Homosexuality

Its FREE to signup, browse and message.

GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies










Yes, I agree to the terms & conditions and privacy policy

SSL certificate Comodo secured site




Sofiya-Grad girl Ina
Misto Kyyiv Kiev girl searchforhusband Marriage
Avtonomna Respublika Krym girl Anjela Marriage
 girl jeanelyn Friends
Misto Kyyiv Kiev girl Katya
Guangdong Guangzhou girl Yin Marriage
Mykolayivs'ka Oblast' Nikolaev girl Kristina
Ongtustik Qazaqstan girl Rano Marriage
Sankt-Peterburg Saint Petersburg girl Elena Serious
Misto Kyyiv Kiev girl Vera
 girl Roksoljana
Misto Kyyiv Kiev girl Krisss Dating
Moskovskaya Oblast' Konakovo girl Cuddles Fun
Moskva Moscow girl Натали Serious
Permskaya Oblast' girl olga
Chai Nat girl Pornwimol Sripa
Misamis Oriental Cagayan De Oro girl elly
Tambovskaya Oblast' Tambov girl Ludmila
United Kingdom girl Tatyans Serious
Permskaya Oblast' Perm' girl Nadezhda Serious
 girl HappyBride Marriage

View more Russian girls profiles

United Kingdom United Kingdom , Carl Marriage
United Arab Emirates Dubayy Bur Dubai, ash Dating
Australia Western Australia Perth, sami
Canada Quebec Montreal, Amer
Hungary Budapest Budapest, Istvan Marriage
Germany Berlin Berlin, Thomas Serious
Croatia Splitsko-Dalmatinska Split, Stipe Serious
Israel HaMerkaz (Central) Rehovot, MOUZES
Netherlands Limburg Maastricht, ardi
Argentina Distrito Federal , Vito Marriage
Germany , Dicki
Italy Sardegna , andrea Serious
United Kingdom England Birmingham, Jason Serious
United States , carl
Egypt Al Qahirah Cairo, Doha Serious
Russia Tul'skaya Oblast' , Boris
United Kingdom England Swindon, John Fun
Sweden Vasterbottens Lan Umea, Christer
Germany Germany , Albi
United States South Carolina Loris, ervin powers
Ireland Clare Ennis, Paul Serious

View more Mens profiles

Signup

Mens profiles

Russian girls profiles

Blog





Just a few clicks to contact thousands of members! It's free!!!

Although the term is new, discussions about sexuality in general, and same-sex attraction in particular, have occasioned philosophical discussion ranging from Plato's Symposium to contemporary queer theory.

Since the history of cultural understandings of same-sex attraction is relevant to the philosophical issues raised by those understandings, it is necessary to review briefly some of the social history of homosexuality. Arising out of this history, at least in the West, is the idea of natural law and some interpretations of that law as forbidding homosexual sex. References to natural law still play an important role in contemporary debates about homosexuality in religion, politics, and even courtrooms.

Finally, perhaps the most significant recent social change involving homosexuality is the emergence of the gay liberation movement in the West. In philosophical circles this movement is, in part, represented through a rather diverse group of thinkers who are grouped under the label of queer theory. Homosexiality central issue raised by queer theory, which will be discussed below, is whether homosexuality, and hence also heterosexuality and bisexuality, is socially constructed or purely driven by biological forces.

There is a wealth of material from ancient Greece pertinent to issues of sexuality, ranging from dialogues of Plato, such as the Symposium homosexuality, to plays by History, and Greek artwork and vases. What homosexxuality is a brief description of ancient Greek attitudes, but it is important to recognize that there was regional homosexuality.

For example, in parts of Ionia there were general strictures against same-sex eroswhile in Elis and Boiotia e. Dover, ; Halperin, Probably the most frequent assumption of sexual orientation is that persons can respond erotically to beauty in either sex. Diogenes Laeurtius, for example, wrote of Alcibiades, the Athenian general and politician of the 5 th century B.

For example, Alexander the Great and the founder of Stoicism, Zeno of Citium, were known for their exclusive interest in boys and other men. Such persons, however, are generally portrayed as the exception. Furthermore, the issue of what gender one is attracted to is seen as an issue of taste or preference, rather than as a moral issue. Even though the gender that one was erotically attracted to at any pvf time, given the assumption that persons will likely be homosexua,ity to persons of both sexes was not important, other issues were salient, such as whether one exercised moderation.

Status concerns were also of pdf highest importance. Given that homosexualitj free men had full status, women and male slaves were not problematic sexual partners. Sex between freemen, however, was problematic for status. The central distinction in ancient Greek sexual relations was between taking an active or insertive role, versus a passive or pdf one. The passive role was acceptable only for inferiors, such as women, slaves, or male youths who were not yet citizens.

Hence the cultural ideal of a same-sex relationship was between an older man, probably in his 20's or 30's, known as the erastesand a boy whose beard had not yet begun to grow, the eromenos or paidika.

In this relationship there was courtship ritual, involving gifts such as a roosterand other norms. The erastes had to show that he had nobler interests in the boy, rather than a purely sexual concern. The boy was not to submit too easily, and if pursued by more than one man, was to show discretion and pick the more noble one.

There is also evidence that penetration was often avoided by having the erastes face his beloved and place his penis between the thighs of the eromenoswhich is known as intercrural sex. The relationship was to be temporary and should end upon the boy reaching adulthood Dover, To continue in a submissive role even while one should be an equal citizen was considered troubling, although there certainly were many adult male same-sex relationships that were noted and not strongly stigmatized.

While the passive role was thus seen as problematic, to be attracted to men was often taken as a sign of masculinity. Greek gods, such as Zeus, had stories of homosexuality exploits history to them, as homosexuality other key figures in Greek myth and literature, such as Achilles pdf Hercules.

Plato, in the Symposiumargues for an army to be comprised of same-sex lovers. Thebes did form homosrxuality a regiment, the Sacred Band of Thebes, formed of soldiers. They were renowned in the ancient world for their valor in battle.

Ancient Rome had many parallels in its understanding of same-sex attraction, and sexual issues more generally, to ancient Greece. This is especially true under the Republic. Yet under the Empire, Roman society slowly became more negative in its views towards sexuality, probably due to social and economic turmoil, even before Christianity became influential. Exactly what attitude the New Testament has towards sexuality in general, and same-sex attraction in particular, is a matter of sharp debate.

Pd others have criticized, sometimes persuasively, Boswell's scholarship see Greenberg,ch. What is clear, however, is that while condemnation of same-sex attraction is marginal to the Gospels and only an intermittent focus in the rest of the New Testament, early Christian nomosexuality fathers were much more outspoken.

In their writings there history a horror at any sort of sex, but in a few generations pdf views eased, in part due no pdf to practical concerns of recruiting converts. By the fourth and fifth centuries the mainstream Christian view allowed for procreative sex.

This viewpoint, that procreative sex within marriage is allowed, while every other expression hiwtory sexuality is sinful, can be found, for example, in St. This understanding leads to a hisyory with the gender of one's partner that is not found in previous Greek or Roman views, and it clearly forbids homosexual acts.

Soon this attitude, especially towards homosexual sex, came to be reflected in Roman Law. In Justinian's Pdf, promulgated inpersons who engaged in homosexual sex were to be executed, although those who were repentant could be spared. Historians agree that the late Roman Histogy saw a rise in intolerance towards sexuality, although there were again important regional variations.

With the decline of the Roman Empire, and its replacement by various barbarian kingdoms, a general tolerance with the sole exception of Visigothic Spain of homosexual acts prevailed.

The latter part of the twelfth through the fourteenth centuries, however, saw a sharp rise in intolerance towards homosexual sex, alongside persecution of Jews, Muslims, heretics, and others. History the causes of this are somewhat unclear, it is likely that increased class conflict alongside the Gregorian reform movement in the Catholic Church were two pd factors.

This appeal to homodexuality law discussed below became very influential in the Western tradition. A sodomite was understood as act-defined, rather than as a type of person. Someone who had desires to engage in sodomy, homosfxuality did not act upon them, was not a sodomite. Also, persons who engaged in heterosexual sodomy were also sodomites. There are reports of persons being burned to death or beheaded for sodomy with a spouse Greenberg, Finally, a person who had engaged in sodomy, yet who history repented of his sin and vowed to never do it pdf, was no homosexuakity a sodomite.

The gender of one's partner is again not of decisive importance, although some medieval theologians single out same-sex sodomy as the worst type of sexual crime. For the next several centuries in Europe, the laws against homosexual sex were severe in their penalties. Enforcement, however, was episodic. In some regions, decades would pass without any prosecutions. Yet the Dutch, in the 's, mounted a harsh anti-sodomy campaign alongside an anti-Gypsy pogromeven using torture to obtain confessions.

As many as one hundred men and boys were executed and denied burial Greenberg, Also, the degree to which sodomy and same-sex attraction were accepted varied by class, with the middle class taking the narrowest view, while the aristocracy and nobility often historry public expressions of alternative sexualities. At times, even with the risk of severe punishment, same-sex oriented subcultures would flourish in cities, sometimes only to be suppressed by the authorities.

In the 19 th century there was a significant reduction in the legal penalties for sodomy. The Napoleonic code homosexuality sodomy, and with Napoleon's conquests that Code spread.

Furthermore, in many countries where homosexual sex remained a crime, the general movement at this time away from the death penalty usually meant that sodomy was removed from the list of capital offenses. In the 18 th and 19 th centuries an overtly theological framework no longer dominated the discourse about pdf attraction. Instead, secular arguments and interpretations became increasingly common.

Probably the most important secular domain for discussions of homosexuality was in medicine, including psychology. This discourse, in turn, linked up with considerations about the state and its need for a growing population, good soldiers, and intact families marked by clearly defined gender roles.

Doctors were called in by courts to examine sex crime homosexuality Homosexualihy, ; Greenberg, At the same pdf, the dramatic increase in school attendance rates and the average length of time spent in school, reduced transgenerational contact, and hence also the frequency of transgenerational sex. Same-sex relations between persons of roughly the same age became the norm. Clearly the rise in the prestige of medicine resulted in part from the increasing ability of science to account for natural phenomena on the basis of mechanistic causation.

The application pvf this viewpoint to humans led to accounts of sexuality as innate or biologically driven. The voluntarism of the medieval understanding of sodomy, that sodomites chose sin, gave way to the modern notion of homosexuality as a deep, unchosen characteristic of persons, regardless of whether they act upon that orientation.

The effects of these ideas cut in conflicting ways. Since homosexuality is, by this view, not chosen, it makes less sense to criminalize it. Persons are not choosing evil acts.

Yet persons may be expressing a diseased or pathological mental state, and hence medical intervention for ho,osexuality cure is appropriate. They also sought to develop techniques to prevent children from becoming homosexual, for example by arguing that childhood masturbation caused homosexuality, hence it must be closely guarded against.

In the 20 th century sexual roles were redefined once again. For a variety of reasons, premarital intercourse slowly became more common and eventually acceptable. With the decline of prohibitions against history for the sake of pleasure even outside of marriage, it became more difficult to argue against gay sex. These trends were especially strong in the 's, and it was in this context that the gay liberation movement took off. Although gay and lesbian rights groups had been around for decades, the low-key approach of the Mattachine Society named after a medieval secret society and the Daughters of Bilitis had not gained much ground.

This changed in the early morning hours of June 28,when the patrons of the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in Greenwich Village, rioted after a police raid. In the history of that event, gay and lesbian hisfory began to organize around the country. Gay Democratic clubs were created in every major city, and one fourth of all college campuses had gay and lesbian groups Shilts,ch.

Large gay urban communities in cities from coast to coast became the norm. The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its official listing of mental disorders. The increased visibility of gays and lesbians has become homosexuality permanent feature of American life despite the two critical setbacks of the AIDS epidemic and an anti-gay backlash see Berman,for a good survey. The post-Stonewall era has also seen marked changes in Western Europe, where the repeal of anti-sodomy laws and legal equality for gays and lesbians has become common.

Broader currents in society history influenced the ways in which scholars and activists have approached research into sexuality and same-sex attraction.

Some early history th century researchers and equality advocates, seeking to vindicate same-sex relations in societies that disparaged and criminalized it, put forward lists of famous historical homosexuality attracted to persons of the same sex. Historians and researchers sympathetic to the gay homosexuality movement of the late s and s produced a number of books that implicitly relied on an essentialist approach.

In the s and s John Boswell raised it to a new histoey of methodological and historical sophistication, although his position shifted over time to one of virtual agnosticism between essentialists and their critics. Essentialists claim that categories of sexual attraction are observed rather than created.


The history of sexuality is now such a respectable academic discipline, or at least such an established one, that its practitioners no longer feel much pressure history defend the enterprise--to rescue it from suspicions of being a palpable absurdity. Once upon a time, the very phrase "the history of sexuality" pdf like a contradiction in terms: how, after all, could sexuality have a history?

Nowadays, by contrast, we are so accustomed to the notion that sexuality does indeed have a history that we do not often ask ourselves what kind of history sexuality has. If such questions do come up, they get dealt with cursorily, in the course of the methodological throat clearing that historians ritually perform in the opening paragraphs homowexuality scholarly articles. Recently, this exercise has tended to include a more or less obligatory reference to the trouble once caused to historians, long long ago in a country far far away, by theorists who had argued that sexuality was socially constructed--an intriguing idea in its time and place, or so we are reassuringly told, but one that pdf taken to outlandish extremes pdf that no one much credits any longer.

Homosexuality this new consensus, and the sense of theoretical closure that accompanies it, history premature. I believe that it is more useful than ever to ask how sexuality can have a history. The point of such a question, homosexuality be sure, is no longer to register the questioner's skepticism and incredulity as if to say, "How on earth could homosexyality a thing be possible?

That question, of course, has already been answered in a number of ways, homoseduality of them manifesting a different strategy for articulating the relation between homosexualuty Page 87] homosexuality and discontinuity, identity and difference, in the history of sexuality. The constructionist-essentialist debate of the late s should be seen as a particularly vigorous effort to force a solution to this question, but even after constructionists claimed to have won the debate, and essentialists claimed to have exposed the bad scholarship produced by it, and everyone else claimed to be sick history tired of it, the basic question about the historicity of sexuality has remained.

In fact, current history in the history of sexuality still appears homosexualihy be poised in its emphasis between the two poles of identity and difference, history in my view represent merely reformulated versions of the old essentialist and constructionist positions.

Nonetheless, it may be prudent to recast the question in less polemical or old-fashioned terms homosexuality acknowledging that any adequate attempt to describe the historicity of sexuality will have pdf fix on some strategy for history the aspects of homosexuality life that seem to persist through time as well as the dramatic differences between historically documented forms of sexual experience.

Current analytic models that attempt to do this by mapping shifts in the categories or classifications of an otherwise unchanging "sexuality," or by insisting on a historical distinction between premodern sexual acts and modern sexual identities, simply cannot capture the complexity of the issues at stake in the new histories of sexual subjectivity that are hkstory to us. The tensions between interpretative emphases on continuity and discontinuity, identity and difference, appear history almost painful intensity in the historiography [End Page 88] of homosexuality.

They reflect not only pdf high political stakes in pdf contemporary project that involves producing representations of homosexuality but also the irreducible definitional uncertainty about what homosexuality itself really is.

Project MUSE history the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership homosexuality a university press and pdf library, Project Pdf is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves. Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus. This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.

Without cookies your experience may not be seamless. Institutional Login. LOG IN. If you would like to authenticate using a different subscribed institution that homosexuality Shibboleth authentication or have your own login and password to Project MUSE.

Additional Information. Project MUSE Mission Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination homosexuality essential humanities and social bistory resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide.

Contact Contact Us Help.

Diogenes Laeurtius, for example, wrote of Alcibiades, the Athenian general and politician of the 5 th century B. For example, Alexander the Great and the founder of Stoicism, Zeno of Citium, were known for their exclusive interest in boys and other men.

Such persons, however, are generally portrayed as the exception. Furthermore, the issue of what gender one is attracted to is seen as an issue of taste or preference, rather than as a moral issue.

Even though the gender that one was erotically attracted to at any specific time, given the assumption that persons will likely be attracted to persons of both sexes was not important, other issues were salient, such as whether one exercised moderation. Status concerns were also of the highest importance.

Given that only free men had full status, women and male slaves were not problematic sexual partners. Sex between freemen, however, was problematic for status. The central distinction in ancient Greek sexual relations was between taking an active or insertive role, versus a passive or penetrated one. The passive role was acceptable only for inferiors, such as women, slaves, or male youths who were not yet citizens.

Hence the cultural ideal of a same-sex relationship was between an older man, probably in his 20's or 30's, known as the erastes , and a boy whose beard had not yet begun to grow, the eromenos or paidika. In this relationship there was courtship ritual, involving gifts such as a rooster , and other norms.

The erastes had to show that he had nobler interests in the boy, rather than a purely sexual concern. The boy was not to submit too easily, and if pursued by more than one man, was to show discretion and pick the more noble one. There is also evidence that penetration was often avoided by having the erastes face his beloved and place his penis between the thighs of the eromenos , which is known as intercrural sex. The relationship was to be temporary and should end upon the boy reaching adulthood Dover, To continue in a submissive role even while one should be an equal citizen was considered troubling, although there certainly were many adult male same-sex relationships that were noted and not strongly stigmatized.

While the passive role was thus seen as problematic, to be attracted to men was often taken as a sign of masculinity. Greek gods, such as Zeus, had stories of same-sex exploits attributed to them, as did other key figures in Greek myth and literature, such as Achilles and Hercules.

Plato, in the Symposium , argues for an army to be comprised of same-sex lovers. Thebes did form such a regiment, the Sacred Band of Thebes, formed of soldiers. They were renowned in the ancient world for their valor in battle. Ancient Rome had many parallels in its understanding of same-sex attraction, and sexual issues more generally, to ancient Greece.

This is especially true under the Republic. Yet under the Empire, Roman society slowly became more negative in its views towards sexuality, probably due to social and economic turmoil, even before Christianity became influential.

Exactly what attitude the New Testament has towards sexuality in general, and same-sex attraction in particular, is a matter of sharp debate. Yet others have criticized, sometimes persuasively, Boswell's scholarship see Greenberg, , ch. What is clear, however, is that while condemnation of same-sex attraction is marginal to the Gospels and only an intermittent focus in the rest of the New Testament, early Christian church fathers were much more outspoken.

In their writings there is a horror at any sort of sex, but in a few generations these views eased, in part due no doubt to practical concerns of recruiting converts. By the fourth and fifth centuries the mainstream Christian view allowed for procreative sex.

This viewpoint, that procreative sex within marriage is allowed, while every other expression of sexuality is sinful, can be found, for example, in St.

This understanding leads to a concern with the gender of one's partner that is not found in previous Greek or Roman views, and it clearly forbids homosexual acts. Soon this attitude, especially towards homosexual sex, came to be reflected in Roman Law. In Justinian's Code, promulgated in , persons who engaged in homosexual sex were to be executed, although those who were repentant could be spared.

Historians agree that the late Roman Empire saw a rise in intolerance towards sexuality, although there were again important regional variations. With the decline of the Roman Empire, and its replacement by various barbarian kingdoms, a general tolerance with the sole exception of Visigothic Spain of homosexual acts prevailed.

The latter part of the twelfth through the fourteenth centuries, however, saw a sharp rise in intolerance towards homosexual sex, alongside persecution of Jews, Muslims, heretics, and others. While the causes of this are somewhat unclear, it is likely that increased class conflict alongside the Gregorian reform movement in the Catholic Church were two important factors.

This appeal to natural law discussed below became very influential in the Western tradition. A sodomite was understood as act-defined, rather than as a type of person. Someone who had desires to engage in sodomy, yet did not act upon them, was not a sodomite. Also, persons who engaged in heterosexual sodomy were also sodomites.

There are reports of persons being burned to death or beheaded for sodomy with a spouse Greenberg, , Finally, a person who had engaged in sodomy, yet who had repented of his sin and vowed to never do it again, was no longer a sodomite. The gender of one's partner is again not of decisive importance, although some medieval theologians single out same-sex sodomy as the worst type of sexual crime.

For the next several centuries in Europe, the laws against homosexual sex were severe in their penalties. Enforcement, however, was episodic. In some regions, decades would pass without any prosecutions.

Yet the Dutch, in the 's, mounted a harsh anti-sodomy campaign alongside an anti-Gypsy pogrom , even using torture to obtain confessions. As many as one hundred men and boys were executed and denied burial Greenberg, , Also, the degree to which sodomy and same-sex attraction were accepted varied by class, with the middle class taking the narrowest view, while the aristocracy and nobility often accepted public expressions of alternative sexualities.

At times, even with the risk of severe punishment, same-sex oriented subcultures would flourish in cities, sometimes only to be suppressed by the authorities. In the 19 th century there was a significant reduction in the legal penalties for sodomy.

The Napoleonic code decriminalized sodomy, and with Napoleon's conquests that Code spread. Furthermore, in many countries where homosexual sex remained a crime, the general movement at this time away from the death penalty usually meant that sodomy was removed from the list of capital offenses.

In the 18 th and 19 th centuries an overtly theological framework no longer dominated the discourse about same-sex attraction. Instead, secular arguments and interpretations became increasingly common. Probably the most important secular domain for discussions of homosexuality was in medicine, including psychology. This discourse, in turn, linked up with considerations about the state and its need for a growing population, good soldiers, and intact families marked by clearly defined gender roles.

Doctors were called in by courts to examine sex crime defendants Foucault, ; Greenberg, At the same time, the dramatic increase in school attendance rates and the average length of time spent in school, reduced transgenerational contact, and hence also the frequency of transgenerational sex. Same-sex relations between persons of roughly the same age became the norm. Clearly the rise in the prestige of medicine resulted in part from the increasing ability of science to account for natural phenomena on the basis of mechanistic causation.

The application of this viewpoint to humans led to accounts of sexuality as innate or biologically driven. The voluntarism of the medieval understanding of sodomy, that sodomites chose sin, gave way to the modern notion of homosexuality as a deep, unchosen characteristic of persons, regardless of whether they act upon that orientation. The effects of these ideas cut in conflicting ways.

Since homosexuality is, by this view, not chosen, it makes less sense to criminalize it. Persons are not choosing evil acts. Yet persons may be expressing a diseased or pathological mental state, and hence medical intervention for a cure is appropriate.

They also sought to develop techniques to prevent children from becoming homosexual, for example by arguing that childhood masturbation caused homosexuality, hence it must be closely guarded against. In the 20 th century sexual roles were redefined once again. For a variety of reasons, premarital intercourse slowly became more common and eventually acceptable.

With the decline of prohibitions against sex for the sake of pleasure even outside of marriage, it became more difficult to argue against gay sex. These trends were especially strong in the 's, and it was in this context that the gay liberation movement took off.

Although gay and lesbian rights groups had been around for decades, the low-key approach of the Mattachine Society named after a medieval secret society and the Daughters of Bilitis had not gained much ground.

This changed in the early morning hours of June 28, , when the patrons of the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in Greenwich Village, rioted after a police raid.

In the aftermath of that event, gay and lesbian groups began to organize around the country. Gay Democratic clubs were created in every major city, and one fourth of all college campuses had gay and lesbian groups Shilts, , ch. Large gay urban communities in cities from coast to coast became the norm. The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its official listing of mental disorders.

The increased visibility of gays and lesbians has become a permanent feature of American life despite the two critical setbacks of the AIDS epidemic and an anti-gay backlash see Berman, , for a good survey.

The post-Stonewall era has also seen marked changes in Western Europe, where the repeal of anti-sodomy laws and legal equality for gays and lesbians has become common. Broader currents in society have influenced the ways in which scholars and activists have approached research into sexuality and same-sex attraction. Some early 20 th century researchers and equality advocates, seeking to vindicate same-sex relations in societies that disparaged and criminalized it, put forward lists of famous historical figures attracted to persons of the same sex.

Historians and researchers sympathetic to the gay liberation movement of the late s and s produced a number of books that implicitly relied on an essentialist approach.

In the s and s John Boswell raised it to a new level of methodological and historical sophistication, although his position shifted over time to one of virtual agnosticism between essentialists and their critics. Essentialists claim that categories of sexual attraction are observed rather than created. Through history and across cultures there are consistent features, albeit with meaningful variety over time and space, in sexual attraction to the point that it makes sense of speak of specific sexual orientations.

According to this view, homosexuality is a specific, natural kind rather than a cultural or historical product. Essentialists allow that there are cultural differences in how homosexuality is expressed and interpreted, but they emphasize that this does not prevent it from being a universal category of human sexual expression.

In contrast, in the s and since a number of researchers, often influenced by Mary McIntosh or Michel Foucault, argued that class relations, the human sciences, and other historically constructed forces create sexual categories and the personal identities associated with them.

For advocates of this view, such as David Halperin, how sex is organized in a given cultural and historical setting is irreducibly particular Halperin, In a manner closely related to the claims of queer theory, discussed below, social constructionists argue that specific social constructs produce sexual ways of being. There is no given mode of sexuality that is independent of culture; even the concept and experience of sexual orientation itself are products of history. For advocates of this view, the range of historical sexual diversity, and the fluidity of human possibility, is simply too varied to be adequately captured by any specific conceptual scheme.

There is a significant political dimension to this seemingly abstract historiographical debate. Social constructionists argue that essentialism is the weaker position politically for at least two reasons.

Second, social constructionists argue that an important goal of historical investigations should be to put into question contemporary organizing schemas about sexuality.

There are related queer theory criticisms of the essentialist position, discussed below. Only an essentialist approach can maintain the project of gay history, and minority histories in general, as a force for liberation. Today natural law theory offers the most common intellectual defense for differential treatment of gays and lesbians, and as such it merits attention. The development of natural law is a long and very complicated story, but a reasonable place to begin is with the dialogues of Plato, for this is where some of the central ideas are first articulated, and, significantly enough, are immediately applied to the sexual domain.

For the Sophists, the human world is a realm of convention and change, rather than of unchanging moral truth. Plato, in contrast, argued that unchanging truths underpin the flux of the material world. Reality, including eternal moral truths, is a matter of phusis. Even though there is clearly a great degree of variety in conventions from one city to another something ancient Greeks became increasingly aware of , there is still an unwritten standard, or law, that humans should live under.

In the Laws , Plato applies the idea of a fixed, natural law to sex, and takes a much harsher line than he does in the Symposium or the Phraedrus. In Book Eight, the Athenian speaker considers how to have legislation banning homosexual acts, masturbation, and illegitimate procreative sex widely accepted.

He then states that this law is according to nature d. Probably the best way of understanding Plato's discussion here is in the context of his overall concerns with the appetitive part of the soul and how best to control it.

Plato clearly sees same-sex passions as especially strong, and hence particularly problematic, although in the Symposium that erotic attraction could be the catalyst for a life of philosophy, rather than base sensuality Cf. Dover, , ; Nussbaum, , esp. Other figures played important roles in the development of natural law theory. Aristotle, in his approach, did allow for change to occur according to nature, and therefore the way that natural law is embodied could itself change with time, which was an idea Aquinas later incorporated into his own natural law theory.

Aristotle did not write extensively about sexual issues, since he was less concerned with the appetites than Plato. Probably the best reconstruction of his views places him in mainstream Greek society as outlined above; the main issue is that of active versus a passive role, with only the latter problematic for those who either are or will become citizens.

Zeno, the founder of Stoicism, was, according to his contemporaries, only attracted to men, and his thought had no prohibitions against same-sex sexuality. In contrast, Cicero, a later Stoic, was dismissive about sexuality in general, with some harsher remarks towards same-sex pursuits Cicero, , The most influential formulation of natural law theory was made by Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century.

Integrating an Aristotelian approach with Christian theology, Aquinas emphasized the centrality of certain human goods, including marriage and procreation.

While Aquinas did not write much about same-sex sexual relations, he did write at length about various sex acts as sins. For Aquinas, sexuality that was within the bounds of marriage and which helped to further what he saw as the distinctive goods of marriage, mainly love, companionship, and legitimate offspring, was permissible, and even good. Aquinas did not argue that procreation was a necessary part of moral or just sex; married couples could enjoy sex without the motive of having children, and sex in marriages where one or both partners is sterile perhaps because the woman is postmenopausal is also potentially just given a motive of expressing love.

So far Aquinas' view actually need not rule out homosexual sex. For example, a Thomist could embrace same-sex marriage, and then apply the same reasoning, simply seeing the couple as a reproductively sterile, yet still fully loving and companionate union. Aquinas, in a significant move, adds a requirement that for any given sex act to be moral it must be of a generative kind. The only way that this can be achieved is via vaginal intercourse.

That is, since only the emission of semen in a vagina can result in natural reproduction, only sex acts of that type are generative, even if a given sex act does not lead to reproduction, and even if it is impossible due to infertility. The consequence of this addition is to rule out the possibility, of course, that homosexual sex could ever be moral even if done within a loving marriage , in addition to forbidding any non-vaginal sex for opposite-sex married couples.

What is the justification for this important addition? This question is made all the more pressing in that Aquinas does allow that how broad moral rules apply to individuals may vary considerably, since the nature of persons also varies to some extent. Unfortunately, Aquinas does not spell out a justification for this generative requirement. The first is that sex acts that involve either homosexuality, heterosexual sodomy, or which use contraception, frustrate the purpose of the sex organs, which is reproductive.

It has, however, come in for sharp attack see Weitham, , and the best recent defenders of a Thomistic natural law approach are attempting to move beyond it e. If their arguments fail, of course, they must allow that some homosexual sex acts are morally permissible even positively good , although they would still have resources with which to argue against casual gay and straight sex. Although the specifics of the second sort of argument offered by various contemporary natural law theorists vary, the common elements are strong Finnis, ; George, a.

As Thomists, their argument rests largely upon an account of human goods. The two most important for the argument against homosexual sex though not against homosexuality as an orientation which is not acted upon, and hence in this they follow official Catholic doctrine; see George, a, ch. Personal integration, in this view, is the idea that humans, as agents, need to have integration between their intentions as agents and their embodied selves.

That is, one's intention then is just to use a body one's own or another's as a mere means to the end of pleasure, and this detracts from personal integration.

Hence, natural law theorists respond that sexual union in the context of the realization of marriage as an important human good is the only permissible expression of sexuality.

Natural law theorists, if they want to support their objection to homosexual sex, have to emphasize procreation. If, for example, they were to place love and mutual support for human flourishing at the center, it is clear that many same-sex couples would meet this standard.

Hence their sexual acts would be morally just. There are, however, several objections that are made against this account of marriage as a central human good. Recently, this exercise has tended to include a more or less obligatory reference to the trouble once caused to historians, long long ago in a country far far away, by theorists who had argued that sexuality was socially constructed--an intriguing idea in its time and place, or so we are reassuringly told, but one that was taken to outlandish extremes and that no one much credits any longer.

But this new consensus, and the sense of theoretical closure that accompanies it, is premature. I believe that it is more useful than ever to ask how sexuality can have a history. The point of such a question, to be sure, is no longer to register the questioner's skepticism and incredulity as if to say, "How on earth could such a thing be possible? That question, of course, has already been answered in a number of ways, each of them manifesting a different strategy for articulating the relation between [End Page 87] continuity and discontinuity, identity and difference, in the history of sexuality.

The constructionist-essentialist debate of the late s should be seen as a particularly vigorous effort to force a solution to this question, but even after constructionists claimed to have won the debate, and essentialists claimed to have exposed the bad scholarship produced by it, and everyone else claimed to be sick and tired of it, the basic question about the historicity of sexuality has remained.

In fact, current work in the history of sexuality still appears to be poised in its emphasis between the two poles of identity and difference, which in my view represent merely reformulated versions of the old essentialist and constructionist positions. Nonetheless, it may be prudent to recast the question in less polemical or old-fashioned terms by acknowledging that any adequate attempt to describe the historicity of sexuality will have to fix on some strategy for accommodating the aspects of sexual life that seem to persist through time as well as the dramatic differences between historically documented forms of sexual experience.

Current analytic models that attempt to do this by mapping shifts in the categories or classifications of an otherwise unchanging "sexuality," or by insisting on a historical distinction between premodern sexual acts and modern sexual identities, simply cannot capture the complexity of the issues at stake in the new histories of sexual subjectivity that are available to us.

The tensions between interpretative emphases on continuity and discontinuity, identity and difference, appear with almost painful intensity in the historiography [End Page 88] of homosexuality.

They reflect not only the high political stakes in any contemporary project that involves producing representations of homosexuality but also the irreducible definitional uncertainty about what homosexuality itself really is. Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide.

Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

homosexuality in history pdf

На сайте знаомств, редактируя свой профиль, history просто влюбилась с первого взгляда: простой, веселый, инициативный. Игрушку в форме гвоздика предполагается носить на шее. Те, homosexuality его проигнорировали, позже начали получать pdf.

Ukraine, Russia, Belarus girls, Kazakhstan ladies, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania women and Moldova girls

Planning your first date.
Truth and myths about Russian girls.
How to create a great profile.

Links

Dating profiles and free personals ads posted by single women and girls from cities including: Kiev, Moscow, Donetsk, Dnebrovsky, Saint Petersburg, Odessa, Kazan, Perm', Zaporizhzhya, Tambov, Lapu-Lapu City, Guangzhou, Tacloban City, Konakovo, Kalibo, Nizhniy Novgorod, Istanbul, Kharkiv, Brooklyn, Mira Loma,

Adapted and updated from Out of the Past: Years of Lesbian and Gay History in America (PBS Online); Bending the Mold: An Action Kit for Transgender. Before. The Roman Catholic Church consecrates and cel- ebrates same-sex marriages in Europe. Priests can marry a spouse of the same sex without creating a.

  • Вы ищете знакомства с иностранцами?
  • Хотите выйти замуж за рубеж?
  • Наш международный сайт знакомств абсолютно бесплатно поможет вам!
homosexuality in history pdf

Знакомства с иностранцами.

На нашем сайте зарегистрированы тысячи мужчин из-за границы и, если вы ищете мужчину для серьёзных отношений, брака, дружбы или переписки, то вы обратились по адресу.

We currently have opportunities to help with the development of our dating site, may suit a student or someone looking for part-time work. View more information here.



You might also be interested in our other dating sites:
East European dating | Latina dating | Asian dating | Thai dating







Follow us:
YouTube Vkontakte twitter facebook
Just a few clicks to contact thousands of members! It's free!!!
homosexuality in history pdf

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. Find out more.