>the greeks were gay!!
Debunked
 Anus Alien Shirt $21.68 |
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Anus Alien Shirt $21.68 |
>the greeks were gay!!
>the greeks were gay!!
Debunked
Anus Alien Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Anus Alien Shirt $21.68 |
Why so willfully dishonest? If you are familiar enough with the sources to quote them, then you must know that they also refute the point of view you are advocating
1. You are trying to quote Plato's Laws, not the Republic -- Plato wasn't a Greek conservative, he is trying to reform Greek society to fit his radical ideas (like gender equality, men not knowing their offspring). In the Laws he even talks about the fact that he is trying to change Greece's ideas on homosexuality, to make it as taboo as incest (838). The whole discussion doesn't make sense if homosexuality is not already widespread and tolerated.
2. In this text Xenophon says the Spartans are unique, and notes that in most cities pederasty is allowed (2.14). He also doesn't say that attraction to boys is "an abomination", just sexual contact with them, and in another dialogue even describes (as a positive example) the Spartan king Agesilaus II as erotically attracted to a boy, but chaste (Agesilaus 5.4-6). Xenophon also assists a pederast win a boy in the Anabasis (7.4.7-11). Cicero (Republic 4.3-4) and Plutarch (Lycurgus 17.1, 18.4) describe Spartans as pederasts who avoid anal sex
3. Missing context. Alexander dislikes that the boy is being sold. In the same biography (by Plutarch) he kisses a eunuch (67.7), and other biographies also state that Alexander was "excessively keen on boys" (Athenaeus 13.601)
4. Aristophanes mocked adult passives, but never spoke badly about homosexuality itself (and even has the voice of 'Right' in the Clouds talk about proper pederastic conduct, 949-1113), and Plato has him praise pederasty in the Symposium (189c-193e)
5. Don't know the source
(cont)
OP is just a coping christcuck/NRx.
>NRx
When was NRx against homosexuality?
>Missing context. Alexander dislikes that the boy is being sold
Doesn't say that though
True, but it also doesn't explicitly claim that Alexander dislikes it because of its homosexuality. Here is the passage (22):
>Moreover, when Philoxenus, the commander of his forces on the sea-board, wrote that there was with him a certain Theodorus, of Tarentum, who had two boys of surpassing beauty to sell, and enquired whether Alexander would buy them, Alexander was incensed, and cried out many times to his friends, asking them what shameful thing Philoxenus had ever seen in him that he should spend his time in making such disgraceful proposals. And on Philoxenus himself he heaped much reproach in a letter, bidding him send Theodorus to perdition, merchandize and all. He severely rebuked Hagnon also for writing to him that he wanted to buy Crobylus, whose beauty was famous in Corinth, as a present for him. 4Furthermore, on learning that Damon and Timotheus, two Macedonian soldiers under Parmenio's command, had ruined the wives of certain mercenaries, he wrote to Parmenio ordering him, in case the men were convicted, to punish them and put them to death as wild beasts born for the destruction of mankind. 5In this letter he also wrote expressly concerning himself: "As for me, indeed, it will be found not only that Ihave not seen the wife of Dareius or desired to see her, but that Ihave not even allowed people to speak to me of her beauty." 6And he used to say that sleep and sexual intercourse, more than any thing else, made him conscious that he was mortal, implying that both weariness and pleasure arise from one and the same natural weakness.
Plutarch's point seems to be that Alexander has little time for sexuality in general, including heterosexuality, but especially any kind of exploitative sexuality (rape, prostitution, etc).
(cont)
Aeschines is talking about prostitution, not homosexuality. He makes this clear in the text, directly after the paragraph you are citing (137):
>According to my definition, desire for those who are noble and decent is characteristic of the generous and discerning spirit, but debauchery based on hiring someone for money I consider characteristic of a wanton and uncultivated man. And to be loved without corruption I count as noble, to have been induced by money to prostitute oneself is shameful.
155:
>I shall tell you the names of older men who are well known, and young men and boys. Some of these have had many lovers because of their beauty, while others are still in the bloom of youth now; but none of them has ever been exposed to the same accusations as those made against Timarchus. And in contrast I shall give you the names of men who have practiced shameful and blatant prostitution; remembering these will help you to put Timarchus in the proper category.
He also says that he, personally, has been involved in love affairs with boys (136)
>Personally, I neither criticize legitimate desire, nor do I allege that boys of outstanding beauty have prostituted themselves; nor do I deny that I myself have felt desire and still do. And I do not deny that the rivalries and fights which the thing provokes have befallen me.
and even claims that Homer portrayed Achilles and Patroclus as erotically attached (142-3)
>I shall speak first about Homer, whom we rank among the oldest and wisest of the poets. He mentions Patroklos and Achilles in many places, but he keeps their erotic love hidden and the proper name of their friendship, thinking that the exceptional extent of their affection made things clear to the educated members of his audience.
(cont)
Most of the probably shat on heterosexual adultery as well. It just shows that moralist of their day wrote one thing, but reality was not quite the same.
and that the lawgiver Solon considered homosexuality fit for nobles but not for slaves (138-9, a claim repeated by Plutarch, Life of Solon 1, which also describes Solon as a pederast)
>Our fathers, when they were legislating about conduct and activities dictated by nature, prohibited slaves from engaging in activities which they thought should belong to free men. “A slave,” says the law, “may not exercise and rub himself down with oil in the wrestling schools.” It did not add further: “but the free man is to rub himself down and exercise.” For when the legislators in considering the benefits derived from the gymnasia prohibited slaves from participating, they believed that with the same law in which they prohibited these they were also encouraging free men to go to the gymnasia. And again the same legislator said: “A slave may not be the lover of a free boy or follow him, or he is to receive fifty blows of the public lash.” But he did not forbid the free man from being a boy’s lover or associating with and following him, and he did not envisage that this would prove harmful to the boy but would be testimony to his chastity.
90% of accusations of Greeks or Romans being unreasonably homosexual are either Christian defamation, or misinterpretation akin to 40th century archaeologists discovering some Discord moderator's porn stash and concluding that being pedo was 21st century norm.
There were some homos of course because they exist in any society, but they were generally frowned upon as usual.
Yep, it's crazy how this homosexual
even makes up shit
>misinterpretation akin to 40th century archaeologists discovering some Discord moderator's porn stash and concluding that being pedo was 21st century norm.
No, it's more like if American political historians constantly talked about how the Founding Fathers were homosexuals who promoted it, if the most important American philosophers based their theories of love exclusively on homosexual partnerships, if the gods Americans worshiped had homosexual love affairs, if American military histories had chapters on homosexual army units, if statues were built to homosexual pairs etc.
literally everything I'm saying is sourced
>if the gods Americans worshiped had homosexual love affairs
The gods weren't examples of moral virtue hahaha
>literally everything I'm saying is sourced
No it's not, show me the actual quote
I posted the relevant Aeschines quotes. I'll quote some of the other passages I referenced:
Plutarch on Solon (lawgiver of Athens):
>Solon's mother, according to Heracleides Ponticus, was a cousin of the mother of Peisistratus. And the two men were at first great friends, largely because of their kinship, and largely because of the youthful beauty of Peisistratus, with whom, as some say, Solon was passionately in love. And this may be the reason why, in later years, when they were at variance about matters of state, their enmity did not bring with it any harsh or savage feelings, but their former amenities lingered in their spirits, and preserved there,
>"smouldering with a lingering flame of Zeus-sent fire,"
>the grateful memory of their love. 3And that Solon was not proof against beauty in a youth, and made not so bold with Love as "to confront him like a boxer, hand to hand," may be inferred from hispoems. He also wrote a law forbidding a slave to practise gymnastics or have a boy lover, thus putting the matter in the category of honour and dignified practices, and in a way inciting the worthy to that which he forbade the unworthy. 4And it is said that Peisistratus also had a boy lover, Charmus, and that he dedicated the statue of Love in the Academy, where the runners in the sacred torch race light their torches.
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Solon*.html
Plutarch references "Solon's poems". Here is one that has survived (quoted by Plutarch in his dialogue on love and by Athenaeus):
>Till he loves a lad in the flower of youth,
>Bewitched by thighs and by sweet lips.
>with whom, as some say,
Irrelevant rumors from someone that lived centuries after
>references
Yeah I love 10th degree referencing.
Cope
Yeah, you are coping and reinterpreting everything to suit your view
Look at the sources you have been given and then ask who is coping
You are a liar and trying to create a distinction between homosexuality and rape, prostitution and/or pedophilia when for the Greeks they were largely conflated, muh "homosexual love" was rare
>It is clear that the Athenians generally regarded a homosexualrelationship not as a partnership between equals, but as a relationshipbetween an older, active partner, called "lover" (®rast¸q"), and a younger, passive partner, called "loved" (®rvmenoq"). Typically it would be a relationship between an adult man and a boy or youth, though relationships between an older and a younger adult (such as Pausanias and Agathon in Plato's Symposium) or between a youth and a boy are not excluded. This inequality in a relationship is clearly presupposed in the legislation, and Aiskhines in his account distinguishes laws concerning boys, laws concerning youths, and laws concerning adults; however, since each relationship involves two persons, these categories cannot be entirely separated. I follow Aiskhines' order of exposition, adding different headings, supplementary information from other sources, and comments on each law.
http://local.droit.ulg.ac.be/sa/rida/file/2000/macdowell.pdf
Nice quote. you basically conceded. No one in this thread was denying that Greek homosexuality was pederastic in nature. The Greeks strongly disapproved of raping freeborn males though.
Yeah I am not sure about that either. The juror thing is interesting because the jurors tended to be lower class men, I think because you would get paid for it? We see several lawyers bring up their own or their clients male love affairs in speeches. I forget if Demosthenes was the other example I'm thinking of
>Nice quote. you basically conceded. No one in this thread was denying that Greek homosexuality was pederastic in nature. The Greeks strongly disapproved of raping freeborn males though.
Here:
>Aristophanes mocked adult passives, but never spoke badly about homosexuality itself (and even has the voice of 'Right' in the Clouds talk about proper pederastic conduct, 949-1113), and Plato has him praise pederasty in the Symposium (189c-193e)
>Missing context. Alexander dislikes that the boy is being sold.
>Aeschines is talking about prostitution
Trying to separate homosexuality from those things is pointless
What do you mean "separate homosexuality from those things"? I am describing the distinctions that existed in ancient Greek thought, as attested by the writers themselves. Aeschines makes a very clear distinction between "virtuous" pederastic love affairs, and dishonorable ones based on the exchange of coins. Heterosexual prostitution was widespread in Greek society as well, that doesn't mean you "cannot separate" it from other forms of heterosexuality. The Greeks distinguished between virtuous and immoral homosexual relations the same way they distinguished between virtuous and immoral heterosexual ones. I don't care if you make a negative value judgement about homosexuality, just don't distort history in order to do so. The Christians were capable of condemning sodomy, without distorting the historical record on ancient Greeks, whom they otherwise admired. Why is it difficult for /misc/posters to do the same thing?
>between "virtuous" pederastic love affairs
quote?
I quoted these earlier (
). This time I will use a different translation, from 1919, to reiterate:
>Now as for me, I neither find fault with love that is honorable, nor do I say that those who surpass in beauty are prostitutes. I do not deny that I myself have been a lover and am a lover to this day, nor do I deny that the jealousies and quarrels that commonly arise from the practice have happened in my case. As to the poems which they say I have composed, some I acknowledge, but as to others I deny that they are of the character that these people will impute to them, for they will tamper with them.
>The distinction which I draw is this: to be in love with those who are beautiful and chaste is the experience of a kind-hearted and generous soul; but to hire for money and to indulge in licentiousness is the act of a man who is wanton and ill-bred. And whereas it is an honor to be the object of a pure love, I declare that he who has played the prostitute by inducement of wages is disgraced. How wide indeed is the distinction between these two acts and how great the difference, I will try to show you in what I shall next say.
Aeschines, Against Timarchus 136-7
Can you quote a scholar claiming Aeschines was a pedophile?
>The Christians were capable of condemning sodomy, without distorting the historical record on ancient Greeks, whom they otherwise admired
The Christians admired Greeks for what they were not for the gay fanfic's modern people like Oscar Wilde came up with.
>The Christians admired Greeks for what they were not for the gay fanfic's modern people like Oscar Wilde came up with.
Then how do you explain these quotes by Christians? Long before Oscar Wilde
>Yet they, however, did not think the thing shameful, but as being a grand privilege, and one too great for slaves, the Athenian people, the wisest of people, and Solon who is so great among them, permitted it to the free alone. And sundry other books of the philosophers may one see full of this disease.
John Chrysostom, Homily 4 on Romans
>Solon, one of their seven wise Men, and the famous Lawgives of the Athenians, Plutarch tells us, (Amat.) not only himself used this infamous Trade of Sodomy, but recommended it as honest, and established it by Law, (Chryysost.) forbidding it only to Servants, or with them, as a refined Pleasure, proper only for the Ingenuous, and to be reserved to Men of Quality and Distinction. [...] This so pious and excellent Socrates, as an Instance of his Sapience in Morality, was deeply tained with this foul Diseas of Arsenocoitism [anal coitus, i.e. sodomy] [...] The divine Plato, tho' he is said to disapprove it in his Laws, and some have attempted to clear him from it, yet is made to sully his divine Character with the Guilt of it by Laertius in his Life. [...] Nay, so far was Sodomy from being punished amongst the Athenians, under the Institutes of their famous Philosophers, and in their Times, that Aeschylus, and Sophocles also, had a Tragedy publickly acted upon the Stage, called the "Pederastes" Boy-Lover.
Reverend Conyers Place, Immorality of the Ancient Philosophers
>2 Christians throughout 2 millennia exaggerated things and fell through the same fallacies as modern people
Wow
I can provide even more quotes if you want. Just ask. What I find strange is that apparently 2 millennia of consensus, by both Christians learned in Greek and Latin, and scholars learned in Greek and Latin, is trumped by random IQfy schizos, who are the only people I ever see saying that Greek homosexuality is fake
>consensus
Sure thing buddy, the matter is controversial to this very day even despite the dominance of propaganda, yet you claim there was a consensus while ignoring the fact that most people that read any Greek sources would have rarely found this shit.
>matter is controversial to this very day
IQfy chuds coping is not a "controversy"
Seethe
>IQfy chuds coping is not a "controversy"
You haven't read anything from the topic from actual scholars(no not "scholars of homosexuality")
Name the "actual scholars" who disagree on the existence of Greek pederasty
Nobody is saying pederasty did not exist, only that it was not as common as you imply.
The only "controversy" I've ever seen is on IQfy and one moronic book by a far-right Greek politician. There is no academic controversy about its general existence, only about its particulars. It is so moronic to anyone who has actually read the Western canon to deny this shit. You will just come across it no matter what. Montaigne says that "the Grecian practice is justly abhorred by our manners". Justin Martyr criticises the homosexuality of Greek gods and heroes. Thomas Hobbes criticises Socrates for his attraction to boys. John Dryden laments the fact that the Greeks, whom he otherwise admires, were sodomites. Frederick the Great and Christopher Marlowe both reference it in poems defending homosexuality. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Wagner all reference Greek pederasty as an accepted fact (Nietzsche positively, Schopenhauer and Wagner negatively). Boys getting classical educations in European boarding schools were exposed to it (and some people thought this was a bad thing).
>only about its particulars
Yeah, the "particulars" of whether it was as widespread as you seem to push by re-interpreting every single quote in a twisted way as you do here
>There's some indication that it was universal, consider the episode in Plutarch where the entire army encourages Alexander to kiss Bagoas
>It is so moronic to anyone who has actually read the Western canon to deny this shit. You will just come across it no matter what.
You can find people complaining about bad aspects of other societes, when Romans say X or Y about Germans nobody in their right mind would assume the Romans to make a fair assessment of the Germans, just anecdotal experience filtered through chauvinism.
Same goes for Christian writer, they come across a few passages within hundred of texts and react upon them, the idea that this shit was "quintessentially Greek" is moronic.
>re-interpreting every single quote in a twisted way as you do here
There's some indication that it was universal, consider the episode in Plutarch where the entire army encourages Alexander to kiss Bagoas
That anon isn't me.
>Same goes for Christian writer, they come across a few passages within hundred of texts and react upon them, the idea that this shit was "quintessentially Greek" is moronic.
It is really obvious you haven't read the ancient Greeks anon because this shit is impossible to avoid. Read Plutarch's Lives. Read Plato's dialogues. Read Xenophon's histories. The homosexuals cannot stop talking about fricking boys. It's irritating
>Read Plutarch's Lives. Read Plato's dialogues. Read Xenophon's histories. The homosexuals cannot stop talking about fricking boys. It's irritating
Tell me exactly how many times this comes up in a how many fricking pages(or whatever other measurement of length there is), anyway it's funny how people bring up the same authors, there are tons of other authors there and these authors are a small subsection of Greek society anyhow, anyone claiming anything about Greek society based on individual stories is fundamentally moronic, the only thing you get from it is that Greeks tolerated it or didn't stigmatize it which is not the equivalent to say "Greeks are gay, lol".
Humans didn't change, there are no genetic reasons for homosexualry to be exceptionally higher in Greeks compared to other populations.
>Humans didn't change, there are no genetic reasons for homosexualry to be exceptionally higher in Greeks compared to other populations.
Pederasty is probably more amenable to heteros because of boys relative femininity
>Humans didn't change, there are no genetic reasons for homosexualry to be exceptionally higher in Greeks
If humanity was changeable then you would reject all evidence to the contrary
>then you would reject all evidence to the contrary
reformulate
You reject vast amounts of evidence for Greek homosexuality because men are not changeable, you are putting your theory before the evidence
In reality patterns of sexual attraction are very changeable, think of the Japanese liking black teeth, the Persians women with moustaches
Do you think there were societies with virtually 0 homosexuals then?
Definitely, I've heard of some primitive tribes which don't have any homosexuality, or some which don't even have masturbation
Also the ancient Greeks talk about it as something they are aware of as being unique to them. Herodotus claims the Greeks introduced pederasty to Persia (1.135). The speakers in Plato's Symposium argue that, alongside gymnastics and philosophy, it distinguishes the Greeks from oriental tyrannies. Xenophon says most Greek cities permit pederasty. A major component of Socrates character was his attraction to boys (Lysis, Charmides, Protagoras Phaedrus) but his refusal to have sex with them (Symposium). Several prominent Greek writers have dialogues where people debate whether boys or women are better lovers. As Foucault says, boy love was a "problem" in Greece. They talked about it a lot because it was widely practiced, but also something they were uneasy about. They debate it. Some of them decide it is a bad thing (Plato, Xenophon).
Sure, those are valid points, although it does seem a little rash to dismiss all of Plutarch's biographies... But it's noteworthy that Greeks considered this a plausible claim about Solon, and that it was repeated by several prominent Greek writers. The dialogue by Aeschines is much more contemporary, and says a similar thing. There are other examples of public acceptance of homosexuality. Consider Harmodius and Aristogeiton, the homosexual couple who were known as the 'Tyrannicides' (a bit of a misnomer) for assassinating the brother of the tyrant Hippias. There are contemporary numerous references to the existence of multiple large and public statues of Harmodius and Aristogeiton in ancient Greece (off the top of my head, there's Thucydides' history, Plato's Symposium, and I think one or two of Aristophanes plays).
I’m still wondering whether the theory by Kenneth Dover that homosexual acceptance was mainly an upper class phenomenon and the other groups of people disliked it has a point. On the one hand there are the plays of Aristophanes but on the other hand the against Timarchus speeches indicate that the Athenian jurors were at least somewhat accepting.
What information does there exist on lower class sexual practices, in every other civilization homosexuality was not restricted to certain classes so it would be weird if it was so for the Greeks
There's some indication that it was universal, consider the episode in Plutarch where the entire army encourages Alexander to kiss Bagoas
Nooooo you can't have male friends!!
Straight "people" reduced to quote mining, deception, denial of truth, you will never have the Greeks
>Straight "people" reduced to quote mining
Incredibly ironic projection
>everyone is so instantly attracted to a cute boy they fall silent and stare at him when he walks in during a symposium
What did Xenophon mean by this?
Let's see the playbook:
>if someone doesn't explicitly denounce homosexuality it means that they are ok with it
>anything that can be misconstrued for homosexual attraction is in fact proof of homosexuality
>if someone is said to have been gay at any point in time, even by non-contemporary writers, he is fact surely gay
>if a specific writer is gay and writes gay fanfics or headcanon theories it means that the actual original storytellers meant it to mean that
>if someone doesn't explicitly denounce homosexuality it means that they are ok with it
Post an example where I have done this
>anything that can be misconstrued for homosexual attraction is in fact proof of homosexuality
Show examples of things being misconstrued as homosexual attraction. The Greeks are very handy because they used different words for different kinds of love. When they talk about 'eran', 'eros', 'erotikos', 'paiderastia' and talk about 'mērós ... homīlíā' (thigh intercourse) it is generally very clear they don't mean friendship (philia).
>if someone is said to have been gay at any point in time, even by non-contemporary writers, he is fact surely gay
Didn't claim this. In fact in other threads I have argued against the idea that Virgil was homosexual, despite the fact he wrote several poems about homosexual lovers, and Suetonius and Donatus claim he was
>if a specific writer is gay and writes gay fanfics or headcanon theories it means that the actual original storytellers meant it to mean that
Didn't claim this either. For instance, I have not claimed that Homer intended for Achilles and Patroclus to be homosexual. I'm just pointing out the fact that Aeschylus, Plato, Aeschines (among others) do depict them that way, and I use this as evidence of a certain attitude towards homosexuality in the Classical era
admit it OP, if you went back you would be a submissive boy toy to be passed around by hoplites
You can have sex with other men and NOT be gay. For many civilizations homosexuality was a kink, not an identity.
Can it be assumed that anyone denying Greek homosexuality is just an illiterate /misc/tard with an agenda and hasn't read a single historical source?
>Plato
Wrote an entire book about pederasty and his sexual desire towards young boys
>Xenophon
In the Anabasis he mentions his, and his fellow Greeks' attraction towards young boys they see on their journey
>Alexander
According to numerous sources, Alexander frequently had sex with both men and women in his harem. He particularly adored a boy named Baogos, of whom he kissed in front of his whole army. It is said how Alexander was "ruled" by the thighs of his friend, Hephaestion
We can find similar things with the rest of those figures.
>According to numerous sources, Alexander frequently had sex with both men
Source?
There's only one story in plutarch where he was drunk and goaded into kissing a eunuch probably the trans of their day
Not that anon but here are some other sources:
>King Alexander, too, was quite excessively keen on boys: according to Dicaearchus in On the Sacrifice at Troy, he was so taken with the eunuch Bagoas that under the eyes of the whole theater he bent over to give him a kiss, and when the audience shouted and applauded, he very willingly bent over and kissed him again. Charon of Chalcis—so says Carystius in Historical Notes--had a beautiful boy who was devoted to him. Alexander remarked on his beauty during a drinking bout hosted by Craterus. Charon told his boy to give Alexander a kiss. "No!" said the king. "That would pain you more than it would please me."
Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae 13.602
>Alexander laid a wreath on Achilles' tomb and Hephaestion on Patroclus', hinting that he was Alexander's eromenos, as Patroclus was of Achilles.
Aelian, Varia Historia 12.7
>Euxenippus was still very young and a favourite of Alexander's because he was in the prime of his youth, but though he rivaled Hephaestion in good looks he could not match him in charm, since he was rather effeminate.
Curtius, The History of Alexander 7.9.19
>Alexander ordered the temples of Asclepius to be burned, when his eromenos died.
Epictetus, Discourses 2.22.17
Personally I don't know how reliable these are. I only cite them to counter the claim that there is ancient "no primary source" evidence for Alexander's homo/bisexuality. I don't necessarily think it proves he was one.
Hm yea its strange I'm reading through Arrian and it doesn't mention any of it or hephaistion being anything more than a friend
Yeah, I believe Arrian, unlike later authors, does not use words like 'eromenos' in describing Hephaestion (I might be wrong). That's why I have my doubts
It's the same for Achilles and patroclus
>There's only one story in plutarch where he was drunk and goaded into kissing a eunuch probably the trans of their day
Not even close. The eunuch was called Bagoas, and he was a favourite of Alexander. They were very close and had sex together often, and listened to his advice. Also, they didn't just kiss when drunk, Alexander kissed him in front of the entire army after they successfully crossed a desert on their return from India. Read Quintus Curtius Rufus
According to Dicaearchus, Alexander was especially fond of boys.
It seems that the facts don't align with your agenda.
>They were very close and had sex together often,
Where does it say it though, others just say there is a kiss
There is however writing that he fricked a woman since he has a kid
Denying that the Greeks were gay is like denying that gravity exists.
I swear that's how pathetic and desparate you people sound.
Maybe the reasons why Anatolians out-bred Greeks during the Roman period is that they weren't into gayshit