Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
And since “homo” means man, and not men and women, homosexual is a perfectly good word for males who desire other males, whereas Sapphist is good for women who desire women. (The inhabitants of Lesbos today have lost their geographical pronoun and also their adjective – which the Pride folk, normally very defensive of pronouns, have no sympathy with at all. Of course, there will also be lesbian Lesbians, but most Lesbians are not lesbians). đ
Ain’t language a hoot?
But now we cannot use the word gay in its original sense without qualification.
For instance, when quoting the troubadours calling their music the gay science, one has to qualify whilst others stupidly chuckle at you, and adults are turned into giggling children.And everyone would have access to the means of production, and could learn how to make what he or she considered useful and beautiful.
” So we are lumbered with âhomophobiaâ to describe dislike of homosexuals (or is it dislike of homosexual behaviour by anybody?).”
*****
Or, instead of being lumbered, you can make up your own words, as Nicolas Restif did, and as I often do (although I like to choose the archaic. It still annoys people, which I like to do. Especially professors).
Greek and Roman morality was homosexual. Women were for reproduction purposes.
The Lovers’ Battalion of Thebes was composed of men who were lovers, and was the front line force in war, since it was reasoned they would fight more ferociously to protect one another.
It was more or less required in all Greek city states that mature men would have catamites: young boys who were both students of the elder’s philosophy and also his lover.
Were David and Jonathan real?
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/06/29/in-search-of-king-davids-lost-empireThe Hebrews were again oddities, with their Unknown God and their anti-sodomy.
” I donât think there was even a word for same sex desire before the 1870s.”
*****
I think lesbians used to be called Sapphists, after the poet of Lesbos.
“Pederast” was a word too. And of course “sodomite”, which is very old. 18th century use included “catamite” and “tribade.”
No, that’s not it. When there are so many posts and the page is due to turn, posts are swallowed and don’t appear.
Try again, but alter a word or two, so it doesn’t register as “identical post.”
I know it’s all state capitalism, but I don’t think Castro honoured Stalin. He liked Trotsky.
Only China, N. Korea and Albania honoured Stalin.
I don’t think China under Mao even mentioned Cuba, except as a Krushchev satellite, and hence “revisionist” state.
https://images.app.goo.gl/m1R3RvHEy7oCGaRV6
Libraries: books out, guns in.
” This book shows that all religion had a materialistic origin and most religion came or were related to a specific economic system.”
****
Not denying that.
****
” do not believe that individuals make history, the economic reality of that time made history, and that religion was becoming the ideological vehicle of the rulers of that time, and it became the opposite of the original christian, even more, Engels described them similar to a working class movement.”
****
Not denying that either. But the superstructure not only reflects the base, it also influences changes in it, because ideas, which come from material reality, are also part of that reality and influence its progress.
