comments about the pink dollar

[jan]

Hello Sikander,What you do not realize is that in that day and time of the Christian fundamentalists, sodomy is considered a sin and would result in a death sentence. I was astounded to read a statement by Steve Allen in his book Dumbth that according to the Bible, homosexuals would be given a death sentence. That is still a fact in much of the world today whereupon most give it to themselves through suicide in way or another.I do not believe that Alexander was homosexual. There is much evidence to support that side also, but camp is camp, and as I have known many male homosexuals I am certain that if any movie portrays Alexander as such, that individual will grasp that idea. The idea that any heroic personality is justification for one's own personal behavior is ridiculous! I believe that Alexander was spiritually evolved and not one whose temperament subjected him to gay or homosexual ways. Sorry if I offend you, but that is my position on this subject.Always,Jan

[Tre]

Jan, you wrote:'What you do not realize is that in that day...sodomy is considered a sin and would result in a death sentence.'This particular post came off rather like a tirade against homosexuality particularly the admixing of spirituality (modern religious viewpoints and ancient history do not mix-one clouds the view of the other), and unless your grammar is bad in the above sentence, this is entirely incorrect, if indeed you are referring to ancient Greek and Roman timeframes. I am aware you have not read all the source material on Alexander or ancient Macedonia and shall assume you've picked this up from a book. I am not going to say Alexander was a homosexual, nor for that matter am I aware that was stated by Sikander either, however, historically it is certain he did have male lovers and female ones as well. Whether he preferred one over the other I have to leave to the King as only he knew. One may quibble as to whether Hephaistion was a lover I suppose, as no primary source mentions it that we know of, although Arrian does refer to him as Alexander's eromenos as do later writers in the ancient period. What we can say with reasonable certainty is that to Alexander his sex life was far less important to him than it is to moderns today. Being that he was a very private man, it is not surprising we read so little in ancient times of it, but I must say that Curtius' simple comment 'his sex life was limited to the fulfillment of natural desire' about covers it.If you want to explore this further Jan, I can cite some good articles and books for you to read regarding Alexander and ancient sexual practices. Since Sikander can run rings around me when it comes to the discussion of sexuality in both ancient and modern times, you would probably do well to ask for citations from Sikander on that particular topic.I would want you to have the benefit of reading the best literature available on the topic. A kind ancient history professor offered to do so for me once and I consider my participation on the Forum service for that good deed once shown me.Regards,Tre

[S]

Greetings Jan,
First, I am not offended by your post; I understand your concerns and where they come from, and of course, you have a right to your own opinion ... that said, I am well aware of what fundamentalist Christianity has as a view towards homosexuality- but that is irrelevant to the time frame and this discussion, as there were no Christians at the time (and frankly, Christianity has so many interpretors, that there is still room for discussion there, too!) . But natural sexuality was as diverse then as it is today, and in many places, Jan,and among many people,homosexuality has been and often remains acceptable (even when missionaries spend time preaching against it)...the world is bigger than any one belief, one way...
You state you feel Alexander was "evolved " and "not one whose temperament subjected him to gay or homosexual ways".. Jan, there is NO "one way" to be gay.. the diversity among gay people is as great as that among "straight people"- the sexual side is only one small aspect of a person, and does not affect character, honour, trustworthiness, etc any more or less than any other person... you can not assume "all gay people are alike" and "not evolved" any more than you can assume all professed Christians are "good" or "safe".. and never assume "gay=camp", as you are again assuming all gay people think alike, feel alike, act alike.. truth be told, you would be amazed at who in history- and in the present- is gay. Evolved persons can be gay,too, Jan- IMO, spiritual evolvement has nothing to do with whether one is gay or straight, and everything to do with how a person treats their sexual partner.
Regards,
Sikander

[marcus]

Hi Jan,Tarn disputed the existence of Herakles because he had a vision of Alexander as an early Twentieth Century Scottish gentleman, and as such could not condone the idea that Alexander might have had a 'mistress', particularly not one that might have been concurrent with a legitimate wife. So HErakles, and the whole relationship with Barsine, just *had* to be a fabrication.Tarn is also partly responsible for the idea that Philip only had one 'wife' at a time, and that any children he had by other women had to be illegitimate. He picked up the propaganda from the post-Alexander period and took it to what was, for him, a natural conclusion.All the bestMarcus

[anamarija]

I don't know about Antony(because it has been said but I can't offer any proof on the matter)but I do know a lot about Caesar and he was bisexual-it was known to everyone back ni the day.That is clearly stated in Suetonius's "The twelve caesars".He says that when Caesar was about twenty he had a (for lack of a better word)affair with king Nicomedes and that that fact was known(Cicero even says,in one of his letters,that Caesar was brought to the king's bedroom by servants and that they saw him lay on the golden bed)-years later senators still mentioned it to him in anger.I can't remmember which senator it was but when Caesar tried to help that kings daughter in the senate the senator yelled at him "Stop talking about all the good things he has donne to you because it is well known what he has given you and what you have given him!".But he did love women too and that's also stated;he had a lot of affairs with married women and queens(most notably Cleopatra)next to his own wives.
Now,back to the topic at hand and first of,I have to say,Karen you are very right;there shouldn't even be an issue.If it's love it's love and that's all that matters in a relationship-not genre,nor race.I think Alexander was bisexual but I don't think that had a big effect on his personality;the man conquered the whole known world and so many people are acting like that would all be unimportant if he slept with men which is just plain silly!On the topic of portraying his relationship with Hephaestion I just hope that they try to do the love between them justice in the movie;because you can argue all you want on whether or not they had sex but the love was evident.Okay,that's my two cents(for now).

[marcus]

Even during Caesar's day there was no proof that he had 'given himself' to the king of Nicomedia, just rumour that was used against Caesar. However, you are right that, according to Seutonius (and probably others, although I haven't read the sources for a long time) Caesar had affairs with men as well as women.But I've lost track of why this is an issue, anyway.All the bestMarcus

[Linda]

I'd just like to thank Tre, Sikander, Karen, Gail (to name the main people) for their wisdom in dealing with the sexuality issue. I have been getting very frustrated recently reading some of the threads on this, and almost gave up the forum because of it. You are all a lot more patient than I am, and it convinces me that it is worth persevering, as sense *will* prevail, and there are a lot of interesting things to discuss here, and it is worth sticking around to learn from others. Phew.

[S]

Greetings Linda,
"Never give up, never surrender"
You bring too much to the Forum to leave it! Persevere, please!!!
Regards,
Sikander

[Tre]

This son of Alexander by Roxane who either was miscarried or died at birth is mentioned in the Metz Epitome (sp?)but not in our usual sources. That a dead son is not mentioned by Arrian et al, should not be taken a proof this son never existed, as a child had to live so long to be even accorded the right of a name in those times.Regards,Tre

[susan]

Some variants of the Romance refer to several possible children. I think that the ancient sources weren't interested in children born of non-Greek/Macedonian mothers - even Alexander IV & Heracles get scant mention, and almost none in their own right. Plus the sources are scanty around India - there's a gap in Arrian at this time.Does anyone have the relevant lines of the Metz Epitome that they can post - it seems unobtainable now ?Susan

[beausefaless]

I'll represent the other side. There's so much brown nosing I must breath through my mouth. These last threads make me remember this big picture of an old cowboy shoveling shit of stalls and the caption reads," Training for Politics". So Linda feel free to leave the forum, anytime and I will tell you like General McArther told his troops at Corregidor, bye.

[S]

The expression of genuine respect is not brown-nosing- that's reserved for those who are trying to placate a "superior" or "mix in" with a particular group they want to belong to, none of which applies in any of these cases.. it might be old-fashioned, but paying appropriate respect and/or compliments is still common in some areas. It might also be the "in" thing in some countries to be sarcastic, but it plays poorly elsewhere.
Regards,
Sikander

[beausefaless]

Alexander is my hero, in the field his brilliance was second to no one and being on a roll always helps, don't tell me metaphors aren't allowed, as he captured most of the gold and silver that existed in the world, he had the foresight to establish over twenty numismatic mints in his lifetime and many more to follow after his death which laid the foundation for the Roman Empire.It's good to show your support for a select few but when you use discrimination with the same breath of words on other people then you criticize in the name of righteousness, you damm right I'll stand up for the other side every time!
Excuse my smile as you walk by with your nose held high, I've red your book and I'm not impressed but, if you decide to come down to earth, I will be proud to shake your hand.May this thread serve you well.

[marcus]

Andrew,That was unworthy of you - and I'm not being selective, because it would have been unworthy of anyone on the forum.All the bestMarcus

[gahauser]

Hi S- I do miss your e-mails, by the way. Hi, Linda, my name is Amanda, not Gail
And I have no high horse, someone want to give me a shire perhaps??
Love these debates!!!GA Hauser
http://www.authorga.com