon took Achilles’ “war bride” from him because Agamemnon was an idiot, so Achilles went “fine, see how this war goes without me” lol I’m not any kind of expert on the subject, but having both wives and male lovers was quite common among heroes of myth! Heracles for one had several of each!

@lenapoolaw211

Жыл бұрын

😂

@sirreginaldfishingtonxvii6149

Жыл бұрын

Honestly though if I had a truly great friend, a true brother (and I lived in such a dramatized ancient world), I'd totally see such a statement being platonic making sense. Definitely seems like they _were_ lovers, don't get me wrong. But friendships can be strong, and shouldn't be disregarded as lesser than romantic relationships.

@toasty_tonsty

Жыл бұрын

Im your thousandth like, and I never felt more powerful turning that 999 into 1k

READ THIS COMMENT BEFORE COMMENTING ABOUT ACHILLES BEING BISEXUAL! This video is attacking the idea of heteronormativity. It is not bi-erasure, or LGBTQ-erasure. I'm saying we can't view the past through a heteronormative lens. The art itself is depicting a naked man mourning the loss of his naked lover. It is depicting a tragic homosexual romance. The context of the video is that the first version of the video I posted on TikTok, which only had the art with music, got attacked by a bunch of homophobic history buffs saying "Actually, Homer never explicitly said they were lovers...", and this video is my reply saying "Homer didn't have to say it out loud, because the ancient Greek audience automatically understood it as a sexual relationship". In the hundreds of replies I got on TikTok, not a single homophobe misunderstood my point. And several took offense, claiming I just didn't understand history and actually ancient Greece was very, very straight, except for the pederasty. Which is a problematic viewpoint that I don't have time to go into here. My impression is that most people understand my point, especially if they have some insight into both ancient history and the history of the modern conceptualization of sexual orientation. So it is very disheartening to have to explain again and again to some LGBTQ people and allies who refuse to listen to what's actually being said. We live in a heteronormative society, and our view on sexual orientation is fundamentally based on pathologizing non-straight people. In most countries that have laws against homosexual relations, those laws are based on orientation being a pathology, based on sexual orientation being viewed as a disease or disorder. The reason why I call myself bisexual, and that the LGBTQ as a whole has to embrace these labels, is not that being gay/bi/trans are immutable definitions, but because appropriating these names is our way of fighting back. We can say "No! I am bisexual! It is not a disorder, it is my identity!". The political reality of living under heteronormative society forces us to take on the identity of our sexual orientation. It is perfectly OK for me, as a bisexual man, to draw Achilles as a symbol of bisexuality. Which is what I do in this piece of art. It is perfectly OK to discuss how different societies had different levels of and approaches to homosexual relations, because that's using the words as descriptive. But arguing about the "actual" orientation of historical and mythological figures is falling into the trap of heteronormativity. Not only because it's impossible to identify sexuality without looking through the heteronormative lens, but also because this transposing of heterosexuality as the norm is exactly the type of thinking and lack of nuance that leads, for instance, some Christians to find evidence to justify their continued oppression of everything they consider not straight. Transposing heteronormativity back in time, is LGBTQ erasure.

@sharonboyce4205

Жыл бұрын

This is the best explanation I've ever seen of why people put themselves into boxes and embrace labels. Thank you.

@fyreice3697

Жыл бұрын

What a brilliant explanation 👏

@ryla22

Жыл бұрын

Too long didn't read. The Greeks and Romans were culturally bi. If someone did your wife then you do them in the street for humiliation. If there's a cute slave boy you can just do him. There was lots of gay back then, but it was a social thing more than a sexuality thing.

@Cope.Seethe.

Жыл бұрын

Beautifully spoken and gorgeous art! Thank you for being who you are and standing for what is right. ❤❤❤

@user_.b

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for this

Achilles always struck me as a guy who was like “You got two options. You can catch this d*ck or catch this sword. The choice is yours.” He didn’t seem to discriminate on gender in either regard 😂

@billkillernic

Жыл бұрын

There is nothing that mentions him being homosexual with Patroclus other than the homosexuals who read the iliad and see "implications" that dont exist

@lianxie5582

3 ай бұрын

Eh I don’t think he was a rapist

As a bi person, this is 100% accurate and I hate seeing people apply modern, western definitions of sexuality/gender to other cultures/time periods. Like obviously there have always been people attracted to more than one gender/sex, but it isn't accurate to label that as bisexuality 🌈♥️

@sharktenko267

Жыл бұрын

While the labels may not have existed back then Pretending like the ideas didn't is erasure

@raisinbrancereal582

Жыл бұрын

@@sharktenko267 yeah I know, that's why I said that there have always been people who are attracted to more than one gender. But applying our modern labels to other cultures, wether they be ancient or modern, erases aspects of that culture. It's a two way road. We, as queer people, should be well aware of the damage that causes.

@sharktenko267

Жыл бұрын

@@raisinbrancereal582 except that denying that those people exist isn't helpful We use those words cause they are the ones that make the most sense

@erenjaeger1738

Жыл бұрын

Trans or other shit didnt existed. Only gays did that's all onlh lgb the real ogs

@lianxie5582

3 ай бұрын

Maybe this could be solved by saying “what we would see as bisexual in our context, but for them it was normal”

A lot of people don't realize just how recent the concept of sexual orientation is. It's a modern invention. Depending on the time and place, certain types of sexual activity were simply either normal or abnormal, acceptable or disgraceful. Sometimes it was considered a huge embarrassment to be the "receiver" of gay sex, but not the "giver", and sometimes it wasn't a big deal. Sometimes lesbian sex was frowned upon and sometimes it was completely ignored. Sometimes all people cared about was whether or not you produced an heir before you went back to your preferred type of partner. Sometimes it was OK to have gay relationships between certain age groups, but not others. The important takeaway is, we didn't start putting labels on these things until the last couple of centuries. You weren't seen as having an orientation. You were either acting within the norms and fulfilling your duties or you weren't.

@GingeBreadBoy

Жыл бұрын

labels have always existed, the set of valid labels just changes every few decades. The closest thing we could use to describe a man who engages in sexual intercourse with Men and Women is bisexual. If not what would you call it?

@RonnyMuldoon

Жыл бұрын

​@@GingeBreadBoySomeone who FUCKS

@shippo4ever101

Жыл бұрын

@@GingeBreadBoyyou missed the point….

@GryphStone

Жыл бұрын

​@@shippo4ever101The different labels for sexuality may be new, but they're just describing natural attraction... So while Achilles wouldn't have identified as bi, we can still label him as such as it describes how he presents his sexual preferences. The label itself may be new, and it may have just been seen as following the norm, or not, but even then the attraction is what gets described with labels and so can be applied to historical figures (or semi-historical) to assist with the modern understanding of behavior.

@GingeBreadBoy

Жыл бұрын

@@shippo4ever101 I don't think I did? I perceive his comment as "our modern views of sexuality have only existed for a few hundred years" but I disagree that those before us didn't have their own views labels and norms. I'm positive an andalusian lesbian in 1100s Muslim Spain would've identified with a label, perhaps one without any directly modern continuity. A quick search on wiki proves that.

Of course Homer is real. He is a bald hardworking nuclear power plant operator with a wife and kids. D'oh!

This has the same energy as looking at Sappho and being like "She had a lot of girls who were her friends :)))))))"

@amirmovsho6317

Жыл бұрын

you didn't understand what he was trying to say, he wasn't saying achilles didnt have a male lover he cared for deeply, he is saying we can't call achilles bisexual or any label because we don't know how the ancient greeks interpreted the concept of sexual orientation, if he were to exist in modern times he would likely be bisexual but achilles doesn't come from a society where sexuality is interpreted the way we do now

@kamalalsb7292

Жыл бұрын

@@amirmovsho6317 I do, I just think what he was trying to say is kind of dumb and is USUALLY done in bad faith? In hindsight I was maybe a little harsh with him because while I don't agree with him, I don't think he was acting in bad faith - but the reality is that there are recorded instances of LGBT people throughout history and the fact that the specific terminology did not exist THEN does not mean it doesn't apply NOW. The Greeks didn't have a word for "Bisexual", sure. We do. It applies to him retroactively. An ancient greek would not have CALLED him Bisexual, but language literally changes over time so that we can define concepts that we have not previously been able to - thus, Achilles was Bisexual, or honestly might have just been Gay.

@amirmovsho6317

Жыл бұрын

@@kamalalsb7292 its not that they didnt have a word for bisexual, they might have had a different interpretation of how they view and separate sexual orientation, i agree that "straight-washing" history and cultural stories is a problem and i dislike it, but different cultures in different periods had different interpretations of gender and sexuality so while we can compare them to our modern interpretation of sexuality we cant say they are that sexuality, like native Hawaiian culture had a third gender called Māhū, now while its similar to what we consider to be non binary we cant say people back then that were Māhū are actually non binary. we can only compare the concept of Māhū to our interpretation of gender ngl sorry for being kinda offensive in my last message i should think about what i write before i comment it

This is bisexuality... I don't understand why we need to explain it away with "the spectrum was probably different back then". Just because they didn't use that exact label back then doesn't mean they don't meet the descriptive definition of bisexuality today. It's like saying there weren't boats because we didn't call them boats 3000 years ago. Help me to understand if I'm not understanding correctly.

Honestly, labels never give you the whole picture. Whenever you ask anybody why they love their partner, they never say it's because of their gender. For example, let's say you have a girlfriend and someone asks you, "Why do you love her?" The answer is never "because she is a woman." You might notice a pattern in preferring women, but I still think attraction is a lot more complicated than that.

@audreydoyle5268

Жыл бұрын

Specifically, in the realm of sexual attraction, terms such as hetero, bi, and homo are used. In the realm of love, they would be agape (universal), eros (romantic), philia (platonic), storage (unconditional familial), ludus (flirtatious), pragma (committed) and philautia (self). Labels are helpful and clarifying.

@cfri9332

Жыл бұрын

@@audreydoyle5268 No conditional familial? Damn, my family don't love me in any way.

@flask223

Жыл бұрын

I mean yeah no one word can fully describe a person. But that doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't use words

@Devilspade

Жыл бұрын

Isn't the reason we have lables now to protect people from homophobia? There wasn't much of a need for lables when no one cared

@dorarandom7870

Жыл бұрын

@devil's spadez The lgbtq+ community was created to give people a community to stand behind. I am not saying labels are bad, I think that they're actually pretty useful, and I'm not against using them. It's just important that we think about ourselves not just in the framework of labels. Like think of it like this, if gender is a social construct, doesn't that mean that sexuality is, to some extent, also a social construct? And why is gender specifically the thing that makes you attracted to people? Sometimes, our own attraction will not stay in the box of our labels because the label is not something your brain thinks you are. It's just a name for patterns you notice in your gender identity or sexuality.

Definitely they were more than friends. It's fairly obvious and it was spoken about contemporaneously. How much harder will you fight to protect someone you love so fiercely? It's part of what made them such successful warriors. I also find it interesting that in the ancient word M/M relationships were just taken as a matter of course, just an ordinary part of human relationships and sexuality but nowadays all of that is being seen as, "yeah, but they could've just been friends," or whatever. No, we know they were romantically and sexually involved so why -- in an age where we're allegedly more accepting of same-sex pairings -- are you trying to snuff that out or to reinterpret it in other ways?

@shawnwilcowski

Жыл бұрын

Because morons will take it as “woke-ism” makes me cringe just thinking about them

@fluffbot3000

Жыл бұрын

Because we are very much not more accepting.

@GreenAmaryllis

Жыл бұрын

because it's the other way around, we're becoming less and less accepting as bills to silence and "genocide" the LGBTQ+ are being passed years after years

@sirreginaldfishingtonxvii6149

Жыл бұрын

Well I mean, that's not really what he said though. His point was that you can't apply the label "bisexual", a modern construction, to a time where that term is meaningless. Much like applying 1850's gender norms to the modern day's view of gender becomes a problem, applying our view to the ancient past becomes an equal issue. Our ideas are not some objective truth because our social constructs happen to be newer. In ancient Greece no one was bisexual or even gay, because those concepts didn't truly exist. Sometimes men just had sex with men. It was something you did more than something you were.

@tarod3

Жыл бұрын

@@sirreginaldfishingtonxvii6149 that is wildly disingenuous. Aside from the fact that there have always been labels for all kinds of things, we did not recently invent the phenomenon, there’s the matter of him being depicted as straight being a deliberate attempt to wipe people they or I would find relatable to myself from history. And WHY might he be relatable? Because similarities exist. To say that no one at the time would have used our labels has no bearing on whether those labels are applicable. And there absolutely were labels for people who engaged in such behavior at the time. Just like here in the us a mere 90 years ago, if you took on the passive role, it was considered almost as a different gender. There were even arguments in Ancient Greece about whether Achilles was top or bottom. Why did they care? Especially as he’s called beautiful and lived as a woman for years to avoid the war. Our modern culture isn’t objective truth, no. But we’ve 3000 years of hindsight, and the new sciences of sociology and psychology to view behavior from, and they’re pretty objective!

I remember seeing someone say "Achilles and Patroclus were lovers because of how Achilles reacted to Patroclus' death." And when I read up on his death and Achilles reaction I was just like "That is exactly how I would react if My best friend died." My whole world would have been shattered. I would have been broken for days or weeks before I eventually fell into a vengeful rage and mercilessly killed my best friend's killer. I'm not claiming they weren't lovers, cuz that was, as the creator said, just how things were back then. Just that there are plenty of things that even people with platonic loves for another person would do that are the same as romantic love.

@miriamweller812

Жыл бұрын

It sounds more like the typical problem of men, that they are not allowed to show emotions, if they do they are instantly 'gay'. What is of course just stupid and very hurtful.

@SpencerLemay

Жыл бұрын

"ust how things were back then." Really wasn't. Anyone saying that homosexuality was totally normal and expected back then is not being truthful. There were many attitudes among many city states. Some places were more accepting of homosexuality than others, but in ancient Athens men who received anal sex were barred from most aspects of citizenship. Most of the pro gay attitudes were well after the Iliad was written.

@Toven_WaveWatcherFi

Жыл бұрын

Exactly, most people in this comment scetion must've never had a good friend in their lives. You CAN love your friends without being interested sexually.

@billkillernic

Жыл бұрын

There is nothing that mentions him being homosexual with Patroclus other than the homosexuals who read the iliad and see "implications" that dont exist

@billkillernic

Жыл бұрын

@@Aeo267 Homophobic means fear for homosexuals, nobody is afraid of homosexuals, I dont like the expression "homophobic" it is a passive aggressive term and it comes from extremist people, people that,among everything else, play their part in altering historical events in order to suit their agenda. Homosexuality exists, it is a small minority among the human public, people should do whatever they want with their bodies but that's it,it doesnt mean that they should oppress other people who do not want to do the same thing by calling them names like "homophobic" as this minority can do as it pleases with their body the other majority of people can do the same and do not need to feel guilty for not wanting to intermingle.

so essentially, the writer didn't write this story for _us,_ they wrote it for the people of their time, so we have to look at it from _their_ perspective in order to truly understand what was being written. So looking from their pov, they were obviously lovers, no labels needed, because that's just how things were back in ancient Greece. correct me if I'm wrong, but I really like this idea. kinda wish we didn't need labels now either

@DenUngeHerrHolm

Жыл бұрын

They certainly had labels, and their views on sexuality were highly problematic and misogynistic, but not easily transferable to our labels and ideas of identity.

@Mendoxs_

Жыл бұрын

@@DenUngeHerrHolm ah, thank you.

@SpencerLemay

Жыл бұрын

"because that's just how things were back in ancient Greece." No. There were many different attitudes about homosexuality in Ancient Greece, most of the more tolerant ones were from well after the Iliad were written. However the idea of "Thats how things were" can easily be disproven by looking at the Ancient Athens laws against homosexuality. Homosexuality was only accepted in pederast relationships. Homosexuality between two older men was not condoned. Basically if you were a bottom in Ancient Athens, you were stripped of citizenship. Ancient Athens was more like modern Afghanistan where the r*ping of boys is an open practice, but is not considered gay. Boys would be discarded as lovers when they turned 18, only for them to go and find a young boy themselves to abuse. It was a really messed up society. Ancient Greeks might not have had a word for homosexual, but they had an equivalent to a certain f-slur called "Κίναιδος"(Kinaidos), which comes from the union of the words "κινώ"(move) and "αιδώς"(shame) meaning the one who causes shame. The idea that Achilles and Patroclus HAD to be bi-sexual seems so bizarre. Why would the story talk about how the two had sex with multiple women, but never go into detail about their relationship with each other? Do people really think that you can't deeply love someone without lusting for them? To me that seems like a really shallow and gross way to look at things.

I’ve seen plenty examples of spill art with coffee, tea, and other liquids, but not a wash of paint executed like this. The emphasis on form and shape with a focus on negative and positive space is incredible. Much like inkblots and some minimalist paintings, the eye fills in the gaps to form the shapes and human forms that are present. Well done.

That painting goes hard as hell 💪💪

@goldendaygecko7435

Жыл бұрын

It really does I want that as a poster

@YoonHan35

Жыл бұрын

Scrolled too much to find this comment

historians will say they were really best best friends

@ichbinschanppi

Жыл бұрын

As a historian of Classics ... we defo wouldn't haha

your voice is historic in a way I cannot explain, like you’ve been telling stories for years, like you’ve existed forever

@d1rtyr3d18

Жыл бұрын

(Historic voice ensues)

I want people to look at my relationships and not label them or me as either gay or straight or bi but just be like "yeah they felt passionate for eachother"

@Justyouraveragechaosenjoyer

Жыл бұрын

Finally someone gets it

@eu3801

Жыл бұрын

Yea no i get what u mean, these discussions can go on to the point of pointless, but i do want to say theres a certain weight of meaning when we do use definite labels for important figures, especially since many ppl still have that “straight until proven” mentality

@gamingwhilebroken2355

Жыл бұрын

Question, are you straight? Because this is a very straight comment. Queer people weren’t the ones that cared about sexuality… straight people were, we just defended ourselves

@Justyouraveragechaosenjoyer

Жыл бұрын

@@gamingwhilebroken2355 honestly I just don’t want my friends to harp on me about finding my sexuality anymore and having to know everything. I have 0 craps to give. If I find the right person I will find the right person. Labels shouldn’t be necessary, having an existential crisis every time you sway another way shouldn’t be necessary, fearing the wrath of your elders DEFINITELY shouldn’t be necessary. Love should just be love, like it should not have to be this complicated. Not as it was, nor as it is now. You feel me?

@mirandazhang1359

Жыл бұрын

I think I’d want to be labeled as such, people are still bigoted. This is apart of my nature, and unless I don’t address it, people will erase it. We are all fundamentally the same, but we are not the same.

There is a part where Achilles says he wishes everyone was dead and only Patroclus and him would remain to conquer the walls of troy together, and after he died, Apollo says that Achilles‘ rage and grief exceeds even that normally felt for close kin like fathers, brothers or sons. They may not have had a sexual relationship, but they were absolutely in love with one another.

@firefeather9999

Жыл бұрын

War husbands.

@kin2naruto

Жыл бұрын

No - they did. Like the video points out - the contemporary comments (and art) EXPLICITLY depicts the sexual relationship. (Emphasis on "explicit") They just were not bi or gay because "normal masculine behavior" of that time included gay sex! (And also sex with animals... hence all the stories of Zuse)

@nicolajane7389

Жыл бұрын

@@kin2naruto which is why the video makes no sense. Being bi or gay has nothing to do with masculinity and everything to do with who you are attracted to and who you have sex with….

@arona6692

Жыл бұрын

@@kin2naruto sex with animals wasn't a thing, the stories of Zeus transforming him/his lovers into animals to have his way don't mean to normalize zoophilia. Like most ancient greek myths there are tales created to encourage moral virtue (gods and heros causing chaos and destruction because of their hubris).

@shoepixie

Жыл бұрын

@@nicolajane7389 but it can, and for some culture it might. Sort of like how the character of Kirk changed depending on whether or not you find womanizing to be a personal pattern, or just part of being a captain.

not only did they discuss Achilles and Patroclus' relationship, I'm pretty sure there were heated debates on who was the top

I feel like regardless of Achilles sexual preference this art is FAN F****** TASTIC.

This is coming from someone who is trans and bisexual: You are 100% correct. These are modern terms for our modern framing of sexuality with our modern gender spectrum and modern English terms and modern viewpoint of identity. Even cultures hundreds or thousands of years ago that use terms like "man" and "woman" still aren't necessarily using the same gender spectrum as we do. The way we look at our sexuality from the perspective of gender, other cultures don't necessarily do that. Some places attraction to all sexes in the norm, and they don't have words for it. Or they have words for intermarrying between different social castes. Or attraction to age groups. Or.. anything you can think of as a way to distinguish people. You can try to shift the story into a modern lens and speculate how these characters _would_ behave and call themselves if it happened now, but now you're telling a completely different story.

@danielabassano9528

Жыл бұрын

By the way, in ancient Greek society were recognized 3 sexes:male, female and intersex. Intersex people were regarded as oracles too and had rights. Cross dressing was practiced too, also for ritual reasons. Sexual segregation and certain philosophies encouraged homosexuality as well but marriages (arranged) and couples socially accepted as such were only heterosexual. There was also the question of slaves, not considered as equal humans so sexual activities with them was labeled just as "sex with a slave, the service of a slave" no matter what sex the slave was. Every society had their labels through the history.

@alisonsmith9240

Жыл бұрын

This is bi-erasure in my opinion

@RoseGoldKR

Жыл бұрын

Using modern day words to describe something that happened in a different time is not refitting the story to a modern day tale. All it is doing is using our current words to convey the exact same information. If we took your logic to an extreme example, then you would also argue that we aren’t allowed to use any of the English language to describe a culture that existed before English did. Just because the language didn’t exist, doesn’t mean the information we are talking about is gone. The information that someone has sexual attraction to men and women is an objective fact, and all we are doing with language is conveying that information. It doesn’t change the information that we know is true, it’s just changing how we choose to transfer that information to other people. So if we knew that someone had sexual attraction to men and women, they are (by definition) bisexual. That is not us transposing them into a modern setting, that is exactly what they were in their own time. Just because they didn’t have a word for it (or maybe used a different word), doesn’t mean our current words are wrong. This is a very flawed way of describing history.

@gloop7458

Жыл бұрын

I agree with Rose and: (from another trans person) I know we like to pretend we do, but we really know nothing about gender. The definition we have now is: gender is about what is feminine and masculine, or: gender roles But that entire discussion invalidates tomboys, femboys, androgynous binary people, and non-androgynous non-binary people, but these people are all still valid and it’s recognized as discrimination when countries try to enforce this definition so I think the definition is faulty and we really don’t know much of anything about it, or if gender even is cultural (which is fine)

@ericapelz260

Жыл бұрын

​​@@gloop7458'm also trans, and I disagree. Calling a trait masculine doesn't invalidate tomboys at all. Tomboys are tomboys precisely because they identify as girls or women but have masculine traits in attire, activities etc. The only thing that invalidates tomboys is someone else deciding if they are tomboys. We know a lot about gender. Describing a 2000 year old person's gender and sexuality in modern terms is how we communicate with each other. They may not have had the word or concept then, but it doesn't mean it doesn't fit. I just means they would describe themselves in the language they had.

I like the Nuance here because all the modern labels we have today didn't exist in antiquity, they weren't individual identities. Instead people would be with who they wanted with no need to define what that made them. It's interesting cultural context in so far as we only need the labels because we live in a society that, historically speaking, is uniquely invested in what gender your lover is

@wokeil

Жыл бұрын

They did define these things, just differently and with differing emphasis

@risky_busine55

Жыл бұрын

@@wokeil yeah that's a fair description of it, like you're right cuz gender and sex did play a part, but in very different ways

@XrayTheMyth23

Жыл бұрын

identity is irrelevant to the discussion of a legendary character. It’s clear he was in a relations with a man so why not call it as it is…

@risky_busine55

Жыл бұрын

@@XrayTheMyth23 yeah no it is clear that he was, my point is that the terms which we use today are linked to modern perceptions of identities, those words were invented specifically to describe identities, without that the word is kinda unnecessary

@char1211

Жыл бұрын

Labels regarding gender and sexuality are not a modern invention, it's just that in antiquity _different_ labels were used. An ancient Greek would most likely think of a relationship between two men as _pederaistia_ and he would call on of the men _erastes_ and the other _eromenos._ He also wouldn't think of the eromenos as being a man. Pederasty was essentially the only socially acceptable form of male-male relationships and while being on top wasn't looked down upon, being penetrated was seen as shameful and emasculating so it would be very important for a man to assert that he was the older/wiser/dominant party i.e. the erastes. Appart from the eromenos likely being young enough to be a boy, the fact he was passive is also why he wouldn't be seen as a man. There were lots of social rules around how and when you could have this kind of relationship so it definitely was not as fluid or effortless as you're implying. Hopefully I managed to summarize the nuance of it all

It’s crazy how in such a fun and interesting form of art, this channel also has such heavy and deep conversations about things, love the channel

A four wheeled automotive is a car, a person who doesn't eat meat is a vegetarian, a person who loved males and females is bisexual.

I believe in definitions a bit sexual person is a person who is sexually attracted to both male man females. As Achilles had male and female lovers, it is assumed that he was attracted to both thus fitting the definition. So yes. We make labels and definitions to explain and place things. Unfortunately people have a tendency to get hung up on them.

They were absolutely lovers. That is not best friend activity.

@thegreatandterrible4508

Жыл бұрын

I mean... I have had some **good** friends

@TheAce736

Жыл бұрын

Lovers does not mean fuckin.

@thegreatandterrible4508

Жыл бұрын

@@TheAce736 in this case, it does

@lucasq.rodrigues

Жыл бұрын

He was the first homiesexual

@Awesomeficationify

Жыл бұрын

@@TheAce736 They fucked and were loud about it.

Beautifully said! ❤ Also, the painting made me teary eyed 😢 It conveys so much pain

I trust this man. He looks like he was present for that.

Why is no one talking about that painting. That is beautiful.

I think sometimes using modern labels, even if it doesn't fit perfectly or exist in the past can be helpful. I often call my stays a corset because when I say stays to people who don't understand dress history it's confusing. But when I say corset, they get the idea better. It's a stiff undergarment that you lace to change your silhouette. ... and then they ask if I can breathe or if they hurt (yes I can and no they don't unless I eat really fast and don't loosen the laces)

@wareforcoin5780

Жыл бұрын

No one would wear the garment if it hurt to wear all the time. This whole idea that they hurt came from assuming the Victorian trend of tight lacing was A.) more prevalent than it was, and B.) true for the entirety of corset wearing. I have a very nice corset, and I can full on sprint in that thing. (And I have.) I've been on a personal mission to correct ideas about corsets for the better part of my adult life. Now, the cheap corsets you buy at the costume shop _will_ hurt you, because they're cheap and poorly made with uncomfortable materials. You want it to not hurt? Buy a nice one that'll last you, and you can style with anything. I'm getting buried in mine, I'm that confident that it'll last me that long.

@vainpiers

Жыл бұрын

@@wareforcoin5780 please re-read my comment. I think you got a bit confused.

The Iliad as literally someone’s argument that Achilles was a bottom. There are several books going around arguing abt that.

Basically we don't know if achilles was bisexual no one can confirm he liked women

@eroszakos9042

Жыл бұрын

The Iliad is about Achilles refusing to fight the Trojans because Agamemnon stole his war-BRIDE, Briseis, form him. The story of Achilles confirms Achilles liked women. So what on earth are you talking about?

@renatoramirezreyes8450

Жыл бұрын

@@eroszakos9042 IT'S A JOKE A BAD ONE BUT A JOKE

@eroszakos9042

Жыл бұрын

@@renatoramirezreyes8450 ALL CAPS

@renatoramirezreyes8450

Жыл бұрын

@@eroszakos9042 sorry, was horny

This is why queer is SUCH a helpful label for these things. Do we know the particulars of historical or mythological sexualities? No, but undeniably the do not fit today’s standard for strict heterosexuality or heteronormativity, so queer is our perfect word for it

@Zachary-

Жыл бұрын

It'd be more helpful to stop labeling people at all. If you care to know about someone, you can do so with time. A label deprives from that experience.

@lorek33perandfriends47

Жыл бұрын

@@Zachary- that is. Literally the point of queer tho. It’s the anti-label. Like I get where you’re coming from but that is the word to use In Place Of a label

He just sounds like a mature guy that I could trust with my drink at a party

@gfdereus8967

Жыл бұрын

Patrocules? Yes. Achilles? Absolutely not. 😂

Always looking for that “OmG ThERe JUsT LiKE mE”😂

A man can mourn the loss of his friend and not be bi

@baggelissonic

Жыл бұрын

Very true, Homer mighy have intended for them to not be lovers. However, them being lovers was the most adopted narrative by other contemporary and later creators. In most interpetations they are indeed lovers, maybe not in the Illiad though, despite the historic context.

Fun fact : their sexuality was erased so successfully (at least in Greece) that I didn't even considered that they were something more than friends until years later and only after I read about it on the internet (I am Greek and studied the Iliad as a subject in school) in fact I remember my teacher making sure to point out that they are friends and nothing else

@hopelesslydull7588

Жыл бұрын

Christianity did a fucking number on Greek culture, huh?

@KARMAROSSO

Жыл бұрын

Really? In Italy I was taught that try were lovers. I would expect to be taught the opposite since in Italy we are so obsessed with God and religion..

@snowshower4415

Жыл бұрын

​@@KARMAROSSO not always religious that barrs people and their love interest. It's the people in society. One can be homophobic w/o religious aspects, or otherwise, be okay w homosexuality and be the most religious person you know

@MaRaX93

Жыл бұрын

Fun fact: there's no mention of them having a sexual relationship in the actual work

@hopelesslydull7588

Жыл бұрын

@@MaRaX93 Novel text: "They were two halves of the same soul. They filled each other's lives in a way that has never been done before. The world lost a true kind of love when they died." "IDK, guys. The book never explicitly said they fuck so you can't be sure that they were actually lovers."

I saw a single one of your videos and you instantly became my favorite artist on KZread, I’ve never seen anybody do what you do, please keep up the amazing work!

@taramerryman7330

Жыл бұрын

I know. A week in for me and I’m already fan girl-ing😂 he’s a bad ass and his voice should narrate something for a film voice over. Or a children’s cartoon but a really cool one that you still love as an adult. A Jim Henson team/Neil Gaiman collab like MirrorMask.

I don’t know what he’s saying but this man looks like a wizard and I believe every word

@Bseaz

Жыл бұрын

i did understand but this is still so true

Achilles was def a bit fruity even for that time 😂

this is such an important point we often forget. there was a time where people just *were*. no labels, just doing what you feel. i think we might be a better society if we went back to that 😭 edit: *LESS labels, and less societal restrictions surrounding those labels. Of course there's always been labels

@pouncepounce7417

Жыл бұрын

yes and no, there are always reasons why societies develop norms, and there are usual tradeoffs. We consider the olden times for a reason pretty brutal times. An action back then considerd total normal and logical would be seen as an crime only an psychopath is able to do. I think people back then where wider in action and emotions, we had to reign in some of that because we got so very good at trashing our planet in wars and economical means. In greece cities where at low level wars pretty much all the time, by todays standards and weapons that is not an good idea.

@robertgould1345

Жыл бұрын

The ancients had labels. They just had different labels and different rules.

@pouncepounce7417

Жыл бұрын

@@robertgould1345 I have never seen any mention of it though, we know quit a lot about greek and roman times, even how much a prostitute was paid.

@DimT670

Жыл бұрын

Not only were there labels, they also had cultural baggage with more societal restrictions, unlike today where we use neutral terms. For example, in ancient greece, homosexual relationships had to be between an older man and a boy around the tail end of puberty, the older man had to be the one penetrating and the boy penetrated , and they had different labels for each. The boy was the eromenos and the man the erastes. And the whole thing was calles paiderastia. Thats not more label, that's less. Today's label don't imply anything in contrast, they just describe one thing.

Fun fact: many of the gods in Greek mythology including Apollo and Poseidon had male and female lovers at different points.

“It isn’t gay if nobody says it is”-guy wearing socks

I find it funny that when these to male characters showed love for each other and everyone on the internet instantly started saying they where gay

@laurenc5306

11 ай бұрын

Are you talking about Achilles and Patroclus specifically? Because people on the Internet didn't start that. The debate has been around since at least Plato's time. Even Shakespeare wrote about it

How can any of yall give a fuck about sexuality when he's laying down ink like that

Wow. Your art is incredible, I've never seen a style like this it is so enchanting.

There is absolutely no evidence that that was the norm in the society.

@baggelissonic

Жыл бұрын

It was fairly widespread in the Ancietn Greek society. Pederasty was also extremely popular during that time. Saying it's the norm might imply that the majority had a male partner but the fact of the matter is that it was prevelant enough for it to be widely accepted that it pederasty "the principal cultural model for free relationships between citizens." There is absolutely no evidence that what you said is true.

I think we can just let bi people have the representation if they want it

@DenUngeHerrHolm

Жыл бұрын

Yes. The art is a depiction of Achilles and Patroclus as lovers. By me, a bisexual man. Read the pinned comment.

@naudalyke

Жыл бұрын

True. Every time a man is bi, people call them gay. Every time a woman is bi, people call them straight. It's always centered around men. (I agree with this video though, labels weren't a thing back thing)

Can we call them "roommates"?

Idk how to describe this video other than “They say there’s no such thing as perfection” and this person literally just multitasked it. This video was really enlightening. Thank you

@DenUngeHerrHolm

Жыл бұрын

❤️❤️

Mfs stole my ability to have homies, can't have shit in Troy.

I don't like labels at all so I love this

I think back then people just... Dated. They didn't have labels because love really was JUST love. Sure those are two dudes smashing in their own home, they're dating! This is coming froma bi guy btw, but I think that the ancients "lack of labels" showed how advanced their concept of love was

@DimT670

Жыл бұрын

You know literally nothing about history. The ancient greeks had 4 very specific words for love. The ancient athenians were so rigid in their roles for gay sex that the receiving partner had to be a specific age and had his own term and vice versa for the older partner : eromenos and erastes. And the relationship had a name : paiderastia Ancient athens, because inexplicably when ppl talk about ancient Greece they always talk about athens, wasn't some gay utopia, it was a sexist hellhole that was literally so sexist men preffered to have sex with men because they hated women so much

@zoidbergthebabyjesus1606

Жыл бұрын

@@DimT670 first off, saying I don't know anything about history because I don't know the nomenclature of dudes fucking dudes in Athens is a big assumption seeing as history didn't just happen in Greece. 2nd I said I think, not they did, suprise suprise I didn't do two ours of research for KZread comment on one of my favorite figures in history. Thirdly using Athens as your base for all of Greece is like using Sparta as a base for all of Greece, which is not accurate at all.

Holy shit, that art is sooo vivid and impactful.

That painting looks sick dude

Your talent in painting is beyond heights

As a bi person, this is an excellent explanation

@billkillernic

Жыл бұрын

ofcourse.. There is nothing that mentions him being homosexual with Patroclus other than the homosexuals who read the iliad and see "implications" that dont exist

@adamlaspata7001

Жыл бұрын

As another, I agree.

@xanosghoul

Жыл бұрын

​@@billkillernic Several other sources including Plato outright state they were lovers and that they wished for their ashes to be mixed together so they could be together forever in the afterlife. Considering that men having male lovers was as common as breathing in Greece then you may want to listen to those "homosexuals" you got so mad about.

@billkillernic

Жыл бұрын

@@xanosghoul 0 sources say that, and the ashes thing mixed together is from a 70s song as far as I remember but even if its not originally from the song it (as a verse) doesnt mean anything homosexual unless you want it to mean, I mean ignoring his CLEARLY (as in black and white, not subjectively inferred by ambiguous cryptic innuendos) stated NOUMEROUS female lovers his children his wife his life as a brutal unbeatable warrior(you know a characteristic homosexual treat, something that 99% of homosexuals are and 0% of straight men are, lol ) etc and just trying desperately to seek ghosts in either false/non existing sources or by misinterpreting what you consider as innuendos for being gay is clearly provenance from your side to create a story you like to exist but doesnt

Honestly it’s relatable. Technically I’d fall under “pansexual” , but I just like who I like. It’s a vibe. And its special . I think every single person on earth could find a vibe with someone they wouldn’t expect if they found the right person . It can even be a one time connection . Doesn’t mean your bi, or straight , or pansexual , etc.. These labels box us in , in my opinion

@grass5496

Жыл бұрын

Cool story

For those interested ‘The song of Achilles’ by Madeline miller is a great read about the story between Achilles and Patroclus as lovers, as it follows the perspective of Patroclus

The original poster "They were *STRAIGHT* and just friends." The response *"So we all know these two dudes were in love-"*

@DenUngeHerrHolm

Жыл бұрын

Read the pinned comment.

@thefrogthatknows5251

Жыл бұрын

@@DenUngeHerrHolm I did. Sorry about the confusion, allow to explain. I was merely making a joke about the fact that the person you were replying to was attempting to say that the characters were not in a relationship whatsoever. A fact you didn't cover, but rather rebuked entirely through your explanation. In other words, you explained that the characters were in a relationship, and delved into the ideas surrounding that and the discussion of heteronormativity, while the original comment that was being responded to was just plain erasure. I found it humorous that you brought up meaningful and well spoken discourse about the subject, while the comment worked exclusively to remove the romantic element from the characters.

@DenUngeHerrHolm

Жыл бұрын

@@thefrogthatknows5251 Ah. 😊

In *The Song of Achilles" by Madeline Miller, Achilles called Patroclus his "philtatos", which is "most beloved". I think that this rings true for their story.

@hopelesslydull7588

Жыл бұрын

That book was so damn good. I got about half of the way through and had to actively tell myself to not let it rewrite my memory of the illiad.

This is important I think; sexuality labels being anachronistic and bizarre in ancient times. We really label everything in modern society, and all labels do is let us know how we are supposed to judge it… which honestly just sucks

@Zachary-

Жыл бұрын

Exactly. No one bothers to get to know someone for who they are when they are wearing a label.

@cfri9332

Жыл бұрын

Labels are tools. Hammers are tools too. A lot of people can use a hammer wrong, and a lot of people can do damage with a hammer. Hammers aren't bad. People using hammers poorly is bad. He was bi. He enjoyed the company of men and women. His relationship with this one man had sexual connotations. His relationship with this one man had sexual connotations which is plausible considering the sexual values of the time. The same information exists, it's just a matter of whether key details are shifted from a presumed shared understanding and into the spoken word. If the understanding is not shared, and the communicator uses a label without shifting that information from the presumed shared knowledge into the spoken word, then yes, that is a poor use of a label, that is a poor use of a tool. That doesn't mean that the tool itself is bad, but that it can be used better. That it can be amplified by doing something such as expanding upon the shared knowledge, laying down a better framework. Or in other words, make it universal knowledge that in those times, in those societies--they be fuckin'.

@hopelesslydull7588

Жыл бұрын

​@@cfri9332 I for the most part agree with everything except for "He was bi" with no asterisk. If in 200 years humanity fully removes the gender binary from our cultural framework and used some concept we do not currently use to identify sexuality, you would not be hetero/bi/homosexual. Hell, they may not respect asexuality in the future with enough neuroscientific research. If future humans said, "C Fri is Îçthæsexual" full stop, that would be using their tools wrong. Definition-wise, they may be perfectly accurate, but you never thought of your sexuality that way once in your life, so saying "without question, he was bi" is at least suspect if not disingenuous.

@lukassjogren7910

Жыл бұрын

Labels aren’t used for judgement, they’re used for identifying and understanding.

@DimT670

Жыл бұрын

Sexuality labels aren't anachronistic or bizzare. They are just descriptive words We call achilles a warrior because he participated in war. Did he call himself that exact thing? No. Would the ancient greeks call him that exact thing? No. But he fits the definition so we use the word We call achilles bisexual because he was attracted and had relations with both men and women. Did he call himself that exact thing? No. Would hte ancient greeks call him that? No. But he fits the definition so we use the word Same way the person in the vid used lovers but he wouldn't have used that exact word in fact

Holy shit that drawomg caught me off guard

Man looks like odysseus disguised as the old beggar coming back home

can u make hades? from the myth? thank you

Alexander the Great loved his horse. When his horse died, he mourned him for days and died shortly after. Historian: "Well, obviously he was gay for his horse"

@DenUngeHerrHolm

Жыл бұрын

Alexander loved his male lover.

the art is so beautiful 😭😭💓

I like to think that they were either just best friends who were close as brothers and we're talked about behind their back that they were gay (*insert Senor chang "ha gaaaaayyy" meme*) Or gay dudes who were in a hot and heavy relationship and people were like "nahh, they're just real close friends" 😂

It sometimes does make sense to apply modern labels to historic or fictional characters as a way of expanding the story or as a way of contextualizing the story. I do agree that the label doesn’t truly apply because it is a very individual lave and the only people who could actually decide if they were bisexual would be them or their creators.

The reason it doesn't make sense to transpose the labels back is because back then heteronormativity hadn't been invented yet. But when their lover's bond has been consistently erased and reduced to brotherly companionship by modern historians in aid of a heteronormative social standard, it becomes necessary to draw that parallel between ancient Greek society and modern queer sexualities.

History will call them “Just good friends”, a classic

Another thing to note is that in Ancient Greek culture it was okay to be with a man before you got married (up to about age 25),and was socially acceptably however men did not marry other men.

Well, the word Achillic, describing a male-on-male relationship with homosexual undertones does come from Achilles, ssooooooooooooooo-

@projectstart5522

Жыл бұрын

Achillic is not a word lol.

@baalgodofrain

Жыл бұрын

@@projectstart5522 that’s the shorten term for Achillean like how Sapphic (the female term) is a shorten term for Sappohism

@giorgos3643

Жыл бұрын

@@baalgodofrain Achillean meaning a man to man relationship is a modern construct. Soooooo ... what? Sapho on the other hand was known to be lesbian and her poetry talks about it openly. Soooooo... It is not the same.

@billkillernic

Жыл бұрын

There is nothing that mentions him being homosexual with Patroclus other than the homosexuals who read the iliad and see "implications" that dont exist

@ShieniLicksOnLemons

Жыл бұрын

​@@giorgos3643...... You've never heard of the subreddit Sappho and her friends? It exists purely for the reason that Sappho has had her sexuality erased and disregarded by historians because "haha people can't be gay!". So your point "Sappho was known to be a lesbian" to discredit the origin of the word Achillean is pretty dumb

“And they were roomates”

The thing about writing is that when it comes to what people think the story SHOULD be saying, they suddenly forget about subtext They forget "show don't tell" and "read between the lines" And "they didn't EXPLICITLY say this" is an insult to writing as an art Our job as writers isn't to spoon feed everything to you. Some of it you have to interpret for yourself and the intentions are largely based on what we know the audience we're writing for will take it as It's not fun to everyone to spell it out Maybe you interpret it as really close friends and that's fine! Because you're right, it doesn't say anything about what their relationship actually is and it's good to nurture deep platonic relationships But that doesn't mean that the people who interpret it as lovers is WRONG And it you know anything about Ancient Greek society, you'll have heard that it wasn't uncommon for soldiers to have sexual relationships with one another, and same sex lovers wasn't strange (Apollo had a male infatuation!) even if it may have been uncommon It's great that these stories have survived so that we can have these different interpretations, but that's what it is- an interpretation. There's no right or wrong because the original writers and the original audience isn't here for us to ask about it

Holy hell. I literally could never comprehend predicting how liquid will move to form the shadows of a shape that hasnt been drawn yet. Im in awe

I appreciate your response to this. A refusal to put modern labels on a relationship, fictional or not, that's so far from modernity

Actually it wasn't the norm for men to be lovers in ancient Greek, homosexuality considered taboo. Like any healthy society would. Learn some real history not LGBT Propaganda

@Number-id3dd

Жыл бұрын

why do you hate the gays

Omg i love your art it's so unique!

Literally just Spartans doing spartan things during camp

this video was so good i could feel achilles come inside of me

Something modern society seems to have completely forgotten is that love isn't always sexual! In ancient times, very good friends also called their non-sexual affection "love". People love their parents, partners and their good friends. Love means "strong affection". It's not always the same type of affection, but that doesn't mean it's not love.

@skins881

Жыл бұрын

That is beautiful.

"He wasn't bisexual, he just liked men" What

@insight827

Жыл бұрын

The point is that, while definitionally bisexuality just means attraction to both sexes, it carries other connotations that have been built on to it as an identity in our modern world. To apply this identity, with all of its baggage, to the Greeks is historically counterproductive. Achilles and Patroclus were lovers; their love need not be forced in to one of the harsh, coarse labels of today.

It's like trying to find a word for smartphone in the ancient greek vocabulary

Why can't modern young people (and some not young sadly) recognize Platonic love and close friendship without turning it sexual?

@DenUngeHerrHolm

Жыл бұрын

Blame the Ancient Greek philosophers debating whether Achilles was top or bottom. Them damn' kids, 2500 years ago... 😳

According to the Iliad they were lovers. They wanted their bones buried together to directly paraphrase. Many scholars theorize that it was an equitable homosexual relationship

This man drew an outline on a smudge and then I see buddy muscles poppin, art crazy man

I legit thought this was Woody Harrelson with a beard at first.

the label gay or bisexual makes complete sense for them, they were willing to date men (and possibly women). How would that not be fitting? Just because their sexual dynamics were different doesnt mean the modern understanding is broken somehow.

@AFrogInTheStars

Жыл бұрын

I don’t think this person is saying that the labels don’t make sense. I think what they’re saying is that viewing them through our lens is almost not comparable since they had different ways of thinking than us today.

It’s so incredibly hard to try to explain something like this without sounding homophobic, but you did a pretty good job

That makes as much sense as saying that the French flag isn’t blue white red because those words mean nothing in French. The concept may not have been explicitly stated at the time, but it is still definitely applicable…

I’m pretty sure there is a line in the Iliad where Achilles talks about how pretty Patroclus’ thighs are

Bro thats insane!!!!!

As a bisexual man myself I'd like to assume they were because it's rare to see characters in fiction that I can relate to on that kind of level

@firefeather9999

Жыл бұрын

Especially now that pansexual is a term. It sorta erases bisexual from the codex. I've seen more pan characters than bi ones.

@ivanmehboob

Жыл бұрын

I don't really see any Pans in media, I see more NBs Bis and or aces but not really Pans

@thewitchprince8887

Жыл бұрын

​@@firefeather9999pans aren't as much in the media as bis, and just like all the other multigender sexualities, it falls under the bi umbrella also similar things can coexist without erasing each other. you wouldn't say the existence of toads is frog erasure just because they're similar in some ways the existence of omnisexuality (which is basically something in-between bi and pan) doesn't mean the other similar identities erasure it's just another term for people who feel like those other identities doesn't fit exactly additionally I'd say pansexuality is nothing like bisexuality in a lot of ways and is a necessary term for people who don't see gender when looking for attraction (aka gender blind) so comparing the two is unnecessary because they're both in a group of sexualities that likes multiple/all genders with other similar sexualities

@Zachary-

Жыл бұрын

Honest question, what does anyone's sexuality have to do with your ability to relate to them as a person?

@ivanmehboob

Жыл бұрын

@@Zachary- there's probably a more convoluted explanation for it but for me its like meeting someone new and finding out you went to the same school. Yea the experience may not be exactly the same but it's something to relate to

I don't think I've q seen a more insane creative process. Zero hesitation, full confidence, unreal.

"No, I'm not gay... I'm Greek.," Lol