Same-sex attitudes and behaviors in ancient Rome often differ markedly from those of the contemporary West. Latin lacks words that would precisely translate “homosexual” and “heterosexual”. The primary dichotomy of ancient Roman sexuality was active/dominant/masculine and passive/submissive/“feminised”. Roman society was patriarchal, and the freeborn male citizen possessed political liberty (libertas) and the right to rule both himself and his household (familia). “Virtue” (virtus) was seen as an active quality through which a man (vir) defined himself. The conquest mentality and “cult of virility” shaped same-sex relations. Roman men were free to enjoy sex with other males without a perceived loss of masculinity or social status, as long as they took the dominant or penetrative role. Acceptable male partners were slaves, prostitutes, and entertainers, whose lifestyle placed them in the nebulous social realm of infamia, excluded from the normal protections accorded a citizen even if they were technically free. Although Roman men in general seem to have preferred youths between the ages of 12 and 20 as sexual partners, freeborn male minors were strictly off limits, and professional prostitutes and entertainers might be considerably older.
Same-sex relations among women are less documented. Although Roman women of the upper classes were educated and are known to have both written poetry and corresponded with male relatives, very few fragments of anything that might have been written by women survived. Male writers took little interest in how women experienced sexuality in general. During the Republic and early Principate, little is recorded of sexual relations among women, but better and more varied evidence, though scattered, exists for the later Imperial period.
During the Republic, a Roman citizen’s political liberty (libertas) was defined in part by the right to preserve his body from physical compulsion, including both corporal punishment and sexual abuse. Roman society was patriarchal (see paterfamilias), and masculinity was premised on a capacity for governing oneself and others of lower status. Virtus, “valor” as that which made a man most fully a man, was among the active virtues. Sexual conquest was a common metaphor for imperialism in Roman discourse, and the “conquest mentality” was part of a “cult of virility” that particularly shaped Roman homosexual practices. Roman ideals of masculinity were thus premised on taking an active role that was also, as Craig A. Williams has noted, “the prime directive of masculine sexual behavior for Romans.” In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, scholars have tended to view expressions of Roman male sexuality in terms of a “penetrator-penetrated” binary model; that is, the proper way for a Roman male to seek sexual gratification was to insert his penis in his partner. Allowing himself to be penetrated threatened his liberty as a free citizen as well as his sexual integrity.
To continue reading this Bible article, click here.
Author: Wikipedia
Keywords: Homosexuality in ancient Rome, Ancient Rome, Immorality, Homosexual, Homosexuality, Gay, Lesbian, Lesbianism, Fags, Sex, Sexual immorality, Fornication, Beastiality, Sexual perversion, Malakos, God hates gays, God hates homosexuals, God hates homosexuality, Improper sex, Immoral sex, Anal penetration, Pervert, Perversion, Sexual deviance, Sexual deviant, LGBT
Bible reference(s): Genesis 19:5, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, Judges 19:22, 1 Kings 14:24, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10, Jude 1:7
Source: This article uses material from the Wikipedia article “Homosexuality in ancient Rome,” which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike License 3.0.
Page indexed by: inWORD Bible Software.