• shawn1122@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Romans saw sex mainly through a lens of power and domination. They were okay with a man of higher standing penetrating a man of lower social status but if it happened the other way around, the high status man would suffer loss of his masculine honor. With a similar mindset, older men would mentor adolescent men and it was acceptable to engage in sexual acts with them (pederasty).

    Its interesting because its not entirely homophobic but still a disturbing way to see the world.

    The Kama Sutra was written at around this time and acknowledges same sex marriages as legitimate however, additionally, Vātsyāyana writes positively about sex workers (advising men how to engage with them respectfully) and heavily emphasizes female pleasure (with specific emphasis on female agency and consent), going as far to say it is crucial to living a fulfilling and meaningful life for both partners.

    When the text was transmitted to the West they took out all that “political” stuff and focussed on sex positions.

    • PugJesus@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Romans saw sex mainly through a lens of power and domination. They were okay with a man of higher standing penetrating a man of lower social status but if it happened the other way around, the high status man would suffer loss of his masculine honor. With a similar mindset, older men would mentor adolescent men and it was acceptable to engage in sexual acts with them (pederasty).

      Can’t speak as to the Kama Sutra, but this is partly correct and partly incorrect. For Romans, sex was definitely seen through a lens of power and domination, but it was never okay for a Roman citizen in good standing to be penetrated by anyone, higher status or lower. In theory, at least; in practice there is considerable deviation from this ‘ideal’. The idea of mentoring adolescent men whilst in a sexual relationship was a Greek practice.

      This is not to say that the Romans did not engage in pederasty - unfortunately, they certainly did in some scenarios. But there was no mentor element involved. Even at the height of Roman same-sex practices, the prevailing relationship standards were of a dominant and submissive male (often younger, and either provincial, an infamis, foreign, or enslaved), a ‘in-the-closet’ style affair, or of a husband and a male ‘wife’, which, at least to observers, partly conformed to sexual gender roles even if it (disturbingly, to traditional Romans) preserved the notion of citizenship and masculinity of the ‘wife’.

      Notably, the ultraconservative Roman dictator Sulla retired to a nice Mediterranean island with his lifelong boytoy, the actor (actors were considered infames, along with prostitutes and gladiators) Metrobius; the Emperor Titus was noted to have a number of male ‘favorites’ who were actors whose association lasted long enough that he had to give them up when he became Emperor after his father’s ~10 years of rule - suggesting that, at the very least, they were probably not all teens by the time Titus gave up bussy for the dignitas of the Res Publica. Interestingly, the short-lived (and himself somewhat older) Emperor Galba, a bit of a curmudgeon, was noted to have a preference for ‘hard-bodied’ men in early middle-age. The only recorded Roman daddy appreciator.

      Some of the material is lost, some is simply unrecorded, and some we have only glimpses into, but on the whole, Roman sexuality is an incredibly multifaceted and alien subject.

      Very interesting stuff about the Kama Sutra. I should probably read up on sexuality in pre-modern India sometime, but I have so many goddamn books to read and so little focus to do it with. XD