Talk:Pederasty in ancient Greece/Archive 3

Erastes and Eromenos: The Ancient Greek Terminology Implied platonic Mentor-Mentored Relationship, Not Sexual Bonding
I am questioning the accuracy of anformation on a Wikipedia Page, full of biased secondary sources and obvious mistranslations of ancient Greek Texts

The whole conclusion of this page is based on obvious misinterpretations of ancient Greek texts

The relationship between erastes and eromenos in Sparta serves as a noteworthy illustration of the cultural values attached to such mentorship in ancient Greece. Erastes-eromenos relationships in Sparta were expected to be devoid of any sexual undertones, and any instances of sexual behavior between the two were deemed reprehensible, an abomination, akin to incestuous behavior and were banned."'The customs instituted by Lycurgus were opposed to all of these. If someone, being himself an honest man, admired a boy's soul and tried to make of him an ideal friend without reproach and to associate with him, he approved, and believed in the excellence of this kind of training. But if it was clear that the attraction lay in the boy's outward beauty, he banned the connexion as an abomination; and thus he caused lovers (erastes) to abstain from boys no less than parents abstain from sexual intercourse with their children and brothers and sisters with each other.'"-Xenophon, Constitution of the Lacedaimonians 2.13

https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0210:text=Const.+Lac.:chapter=2:section=13

Before that part Xenophon said:"'[12]I think I ought to say something also about intimacy with boys (pederasty), since this matter also has a bearing on education.'"In his work, Xenophon addresses the topic of love with boys, which he refers to as "παιδικῶν ἐρώτων" (paedikōn erōtōn) in Greek, a compound word meaning "lover of boys." However, it is important to note that Xenophon's use of this term did not imply any sexual connotation, but rather referred to a loving mentorship relationship between a mentor (erastēs) and a mentored individual (eromenos).

In fact, Xenophon explicitly states that any sexual behavior in this "pederastic" relationship is considered "an abomination," equivalent to incest. This clarification demonstrates Xenophon's belief that "pederasty", as he understood it, was solely an educational and mentorship practice, rather than a sexual one. Therefore, it is crucial to acknowledge the distinction between Xenophon's interpretation of "pederasty" and the modern connotation of the term, which is typically associated with sexual relationships between older men and young boys.

The texts clearly state that Erastes-Eromenos relationships in ancient Athens and Sparta were characterized as non-sexual, and instead were seen as a form of mentoring or friendship similar to that between a father and son"'Thus, then, as it seems, you will lay down the law in the city that we are founding, that the lover (erastes/mentor) may kiss and pass the time with and touch the beloved (eromenos/mentored) as a father would a son, for honorable ends, if he persuade him. But otherwise he must so associate with the objects of his care that there should never be any suspicion of anything further,'"Plato, Republic  3.403b

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0168%3Abook%3D3%3Asection%3D403b

I explain more on my blog so i won't spam here how most of the stuff on this page are completely inaccurate.

https://genes-of-the-ancients.blogspot.com/2023/04/the-myth-of-openly-ancient-greek.html Itisme3248 (talk) 05:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have any reliable secondary sources which explain your theory? No, your personal blog does not count. If not, come back to this page when you find some. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:04, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This is not a theory, this is a fact. it is clear that in ancient Greek those words meant something else. This wikipedia page does not even mention that these words did not even imply anything sexual. It is just promoting a biased distortion of history.
 * This page does not cite reliable secondary sources. Random books with biased perspectives that are not even mentioning what the words actually meant does not make them valid sources. All of this page has to be taken down, it is misleading and distorting history. Itisme3248 (talk) 17:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This page must be deleted, books/novels like netflix documenters should not be considered as good sources. These books are as accurate as misleading netflix documenters. Itisme3248 (talk) 17:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh I see, thanks for explaining so clearly why the views of experts who have spent their lives studying the subject should be lesser than that of a rando with a genetics blog. I do have a request, though: since your analysis is unrivalled in its clarity and precision, you will have no trouble publishing it in a reputable journal. No doubt they will be certain to include your work without any hesitation, as they will be awed by the strength and originality of your assessment. Then we can use it as a source on Wikipedia! How does that sound, ? AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, how kind of you to suggest that my groundbreaking analysis is worthy of publication in a reputable journal. I'm flattered, really. However, I fear that my research might be too cutting-edge for them to handle. You see, they tend to favor studies that rely on pesky things like evidence and facts, rather than like my wild speculation and unsupported claims.
 * Speaking of evidence, I'm still waiting for this wiki to provide some actual sources to support the assertions about ancient Greek pederasty. Do you have any sources that include ancient text evidence to back up this wiki's claims about openly practiced and institutionalized pederasty and homosexuality in ancient Athens and Sparta? Where is the explanation of the context and the meaning of erastes-eromenos and eros in ancient athenian and spartan cultures that actually uses and shows ancient texts as evidence?Itisme3248 (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That's too bad. I guess we'll have to wait with baited breath until someone with the intellectual capacity to grasp your insights is willing to publish for you, . As for your evidence, that would be found in the references and bibliography section, a format which is common in reputable sources, in case you're unfamiliar. Many include ancient text evidence, which is just as well, as per WP:PRIMARY, you should not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Of course, if you're willing to publish your blog monograph with a reliable publisher, we could cite you! Hope that helps. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:44, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Literally the first source cited in the article is Kenneth Dover's Greek Homosexuality. Dover's index of ancient texts includes over 100 Greek authors. I'm sure there are improvements to be made to this article, but suggesting that none of the sources cited engage with the ancient Greek evidence is patently absurd, and not likely to incline people to believe that you are actually concerned about improving the article rather than pushing a particular ideological point of view about sexuality.
 * If you do want to improve the article, I suggest you focus on particular parts that could be improved and suggest reliable secondary sources which support your proposed changes. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:18, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So i'm allowed to use books as secondary sources? Any book? Itisme3248 (talk) 01:30, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Does the fact that a modern country has people that make illegal pornographic art mean that the majority of the people support it? No, most people today still think its shameful, disgusting and it is illegal. According to the logic of that book all countries today are openly practicing and institutionalizing pederasty, which is absurd. The book must be completely removed from this wikipedia page, it is obviously biased. Itisme3248 (talk) 01:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

UTC)
 * I think you might have gone off the deep end now. Slow down, and realise that no matter how many paragraphs you post here, if you don't use a reliable source, all will be disregarded. Again, you are very welcome to get your blogspot article published in a reliable journal, should you wish. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:48, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, you can cite books – it's encouraged, even! No, it can't be any book: it needs to be what Wikipedia considers a reliable source. Dover pretty clearly is: he was a professor of Greek at a major university, knighted for services to the study of ancient Greece, and the book was published by Harvard University Press and republished in 2016 by Bloomsbury Academic. The fact that you do not like his conclusions is frankly irrelevant – you need to find reliable sources which agree with you. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 06:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)