/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19673008]

Were oral and anal sex practised with any regularity within the codified pederastic relationships of certain Ancient Greek city-states?

I understand that intercrural sex and kissing were said to be preferred at least publicly to protect the boy's dignity, but does anyone know if penetrative sex within this sort of relationship was commonly practised behind closed doors? Literature on this topic?

[Anonymous No.19673019]

>>19673008
Buggery was not unheard of in the ancient world it seems: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/pedico#Latin

[Anonymous No.19673036]

>>19673019
Yes but I was under the impression that it was only practised on slaves and prostitutes, that it didn't happen in free relationships between citizens.

[Anonymous No.19673075]

>>19673036
Yes, apparently for a noble to be the passive partner was considered infamous: www.pilloledistoria.it/2875/storia-antica/bisessualita-di-giulio-cesare-nicomede%3flang=en&amp

[Anonymous No.19673182]

Intercrural intercourse was the socially acceptable ideal, however anal sex was probably more common than what was considered propitious. Kenneth Dover writes:
>Homosexual anal copulation, by contrast with the intercrural mode, is portrayed by vase-painters only when it involves people of the same age-group, comasts or satyrs. It is commonly believed at the present time to be the characteristic mode of homosexual consummation; in Greek comedy it is assumed, save in Birds 706, to be the only mode; and when Hellenistic poetry makes a sufficiently unambiguous reference to what actually happens on the bodily plane, we encounter only anal, never intercrural, copulation. So Dioskorides 7 recommends a friend to 'delight in the rosy bum' of his wife when she is pregnant, 'treating her as male Aphrodite', and Rhianos 1 rapturously apostrophises the 'glorious bum' of a boy, so beautiful that even old men itch for it. Meleagros 90 is addressed to a boy whose beauty has faded with maturity; a 'hairy pelt' now 'declares war on those who mount from behind', and Meleagros 94, expressing love for a woman, abjures his former eromenoi and 'the squeeze of a hairy arse'. Homosexual fellation seems, so far as vase-painting is concerned, peculiar to satyrs, though it appears from Polybiosxii 13 that at the end of the fourth century Demokhares, a prominent figure in Athenian politics, was accused by a comic poet of being hetairekos with the upper parts of his body, so that he was not a fit person to blow the sacred flame'. Aiskhines ii 88 imputes to Demosthenes 'bodily impurity - even of the organs of speech', and Krates of Thebes 1 is a learned joke about activity of this type. Masturbation of one male by another, envisaged by Meleagros 77, a fantasy in which eight eromenoi are simultaneously engaged with one erastes, is suggested - but not very clearly - by a black-figure fragment, B702.
Greek Homosexuality p. 99

He writes in his postscript to the 1989 edition:
>The fact that comedy assumes anal penetration to be the normal mode of homosexual intercourse suggests that the vase-painters' overwhelming preference for the intercrural mode is highly conventional, and I would not resist such a suggestion.
Greek Homosexuality p. 204

Visually, intercrural sex allows the eromenos more dignity:
>An interesting contrast between heterosexual intercourse and the intercrural activity ascribed to erastes and eromenos by the vase-painters suggests itself. The woman is almost invariably in a 'subordinate' position, the man 'dominant'; the woman bent over or lying back or supported, the man upright or on top. In intercrural copulation, on the other hand, the eromenos stands bolt upright, and it is the erastes who bows his head and shoulders. The contrast exists also in respect of what one might call 'general penetrability'; against the absence of scenes of human homosexual fellation
Greek Homosexuality p. 101

[Anonymous No.19673262]

>>19673008
Also this pic always fucks with me, the bodies are so soft and warm looking but the feet are way too thin and angular for my tastes

[Anonymous No.19673319]

>>19673008
Oh my fucking gosh can you not focus on your faggotry for just one second? This isn't even /lit/ related, go to /his/.

[Anonymous No.19673327]

>>19673319
I did. /his/ is full of retards though.

[Anonymous No.19673347]

>>19673327
I know, but /lit/ isn't the place for building a homosexual subgroup. Have you tried /lgbt/?

[Anonymous No.19673355]

>>19673327
Did you find my post >>19673182 helpful anon

[Anonymous No.19673358]

>>19673347
/lgbt/ doesn't even pretend to care about high culture.

[Anonymous No.19673363]

>>19673355
Yes I did thanks a lot. I should really get around to reading that book.

[Anonymous No.19673366]

>>19673008
It appears anal sex was considered an ignominious activity for obvious physiological reasons.

[Anonymous No.19673372]

>>19673358
Try making a /lit/ general.