Talk:Pederasty/Archive 1

'''DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.'''

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 18 June 2004 and 26 December 2005.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to Talk:Pederasty/Archive02. (See How to archive a talk page.) Thank you.  Mistress Selina Kyle  (  Α⇔Ω ¦  ⇒✉  )  20:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I deleted items about the classical greeks because it is Wikipedia policy to "Cite Sources" none is given. There is no bibliography.

I have read plenty of the greeks, and of classicists especially Muller who is thorough. There is no mention of this *idea* anywhere in classical literature. WHEELER 17:28, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

idem
I assume you are referring to the analogy with the Papuans. I support your deletion, and have removed all remaining mentions of the Papuans, who at this point do not fit into the argument. Someone more familiar with their practices will have to integrate them in. --Haiduc 04:30, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The age thing
Seeing there are varying opinions, I opt to avoid narrowing down the age range until the issue has been debated. Assuming we can agree they were teens I will leave it as such.--Haiduc 03:00, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * A source I have (book I've been reading) says they did not have any facial hair, so I assume that's earlier teens. I don't really know though.  I'll see if I can cite the book I have.--DanielCD 03:04, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * The iconography is telling: the great majority of the young people depicted are well developped, muscular and not at all immature, though clearly still youthful and without any facial hair. Plato also mentions (in the Symposium, I think) that it is most honorable to engage youths who are "almost grown up," and all the male love annecdotes in Plutarch's "Lives" involve young men rather than children. For example, there is one (from Chaeronea) who kills the Roman centurion who wanted to take him by force, and then flees the town only to return with a bunch of his friends to massacre the magistrates who were planning to have him put to death. Another is a competitor in the Olympic games who was not being allowed to sign up on the lists because he looked too mature. And on and on and on. So while all kinds of things were going on in Ancient Greece, the preponderance of the evidence is that most of these were well developped youths short of full maturity. I think we should be careful to let the Greeks speak through us rather than fall into the temptation of us speaking through them. And please do cite the book, I am curious.--Haiduc 01:04, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Please don't forget that in ancient times children were not so childish as now. A 12-year old boy was a warrior; see, e.g., Alexander the Great. Mikkalai 01:42, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I thought so too until I read Plutarch and discovered that there were definite rules introduced - in ancient times - restricting the use of child soldiers. He cites one instance (in ancient Rome) where a boy had to lie that he was sixteen in order to be allowed to join the army. But I agree with you that there was no culture of enforced infantilism, as there is today. Haiduc 01:54, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ceramic
Unless the scene involves historically known persons involved in Eastern kind of pederasty I have no reasons not to think that the affection displayed is, e.g., between father and son. Unless proof of relevance is presented, the image is to go away. Mikkalai 01:38, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * It so happens that it does. Chehel Sutun (Forty Columns) was a palace built at the behest of Shah Abbas I, who was famous for loving beutiful pages and wine boys. Much of the artistic output of his workshops celebrated love between men and youths. This can be seen in the ceramic panels of Chehel Sutun (of which there are many) as well as in the paintings and drawings of artists of his time, like Reza i-Abbasi (see [the Persian hall of male love]). The Persians would be howling with laughter at the notion that artistic depictions of affection between a man and a youth were displays of fatherly love. But I am not a Persian. Haiduc 02:03, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Me neither, and I suspect that the majority of the readers, too. Therefore what you wrote here must be in the article. Mikkalai 02:10, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Good point. Haiduc 02:59, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Quasi-smart blurb

 * In those societies in which pederasty was prevalent, such as Ancient Greece, pre-Modern Japan, Melanesia, or  Renaissance Florence, it manifested as one pole of a quasi-universal male bisexuality. Historically, it exists in a zero-sum relationship with egalitarian same-sex love relationships, in which one or the other – but usually not both – bears a burden of societal disapproval.

Can anyone translate this into Pidgin English? Mikkalai 02:28, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Was it really "prevalent"?
 * 2) What and why is "quasi-universal"?
 * 3) Zero-sum relationship of relationships... Whoa!
 * Prevalent? I was being understated. It was universal. But I did not want to invite quibbles.

I take it you'd prefer this in simpler language. But is this a junior high topic? Quasi-universal = "almost universal" Zero-sum is what it is. I take it you understand full well what is being said, but you think others will not. This can all be dumbed down but is it wise? Haiduc 02:59, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Intellectual honesty
While I consider myself very open minded and quite liberal politically, I can in no wise accede to anything other than stating in plain terms exactly what this activity is.

For example the phraseology male same sex is simply abbreviated homosexual, likewise for other terms. Under the age of consent means that the child - yes, a child - had no say, and that the father - women had no rights in Greek society, they were mere chattel - similarly condoned the rape.

To call it rape would more likely be accurate, for few children would refuse if their lives were in jeopardy, and their father were complicit. They would keep quiet to save their lives and/or a harsh beating.

In this age, such behavior is universally criminal. Because some view it at one time as somehow good or just or even attempting to sanitize the horror is as egregious as condoning or attempting to build upon Mengele's activities at Auchwitz as valid science.


 * I don't know about politics, but I find it interesting that you use the word "honesty" so freely. If I may point out some of your recent edits on this page:


 * a. You have censored the use of the word "courtship."
 * b. You have censored the list of other lands where practices analogous to Greek pederasty were common.
 * c. You have censored the statement pointing out the unity of spiritual and erotic thought of the Greeks on this topic.
 * d. You even censored the use of the word "traditional."


 * Then you proceed to underline with a grease pencil, so to speak, the sexual aspects of a relationship that was far more complex than you seem to want to make it out to be. If I may be permitted an analogy, imagine defining marriage as "a heterosexual relationship involving vaginal and oral intercourse." Excuse me, but this is not my idea of honesty.


 * It is all too easy to trample one's own moral principles in the quest for some ideal (the old "end justifies the means" argument). You strike me as a moral man, and I am sorry to say that by trashing intellectual integrity in this fashion you are only doing yourself a disservice. The crimes of the Greeks (and of the moderns) are all too real, and there are powerful lessons to be learned from them, but the moment we resort to censorship and deception in the name of some higher truth we only reveal that we have learned nothing from the mistakes of the past.


 * If you would like to discuss this article further, I would be glad to oblige. But let's leave the Germans out of he picture. Members of my immediate family were victimized by Mengele. Let's stick to the topic. Haiduc 21:53, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Correlated with what?
The claim at the beginning of the article which states that pederasty is often associated with child sexual abuse because "pederasty" is universally illegal is inaccurate. The "age of consent" in many nations of the post-industrial world is 14, well within the age-range of younger participants in traditional pederastic relationships. The insertion of this juxtaposition seems to be little more than a cheap intended to twist the idea of NPOV until it screams "Agenda!"

Too many references
This is an encyclopedia article, not a collection of all possible books that say a word or two on the subject. I reverted the last aditions. Please reconsider what is directly related to the subject of the article and is of encyclopedic value, rather than of scientific. I am sure there are hundreds of books. Mikkalai 22:16, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ambiguous statement
"In others there was ongoing conflict between popular culture and the authorities."

As far as I am aware, there was no ongoing conflict in any of the societies of antiquity, neither in the West, Middle-East, or Far East regarding male homosexuality. I think it would be necessary to quote and find scholarly references for this comment. The entire introduction seems to be misguiding and inappropriate for the subcontent provided. It needs to be simplified so that it will reflect the information of the subcontent concisely.

Regarding male homosexuality--particularly pederasty--the practice came to an end in the West as a common norm of sexuality and intimacy with the rise of Christianity. After the Greek states were conquered by the Macedonians, and then by the Romans, it's sociological significance declined in those societies, but it remained a socially acceptable practice. Even after the rise of Judeo-Christianity in the West, the practice still continued as an esoteric ritual and as an aristocratic practice. And in the Far East, Westernization brought an end to it.

Timing is such a crucial part in accurately describing social phenomena and their pecularities; the article does not address social change thoroughly nor does it attribute the various differences associated with the practice of pederasty both in the abstract and concrete senses.Dan Asad 13:21, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * No conflict? Religious authorities in Moslem countries beginning in the Middle Ages were constantly suppressing visible manifestations of pederasty, traces of that being the running battles between the poets and the censors, as well as mentions of various punishments, such as being paraded through town while having to carry one's lover on one's shoulders (as per al-Tifashi). There was plenty of conflict in Renaissance Italy, with many people fined, jailed, tortured or even executed (as per Michael Rourke and others). The kagema culture in Japan was repeatedly subjected by the government to various restrictions to curb excesses of public enthusiasm over the actors (as per Gary Leupp, if I am not mistaken). As for your other comments, please do not hesitate to improve the article. It is a work in progress. Haiduc 01:26, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Excellent article, really fascinating, especially about the Sacred Band. However, I would recommend, because of the potentially sensitive nature of this topic, that you distinguish pederasty and paedophilia earlier in the article. My previous encounters with the term pederast have not made this distinction and so I came to the article thinking it was synonymous with paedophilia. I doubt I will be the only person approaching the article with this error.

I see from this discussion page that there is some debate as to the maturity of the youths involved. Perhaps the distinction between pederasty and its modern interpretation, whether rightly or wrongly, as paedophilia deserves its own section, outlining contemporary attitudes to historical relationships. It would seem to me that pederasty did survive in the situational sexuality of all-male boarding schools, with the roles of praeposters and fags. Philip Thomas --82.38.227.149 17:32, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Issue with examples.
"Among the luminaries of the time who had romantic liasons with youths were Théophile de Viau, Benvenuto Cellini, Caravaggio, Leonardo da Vinci, and Michelangelo."

It may be prudent to strike Leonardo da Vinci's name from the list, as his pedastry is suspected, but not confirmed. That he had homosexual relations at all in fact is largely a matter of conjecture, and while it may be somewhat accepted as to being possible, it should not be listed in such a matter-of-fact way, lest the reader be misinformed. If preferred, perhaps the artist's name should be listed under "assumed" or "suspected", or another such word which would serve to balance the statement.


 * I assume you have read the article here on his life? To my eye, the clear preponderance of the evidence, also based on the culture in Florence at the time, when pederasty was universal, makes this a more than defensible case. Man lives in a society where everyone goes to bed with youths, man does not marry, man is accused of sleeping with youths, man lives and works with youths all his life. I am not sure how much more evidence could possibly exist, especially given the danger they all were in. Haiduc 12:52, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Lest I seem to be passing myself off as an authority, see note 120, p.298, in Michael Rocke's "Forbidden Friendships:" [...] Leonardo's attraction to boys was well known, even in the sixteenth century. Haiduc 13:16, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Pederasty in Afghanistan
I removed Afghanistan. I think the article cited doesn't come close to meriting afganastans mention here, and if it does, what nation wouldn't deserve mention? (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 13:38, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Interesting quandry. See article on Kandahar. Haiduc 14:36, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ah, ok, so I guess its a bit like San Francisco. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 15:02, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * From article on Afghanistan : Afghans from other regions joke about the high incidence of pederasty among Kandahari men. They say that when crows fly over Kandahar they clamp one wing over their bottoms, just in case....Pederasty was evidently a continuing source of concern to Mullah Omar, who decreed that Taliban commanders couldn't have beardless boys in their ranks. Apollomelos 15:47, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I am adding Pakistan too. across all classes and social groups, men have sex with men. In villages throughout the country, young boys are often forcibly "taken" by older men.... Most people know it happens -- from the police to the wives of the men involved....In some areas, homosexual sex is even tacitly accepted...shares many tribal and cultural links with neighboring Afghanistan, the ethnic Pashtun men who dominate the region are renowned for taking young boys as lovers Apollomelos 15:47, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

There is practically no country with sizeable ethnic minorities/ethnic strife where such comments are not made. Utter nonsense. Kandahar is the epithome of cultural backwardness within Afghanistan, moral self righteousness and religious bigotry (see Taliban). Subsequently comments on rampant homosexuality/paederasty are a subversive comment at times of the Taleban and their aftermath - on the background of latent and widespread homophobia, but should not be seen as anything proving or disproving the increased incidence of such behaviour/sexual preferences   I have therefore deleted : The same is also true of the city of Kandahar, Afghanistan  and Pakistan . Refdoc 15:57, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Refdoc, my friend Samera lived in Kandahar until the American War when she immigrated to the United States and she confirms that pederasty is indeed still practiced. Notice how these news organizations use the phrase: ‘’ high incidence of pederasty’’.  Therefore unless you can refute these claims with citations I am reverting the deletion.  Just because in your personal view it would be hard to imagine doesn’t prove it doesn’t happen. Apollomelos 16:18, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I am not going into an editwar with you over the matter - this would be ridiculous, but please have a look at what you use as sources 1) a friend - this has no value as a sourcce here on Wikipedia 2) a journalist repeating jokes from other areas of Afghanistan about Kandahar, the city of Mullah Omar. Not very reliable, i would say. Bring some real data and I would be the first to agree putting this in again. I am not saying that there is no paederasty happening in kandahar - you misread me here, but your sources are simply not worth much, certainly not for asserting paederasty as a major distinguishing cultural feature of Kandahar. Really the most you can say about Kandahar based on your source is that a) it is at the receiving end of jokes and b) men in Kandahar have a taste for clothing and make-up considered as somewhat 'camp' in other parts of the world.

The source on Pakistan is very different - I admit this, but it again only describes the - undoubted - existance of a homosexual minority in Pakistan's Islamic society. Whether this amounts to cultural acceptance or increased incidence beyond what would be expected across the globe is hard to say.

Wrt sources - it is not just the presence of a quotation on the internet which is important, but also whether the sources are of sufficient quality to support the assertion. Neither of your sources are of such quality.

Finally, the distinguishing part of paederasty from other forms of homosexual behaviour/homosexuality appears from the article some form of paedagogic input/coming of age ceremony etc. The article on Kandahar doe snot offer any evidence for this. I therefore suggest deletion again. In the meantime I have altered the sentence, but would appreciate your further inputRefdoc 16:40, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I just made some edits to the page and only now noticed this discussion here. If I get this straight, Redfoc denies the anthropological value of mass media articles on the subject. I don't know what to say, it seems to me that several unscientific sources independently reporting similar observations add up to undeniable evidence, even if hard to quantify. Plus this is consistent with historical materials and with personal communications (which are not admissible here in the absence of other evidence, but that is not the case). Haiduc 18:57, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You did not get this straight. The article quoted on Afghanistan did not support the categorical statement, it did though support a much more vague statement like the last one before you changed the position. The reasons for my view are detailed above - a journalist, reporting rumours from other parts of Afghanistan, jokes and observations of 'camp' behaviour but little else. I still struggled with the position in the introduction next and on a similar level to the accounts of a culturally accepted practice of paederasty in Greece, widely documented, supported by uncounted artefacts and documents etc. against hearsay, jokes and doubtful observations. But you have changed to position to a better place and I am perfectly happy with this. Refdoc 19:37, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Greek Influence On Afghanistan & Pakistan

 * I have read that ancient Greek colonies were located in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They were established under Alexander the Great.  Should we add something to the artilce noting that the Afghani and Pakistani pederasty practices could have been adopted during Greek colonization? Apollomelos 09:07, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think you are moving rapidly from "poorly documented" here to "outright speculation". Refdoc 23:30, 22 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I think we can mention the fact that there was Greek influence, but I have not seen any studies indicating a cause and effect relationship (not that it does not stand to reason, but that is not enought to go on.) Haiduc 04:10, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Well refdoc if you visit Wikipedia Commons on homosexuality there is an image depicting pederasty in Afghanistan. It is of Zeus and Ganymede with cupid, the artifact was made in Afghanistan.  But you are correct I have yet to find any studies finding a cause and effect. Apollomelos 13:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Exactly... Refdoc 22:08, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

YSL Image
See Image talk:Photo of magazine page.jpg.

(The image has since been removed.)

Semitic homosexuality
Do you think it would be relevant to include a section on ancient Semitic homosexualities, because if I remember correctly, there were certain Semitic peoples other than the Arabs in which paederasty was practiced? Unfortunately, I forgot the sources. If I'm correct, there actually were homosexual practices in ancient Hebrew societies, which is rather ironic as the Jews hold a strong aversion to homosexuality. Dan Asad 13:25, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Very relevant, but you would need to contribute the material and the sources. Haiduc 12:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't see any irony. Hebrews came before the Israelites, who came before the Jews. Civilisations tend to progress... According to the bible, the Hebrews did many bad things that angered God (Sodom and Gomorrah is a good example). Perhaps I should find ironic that today we don't have slaves and eat human flesh? (at least not legally / in society).

Yea, I know. I vaguely remember reading about it, but I forgot the sources. I think it might have been in one of the older German studies. It was something about boy prostitutes. It also contained information about the sexual practices of the Canaanites, Phoenicians, and Hittites. The only information that I have sources for at the moment is that involving the Hebrews and Phallic worship, which they too, as many other peoples, practiced during ancient times. Dan Asad 13:25, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * If you can dig up your sources again, please post the info. Haiduc 23:56, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'll be sure to do so if I can find the time to search for it. While browsing amazon, I came upon a book entitled, "Wrestling with God and Men: Homosexuality in the Jewish Tradition" by Steven Greenberg. That might contain some pertinent information. Dan Asad


 * That, and Norman Roth has written on Andalusian pederastic Hebrew verse. Good luck! Haiduc 02:52, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Great article
Sorry to take up room in the form of a subsection, but I want to say that this is an excellent article, esp. dealing with many potentially controversial topics. --ShaunMacPherson 04:02, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Would anyone mind here if I nominate this article as a featured article? Since I am not involved I do not want to presume to put it up.  If it is going to be put up perhaps you'd liek time to do a final check :).  Please reply here if you think this is a good or bad idea. --ShaunMacPherson 05:53, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the kudos. The article needs more work (the end is still terrible, the badly integrated work of several editors) and there is more valuable material to be integrated into it from the classics, the moderns, and the French wiki version. Though these things are never "finished" perhaps we can get a bit closer to the limit with a modicum of work. Unfortunately, as the end of the school year approaches I will be occupied with other matters. If you still feel as strongly about this in late summer, perhaps we can give it a shot at that time. It would be interesting to see what opinions other experienced editors might have about it. Haiduc 11:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Good idea, I might help with this article if no one is tending it although I usually sprinkle my edits all over the place as I don't like being tied down :).


 * Another useful thing maybe to do a FARC (WikiProject_Fact_and_Reference_Check) to the article which verifies facts and references, it cleans out things that might be wrong and adds credibility. See you later on in the Summer, bye for now :). --ShaunMacPherson 02:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pederastic advertising

 * On the other hand, commercial interests continue to produce ads featuring sexually charged images of young males. This can be seen in ads for Calvin Klein jeans, as well as in perfume ads by several companies, though most instances are less explicitly pederastic than an early version by Anheuser-Busch for Budweiser beer. See Sex in advertising.



I would dispute that this kind of mainstream advertising has anything to do with pederasty. You see sexy (often young) women in products-for-women ads, and sexy (often young) men in products-for-men ads not because the advertisers think their audiences are secretly or subconsciously homosexual. Nor do audiences respond that way. Instead, these images are designed to exploit self-image, to make people think they could look yound and sexy if only they used the products advertised. The inclusion of the Budweiser Ganymede picture is particularly misleading, because Ganymede is almost certainly being referenced here in his role as cup-bearer to the gods, not as a love object. Besides which, we already have a lovely Ganymede illustration more closely related to the subject of the article.

If modern advertising is to be included at all, I would actually look at images and ideas in ads in the gay press. -- Beland 13:25, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Beland, you are repeating an argument that we have already been over once and that you were not able to support before. "Since antiquity Ganymede has served as an artistic expression for homosexuality." says Griffith here, as say all who have properly studied the topic. Not for inebriation. That would be Bacchus. But what is worse is that you are engaging in an argument which you have alredy won. I am NOT contending that Bud is targeting pederasts. That is YOUR projection, probably based on my statements to that effect in the past. But your arguments (and other material) persuaded me and I have recanted. I don't know why Bud used a homoerotic/pederastic symbol in their ad (though if I were to guess, it is because it is a real attention grabber, a blunt manipulative tactic). The point of including the image in the article  was because it indicates the evolution of the symbology, that pederastic imagery has been relegated to the role of jerking people's chains, like it clearly jerked yours (and Sam's). Please look more carefully at the material, this time your critique is off the mark. Haiduc 00:47, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, Griffith also says that during the Renaissance, this image was used "an allegory of the soul's ascent toward Heaven", i.e. not in reference to pederasty, and that over time, changing culture mores caused depictions to lose their "homoerotic charge". His history doesn't go past 1700, though, so I'm not sure it informs us much about the situation in the early 1900s. I certainly agree that it's appropriate to include the other two images of this scene, since they both explicitly make reference to the homosexual aspect. But it seems implausible to me that the beer advertisers wanted to reference that aspect. I will ask for some others' opinions. -- Beland 03:54, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I just happened to notice that the eagle is repeated in the Budweiser logo. The implication would then be that this is the Budweiser mascot making the delivery, which explains a bit more why this image would be chosen for non-erotic reasons. -- Beland 04:01, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The eagle, Beland? Adolphus Busch took the American mascot for his use, co-opting a patriotic symbol to his purposes. The ad is a double whammy, combining two powerful symbols into one. But that is just my opinion, not for public consumption. Haiduc 05:22, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Ganymede was the cup-bearer to the gods... he brought them good stuff to drink, that's all this is. To say that this is homoeroptic or pederastic or whatever is just nonsense. It is not "explicitly pedarastic", it's not even pederastic at all. And I think Haiduc was the one before trying to pass off his whacky interpretations of supposed homosexual content of other ads as factual... We've been through this before, creative opinions of one editor do not make facts, get some actual source to say this and we'll quote them, otherwise it gets deleted. DreamGuy 04:34, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * Beland, why not just mention that by the twentieth century the allegory of Zeus and Ganymede was being used for commercial purposes? (In the same way in which an article on the Soviet Union may mention that hammer and sickle insignias are now collectors' items (Is no advertiser making use of that symbol? I must really look that up.)). That is simply a factual observation which does not seem contestable. Haiduc 05:22, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, that's already mentioned on Ganymede (mythology), and we link there, so, yay. -- Beland 03:04, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Man boy love
Man boy love is not a synonym for pedersty. I've chosen not to remove this for now, but this should really be moved to the See also section. Exploding Boy 02:38, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * Hmmm... Well there isn't an article and I'm not sure where to put it.  Maybe it should go somewhere else in the article and maybe someone knows.  Oh and why is it not a synonym?  Man boy love is supposed to be consentual like pederasty.  Thodin 03:04, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's a different cultural concept. If there's not an article, maybe Man boy love should be redirected to a related article... Exploding Boy 23:16, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * Seems to me like a dis-contextualized expression for pederastic-type relationships, to which we could create analogues like man-man love and woman-man love. Also sounds like something that was created to evade the onus attached by some to the term "pederasty," just like "black" superseded "negro." Perhaps there is some reflection on how this type of relationship resurfaces even when the cultural underpinnings are cut away. It would make sense to integrate the term into the article if we could find a discussion of the term somewhere, so as to present some raison d'être for the thing. Haiduc 23:35, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * A long time ago, the article Man boy love was deleted and all the voters (of which 99% consisted of a hundred admins) voted to move the information here. Thodin 00:25, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, whatever was here by now has been integrated into the article or deleted. As for this term, I have found no info on its origin. Is it a NAMBLA coinage? If so, (or even if not) we should mention it in the same paragraph and leave it at that. I did a quick search for "man-man love" and for "man-woman love" and the terms exist and are in use, though relatively infrequently, and are not included in the articles on homosexuality and heterosexuality here, so I don't think we need to give the term any undue weight - it does not seem like intro material to me. Haiduc 02:27, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Paederasty refers to normalized, even celebrated traditions of love and sex between adult men and youths. Paedophilia refers to usually illegal, socially prohibited and abhorred activities by adults considered criminal or ill.  Man boy love really belongs with paedophilia. Exploding Boy 17:26, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * I really don't know whether you are right or wrong, or perhaps a bit of both. At any rate, I am about to remove the term from the intro and relegate it to the "Modern aspects" section. Haiduc 01:35, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Female
Is there an equivalent concept for females? I read something about married women whose husbands were away in the minefields (or the fisheries?) for long time who took young girls to their home. Somewhere in Africa. --Error 01:53, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Social class
In Greece, was it limited to citizens? --Error 01:53, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It is my understanding that in Athens slaves and foreigners were prohibited by law from entering into such relationships with the sons of citizens, but Plutarch records a relationship between an exiled son of the Persian emperor and a local boy (Spartan?) so that I would imagine it was more of a class thing than a clearcut citizen/non-citizen distinction. If I were to theorize a bit, I would suggest that whatever relationship a father found to his and his son's advantage would have been fine, legal or not. Slaves, because of their social position, were at a disadvantage, though I wonder what would have happened if someone owned a particularly erudite and accomplished slave, say an aristocratic scholar taken prisoner in a war, and some chemistry began to take place between that man and the master's son. But with some Gaulish cowherd? I doubt it. Haiduc 02:46, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Los Angeles Times photo in main article
Surely that should be removed -- unless, unlikely as it seems, the LA Times has given express permission to reproduce it here. In which case, all that info ought to be linked to the photo. Hayford Peirce 19:54, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Fabricating history
Obviously a person of homosexual orientation wrote the article. There is no substantiation whatsoever that homosexuality or pederastry was a norm in ancient Greece. On the contrary, homosexuality and pedophilia was scorned upon and ridiculed. In terms of pederastry: the words erastis and eromenos in ancient Greek, do not indicate sexual relationship. Over the years the meaning has been corupted as with many other words in modern Greek. It was more a mentor-disciple relationship. For example, a number of erastis would be listed for a single eromenos. You are not suggesting that parents would endorse their precious boys to be taken advantage by many sick perverts are you. One mentor would teach the boy military arts, another philosophy, etc. What normal, logical human being would believe such an absurd claim as yours that actually sexual relationship between men and boys was endorsed and expected by the greek or any culture? You cannot be a total moron, so just tell us; are you a homosexual? If so, your article should be deleted for attempting to fabricate history to justify yours and others sickness. If you say you are not, then your article should be deleted, because only a fool would advocate that a great culture and civilization who founded the western world, would adopt abuse and corruption of their boys.

By the way, all your distortions in the so called "article" (a bunch of ballony) can be refuted in Georgopoulos's book, "Homosexuality in Greece: Myth debunked". --63.26.156.107 04:43, 5 August 2005 (UTC)


 * So you're going to source your argument with a book that I can find nowhere on the Internet. Does the book even exist, or did you just make it up (as you claim the authors of this article have done to its contents)? Corax 19:08, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * LOL. Get over it. The ancients speak for themselves. Do you not know what the Greek word ero meant? Erotic love (sexual). Now look at the word assigned to these relations eromenos and even pederasty means "boy sexual love". I am Greek and a teenager; I see nothing wrong with pederasty. What I do see is my fellow countryman who spits on his ancestors graves and shames them in his new religious cult. A religious cult that massacred Thessalonica to force Greeks to convert and be subjugated. 70.57.82.114 00:38, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


 * There is no place for hysteria on wikipedia.org. Please have yourself castrated, and stop using the Internet. Thank you.--213.40.3.66 18:46, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Not one person, but many, wrote this article
 * There is ample evidence of socially-sanctioned paederastic relationships in ancient Greece.
 * There is also ample evidence of socially sanctioned paederastic relationships in other cultures.
 * Exploding Boy 20:31, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Jesus Christ and pederasty - needs to be much better researched
Here is the deleted text posted today by the anon:
 * However some believe Jesus to have had a sexual relationship with a young boy according to the Gospel of Mark.

There is another episode with pederastic overtones in the life of Jesus, his healing the entimos doulos of the Roman soldier, a boy presumed to be the soldier's beloved. Any inclusion of either episode in the article should be solidly buttressed with references and historical explanations. Haiduc 23:37, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Article size
It is getting rather big, and it is only a matter of time before a request will be made to shorten it. I am minded to make the Greek pederasty section into an article of its own. A summary will have to be left in its place in this article. Any thoughts? Haiduc 02:33, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Excellent idea. The article is looking more like a research dissertation than an encyclopedia article. Not that that's a bad thing, but... Corax 16:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

child-adult sex
This is an unbelievably biased paper. Whoeverever wrote this is definitely a pro-pedastrian. The author cites numerous sources and studies in favor of pedestrians and hardly mentions any of the overwhelming studies that document harm. Why aren't powerdynamics, psychological vulnerability, or physical vulnerability mentioned. While the author correctly differentiates between pedastry and pedophilia, he nevertheless avoids that almost everywhere in the world "beardless youths" are considered "children" because of their lack of both knowledge and power. There should be links to numerous respected peer-reviewed studies on both sides of the issue. I'm also wondering if this paper was about another type of sexual preference, men who favor young adolescent girls between the age of 12 and 16, whether it would have been written with more balance. Therefore not only is this article biased in favor of pedestrians but is also biased against men.


 * I agree. I hate pedestrians.  Especially when they walk out in front of my car. Corax 05:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Some of these arguments might belong in the article about pedophilia, some may belong here, though they are not of a historical nature and seem applicable more to modern times rather than to a description of past cultural practices. The cross-cultural concept of "children" is a bit more complex than you imply. Please contribute any information you deem appropriateHaiduc 21:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

"Wikipedia infiltrated by Pedophiles?"
There are people alleging that "Wikipedia has been infiltrated by Pedophiles":

http://www.perverted-justice.com/opinions/?article=11

Any comments?


 * Of course. Anybody who doesn't buy the sex abuse agenda's hysterical rhetoric is attacked as a child predator.  And since Wikipedia strives for a NPOV, which is naturally averse to the sex-abuse agenda's emotion-laden and unscientific language, those who compose articles for the resource are a natural target for the sex-abuse kooks who see pedophiles under every rock and bush.  This is hardly a surprise.  Corax 18:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I look forward to removing all pedophile influence from Wikipedia. It's a shame I don't believe in capital punishment, because if there's somebody worthy of getting their life terminated, it's a bunch of self-justifying child molestors. - Naif 06:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I work in a group home for mentally-retarded, developmentally-disabled women. I always thought that it would be immoral to have sex with them. I believed this because I am in a position of authority over them and have greater mental/physical abilities which could serve as a source of intimidation and confusion. But now that I've listened to all of you, I realize that the fact that they are too incompetant to vote, drive,drink alcohol safely, or work is irrelevant because I'm only "loving" them with my body. Thanks for the enlightenment guys!


 * This is not an advocacy forum, either pro or con, and arguments about personal issues, whether valid or not, are out of place here. The article already documents the range of views on the morality and immorality of relationships between youths considered to have come of age and older males, but if anything is missing please feel free to point it out. Haiduc 11:06, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

The Preponderance of HOMOSEX
I have voiced this opinion elsewhere on 'Wiki' but I am relatively inexperienced with the means and methods of contacting/complaining to/notifying administrators of shortcomings of Wiki's supposed "NPOV" so I thought that I would simply complain on this message board to whomever may be reading, and, presumably, the people who are responsible for this article. I came across the article on pederasty while investigating the movie "The Big Lebowski" (a film, where, granted, the phenomenon is briefly and humrously touched upon) and this discovery is something I believe in itself to be an unfortunate and quite odd idiosyncracy of Wiki. It seems every other article I investigate, seemingly regardless of its subject matter, can potentially, via underlined link, lead me to a article concerning homosexuality. This first came to mind when investigating notoriously conservative and now dead senator Strom Thurmond. In the 'Trivia' section, the first, yes first bit of trivia was that a journalist (and apparently the author of some book ((not surprisingly, of homosexual content and bias)) which makes him a reliable source?) was (not claims to have been) solicited by Thurmond for sex. This is ridiculous. I do not understand how Wiki can proclaim "NPOV" and still allow such activities. The issue here is not gay as right/wrong but relevant/irrelevant. In the case of Thurmond, I think its relevancy (and certainly its veracity) should be called into question when considering the article as a whole. Sorry to digress, but now to this article. Perhaps it understandably escapes the contributors (whom so agressively defend themselves on this message board) that this article hopelessly endorses the practices it describes. I would describe the article's tone as a tacit and fond endorsement. I believe the whole subject (while, yes yes okay existent and previously existent) to be along the margins of useful/practical/ or even informative (yes it informs that there were and are same-sex relationships with sociological trends to be seen, but so exhaustively and extensively one wonders if you just could have written 'worldwide' and be done with it) and should probably exist within the subtext of articles on homosexuality (because this is clearly the type of pederasty the authors are interested in, for example, haven't you heard of Lewis Carrol?) I believe it is important to consider sexual orientation when considering "NPOV" and that while the 'junior high level' so spitefully refered to earlier on this wall may not be sufficient to fully grasp the topic, it is important to note that currently, junior high students can be routed here when investigating the Big Lebowski. Wikipedia has a long way to go in my opinion, which is why I keep a copy of the Britannica, which, as of 2003, does not have an entry for 'pederastry' but does for pedophilia, yet the phenomenon is tastefully treated and implied in its more comprehensive coverage of homosexuality.


 * You are right, my Britannica likewise lacks an article on pederasty. How fascinating that a practice considered to have been one of the three principal features of Hellenic culture (together with the Eleusianian mysteries and the Olympic games) should receive such short shrift in the mother of all encyclopedias. All the more reason it should be documented in a publication that is not driven by commercial considerations. As for homosexuality permeating into various articles (see Penguin for example), I think that needs to be judged on a case by case basis. As for the "tacit and fond endorsement" of pederasty, I'd like to think you are mistaken, and that where it appears it is simply a result of our reflecting the attitudes of the cultures under discussion (who were fond and not at all tacit about it). Other than that, I'd like to think that we walk the knife edge between endorsing and moralizing. If you can cite particular examples it will be more helpful. Is there something here that junior hs students should not know? Haiduc 00:07, 22 December 2005 (UTC)