Homosexuality

[TurquoiseSunset]

I don't think I can call myself Christian anymore. If God will not save those who merely love members of their own sex then I don't know if God is all I think He is. If He really cares about that then he is not the great God of wisdom and love that I take him to be. This discussion is really depressing to me. My faith is helping me so much but I can't imagine the gay people I know not being allowed into heaven just because they are gay. I simply cannot imagine it. I would rather go to hell or into oblivion with them than tell them they are somehow impure or lesser than me.

Please don't give up your religion over this. Like I said in my previous comments, not all Christians believe homosexuality is a sin, because they don't agree with the translation/interpretation of the Bible, etc. I'm not saying however, that one brand of Christianity is better than another. They're just different.

So, like Mutatis said, maybe Catholicism is not for you. Maybe you should try a non-denominational church that also welcomes gays?

[Shea]

I don't think I can call myself Christian anymore. If God will not save those who merely love members of their own sex then I don't know if God is all I think He is. If He really cares about that then he is not the great God of wisdom and love that I take him to be. This discussion is really depressing to me. My faith is helping me so much but I can't imagine the gay people I know not being allowed into heaven just because they are gay. I simply cannot imagine it. I would rather go to hell or into oblivion with them than tell them they are somehow impure or lesser than me.

Please don't allow what I've said to depress you. I wasn't trying to say that everyone has to believe the way I do. I sincerely was trying to defend my position. It can be very depressing thinking that most of my family and friends probably will not be joining me in heaven, if what I believe is accurate. You may not think it's accurate, I do, and really that's okay. I've learned to accept it and you really don't have to agree with me if you don't want to. :)

[OrphanPip]

Darcy, the largest Protestant denomination in Canada, the United Church of Canada, is largely gay affirming. The BC branch of the Anglicans are pretty liberal too. The UCC comes out of the social gospel movement, so it is pretty left leaning on all issues.

[cacian]

Please don't allow what I've said to depress you. I wasn't trying to say that everyone has to believe the way I do. I sincerely was trying to defend my position. It can be very depressing thinking that most of my family and friends probably will not be joining me in heaven, if what I believe is accurate. You may not think it's accurate, I do, and really that's okay. I've learned to accept it and you really don't have to agree with me if you don't want to. :)

It is another very good point you bring here Shea.
One has many beliefs and every belief is different.
I believe not in punishement and hatred towards people on the ground of differences manners or actions and I believe there is a God too.
I doubt that the Bible is the final words of God and doubt the Bible being accurate let alone true. This does not stop me from believing there is a higher being a God that does not give toss whether you are straight forward or gay.
Are my belief accurate?
As far as I know yes because none of my beliefs implicate judgement or prejudice against others.
My beliefs do not prevent me from living amongst differences on the contrary my beliefs allow me to live and let live and not judge or say this is right or wrong so long as they are not hurting me or others.
Is my belief reflect a good deed and shows that I am a responsbile believer?
Yes I think it does.
Now why would a God punish me or others for believing something different from someone?
It makes no sense.

[Charles Darnay]

I would rather go to hell or into oblivion with them than tell them they are somehow impure or lesser than me.

Who wouldn't? Really, if Heaven existed and was just for those who followed every single law in the Old and New Testament, it would be like spending an eternity in the most awkward doctor's waiting room you have ever been in.

But don't let the fact that certain sects pick and choose whatever rules they want to follow out of an outdated book stop you from believing: that is not religion. It's deciding what makes you happy in life. For some people, the best thing in life is having that community that religious institutions provide. The idea of "we must follow this and that law" is secondary to "we are here together, and we like each other, and we support each other, and we know God supports us" - that's religion (or religious institutions).

I was never exposed to such a community, and my earlier encounters with religious types were the ones who lorded their superiority over everyone and who blatantly hated others because their book told them to. I knew that this was nothing I wanted. But I am well read when it comes to several religions, and have amalgamated a concept of god(s) that works for me.

[TurquoiseSunset]

This is going to turn into The Neverending Story...

[cacian]

This is going to turn into The Neverending Story...

LOL so true :p

[cacian]

Who wouldn't? Really, if Heaven existed and was just for those who followed every single law in the Old and New Testament, it would be like spending an eternity in the most awkward doctor's waiting room you have ever been in.

But don't let the fact that certain sects pick and choose whatever rules they want to follow out of an outdated book stop you from believing: that is not religion. It's deciding what makes you happy in life. For some people, the best thing in life is having that community that religious institutions provide. The idea of "we must follow this and that law" is secondary to "we are here together, and we like each other, and we support each other, and we know God supports us" - that's religion (or religious institutions).

I was never exposed to such a community, and my earlier encounters with religious types were the ones who lorded their superiority over everyone and who blatantly hated others because their book told them to. I knew that this was nothing I wanted. But I am well read when it comes to several religions, and have amalgamated a concept of god(s) that works for me.

Indeed.
Enough said.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

It looks like it has ended.

[TurquoiseSunset]

Hooray! :D

Looks like everyone's made their point now. On to the next! :p

[cacian]

Hooray! :D

Looks like everyone's made their point now. On to the next! :p

What about?
Heterosexuality?:p

[Shea]

What about?
Heterosexuality?:p

:lol: In which case, I'll defend my position with a bunch of Bible verses, but you don't have to agree with me. :p

[tonywalt]

We really have not explored the Koran:idea: on gays, and I'm sure we all agree that it has to be done.

[cacian]

We really have not explored the Koran:idea: on gays, and I'm sure we all agree that it has to be done.

Oh no please let's not go there unless you want a fatwa descending on you for starting the whole thing I would be careful you never who is reading these forums.:hand:

[Alexander III]

While on the subject of homosexuality, I was wondering if other guys might have experienced this:

Me and an old friend of mine went down to the beach and since the spot was secluded and twas just us and much wine, we decided to swim naked. My friend is very handsome, actually that is not right, his face is pretty, but his true beauty is his body it is awing. It's sculpted and defined to perfection, and he enjoys showing of his body to other guys because the reaction is always the same and he is a vain creature. Anyways perfect body. So I was looking at him and I stared to think, I wish I could paint him in the nude. I was genuinely admiring his body is a purely aesthetic way. This would not have startled me if not for the fact that I realized I never have and do not think I am able to admire the female body as I admired his that day. When I look at a beautiful girl, my instinct is sexual, I have never thought I wish to paint her and portray her beauty, my thoughts are simpler and more bestial, I wish to **** her. When I think of a beautiful woman I never think of her by herself on a pedestal like some ancient statue, I think of me pleasuring myself with her, I am always in the image with her. But with him there was no lust in my thought, just an honest appreciation of something beautiful, which I believe I am incapable of doing with any woman as lust shall always prevent me from possessing solely an aesthetic eye towards a female body.

Any other guys know what I mean?

[Charles Darnay]

We really have not explored the Koran:idea: on gays, and I'm sure we all agree that it has to be done.

I have read only small sections of the Koran, and while I know homosexuality is no more acceptable in it than in the Torah/Bible - I don't know the details. So unless someone has some expertise on the mater.....



While on the subject of homosexuality, I was wondering if other guys might have experienced this:

Me and an old friend of mine went down to the beach and since the spot was secluded and twas just us and much wine, we decided to swim naked. My friend is very handsome, actually that is not right, his face is pretty, but his true beauty is his body it is awing. It's sculpted and defined to perfection, and he enjoys showing of his body to other guys because the reaction is always the same and he is a vain creature. Anyways perfect body. So I was looking at him and I stared to think, I wish I could paint him in the nude. I was genuinely admiring his body is a purely aesthetic way. This would not have startled me if not for the fact that I realized I never have and do not think I am able to admire the female body as I admired his that day. When I look at a beautiful girl, my instinct is sexual, I have never thought I wish to paint her and portray her beauty, my thoughts are simpler and more bestial, I wish to **** her. When I think of a beautiful woman I never think of her by herself on a pedestal like some ancient statue, I think of me pleasuring myself with her, I am always in the image with her. But with him there was no lust in my thought, just an honest appreciation of something beautiful, which I believe I am incapable of doing with any woman as lust shall always prevent me from possessing solely an aesthetic eye towards a female body.

Any other guys know what I mean?

Maybe if you are with a girl long enough to get past the lust phase, you can see if you feel the same way about women when exposed to the same variables as men. Not that I'm judging your relationship habits.

I know a few girls who I admire aesthetically (the type that I would paint if I could paint) with no strong desire to **** them. Never had this experience with guys, but honestly, I don't have any male friends that fit this Adonis stature. I also have not seen any of them naked so there's that.

[cacian]

While on the subject of homosexuality, I was wondering if other guys might have experienced this:

Me and an old friend of mine went down to the beach and since the spot was secluded and twas just us and much wine, we decided to swim naked. My friend is very handsome, actually that is not right, his face is pretty, but his true beauty is his body it is awing. It's sculpted and defined to perfection, and he enjoys showing of his body to other guys because the reaction is always the same and he is a vain creature. Anyways perfect body. So I was looking at him and I stared to think, I wish I could paint him in the nude. I was genuinely admiring his body is a purely aesthetic way. This would not have startled me if not for the fact that I realized I never have and do not think I am able to admire the female body as I admired his that day. When I look at a beautiful girl, my instinct is sexual, I have never thought I wish to paint her and portray her beauty, my thoughts are simpler and more bestial, I wish to **** her. When I think of a beautiful woman I never think of her by herself on a pedestal like some ancient statue, I think of me pleasuring myself with her, I am always in the image with her. But with him there was no lust in my thought, just an honest appreciation of something beautiful, which I believe I am incapable of doing with any woman as lust shall always prevent me from possessing solely an aesthetic eye towards a female body.

Any other guys know what I mean?

I guess this brings to think about the evidence of body image present amongst the Greeks and the Romans ie through the enormous amount of statues of naked bodies men mainly and women that one might well wonder the reasons behind it all.

Was it because the Greeks and Romans were body conscious and did not measure and so spend most of their time daydreaming of being one, a perfectly formed body which they could not have, and so produced thousands of perfect bodies under a form of a naked statue? was it a cry for help? were they really that nasty looking.
This is one possibilty not to be sniffed at.
Or was it because they liked nude men with muscly bodied and so took up statues making and painting just to get that bit closer to what they really fancied but could not have because of their supressed beliefs.

[stlukesguild]

I guess this brings to think about the evidence of body image present amongst the Greeks and the Romans ie through the enormous amount of statues of naked bodies men mainly and women that one might well wonder the reasons behind it all.

Was it because the Greeks and Romans were body conscious and did not measure and so spend most of their time daydreaming of being one, a perfectly formed body which they could not have, and so produced thousands of perfect bodies under a form of a naked statue? was it a cry for help? were they really that nasty looking.
This is one possibilty not to be sniffed at.
Or was it because they liked nude men with muscly bodied and so took up statues making and painting just to get that bit closer to what they really fancied but could not have because of their supressed beliefs.

Cacian... it seems to me that it would make some sense to do a little research into these questions concerning history that seemingly intrigue you, rather than airing every ridiculous theory in public.

Over on "The Art Thread" I offered a somewhat in-depth history of the development of "the Nude" as a subject matter in Greco-Roman art:

I explored the development of the "nude" in art here:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64250

Again, I would caution you against making suppositions concerning the thinking of another culture based upon your own biases, values, and beliefs... especially while wholly ignoring the history of the culture you are speaking of.

It is indeed true that the nude evolves as a major subject matter of art in Greek and Roman art to an extent greater than appears in other cultures. But it is not unique. You need only look to the art of India and the whole of Western art from the Renaissance to the present.

The "fixation" upon the nude human figure as a major subject matter in Western art truly does begin with the Greeks... and owes much to the Greek belief... beginning especially in Sparta... that the human body was the most aesthetically beautiful of forms, and that it represented some ideal rooted in proportions, ratios, mathematics, motion, etc... and that the ideal toward which all sophisticated men should aspire is the combination of the perfect mind and perfect body. The average Greek youth was far more likely to have attained this physical ideal, than the average modern Westerner due to the continual physical exertions of labor. As such... the nudes in Greek art are most definitely not cries for help or representations of an unattainable ideal. Our own culture is far more guilty of such in the form of unnaturally thin models employed in fashion magazines, while in reality, many in our culture are overweight and out of shape to to our access to excess in food and sedentary lifestyle.

I say "men" specifically, because this concept was applied initially to men, and not women. The Greek ideal was an intelligent, educated athlete/warrior. Greek men frequently exercised in the nude and Greek athletes competed in the nude. The very idea that a man should be ashamed of his naked body was imagined as a sign of lowly barbarism. With the exception of the Spartans, women were excluded from displays of public nudity... or even from attending events at which they might see nude men exercising or engaged in sporting competitions.

This had nothing to do with the sexual preferences of the Greeks, although certainly homosexuality existed then as much as it has at any time and in any culture. We should recognize that the institution of what later became derogatorily termed "Greek Love"... the idea so earnestly celebrated in the Odes of Pindar and in the dialogs of Plato, in which the notion is put forth that the love between two young men is nobler and more "natural" than between a man and a woman was not inherently sexual. It could also simply refer to a profound friendship between men... one that might be strengthened by having shared the intense experiences of battle.

The bias against the display of female nudity was primarily an issue of decorum. Allowing women to participate in events of public nudity... even only as observers... was imagined as inherently bringing sexuality and vulgarity into something "ideal" and sacred. Wives, mothers, and sisters should not be seen nude in public... while courtesans and prostitutes were not the class of women that would be allowed to participate in sacred rituals or revered sporting events... nor commemorated in art. Even the idea of a nude Venus... the goddess of love and sex... was thought of as heresy. This was echoed throughout Greek society. Men habitually wore nothing more than a short cloak and exercised in the nude, while women went about draped from head to foot. Their role in the culture was nearly wholly limited to the domestic. Again, the Spartan women were the sole exception, and they scandalized the rest of Greece by showing their thighs during sporting competitions.

No female nude appears in art until the 5th century BCE... and these are largely crude in comparison to the male nudes of the era, and probably the product of lesser provincial artists.

By the end of the 5th century, sculptors began to exhibit a mastery of the female figure... but still avoided the heresy of the female nude (while reveling in it) through the invention of the draped nude. It is here, prior to Praxiteles, that we must search to find the female nude in art. Through employing a light, semi-transparent, clinging garment (wet drapery) the artist was able to at once conceal and reveal the body. As Kenneth Clark states, "The section of a limb as it swells and subsides may be delineated precisely or left to the imagination; parts of the body that are plastically satisfying can be emphasized, those less interesting can be concealed; and awkward transitions can be made smooth by the flow of line." The wet drapery is perhaps best known from the masterful figures from the Parthenon (part of the Elgin Marbles).

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_wetdrapery.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/?action=view&current=wetdrapery.jpg)

The representation of the female figure catches up with those of the male in the late 5th/4th century B.C. The so-called Venus Genetrix fully reveals the beauty of the female body through its drapery...

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_509970020_7411ab36ca_o.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/?action=view&current=509970020_7411ab36ca_o.jpg)

From the time of the great Greek master, Praxiteles (mid-4th century BCE) onward, the female nude becomes as common... and often far more common than the male nude in subsequent Greek art.

The Romans, whose art and aesthetic ideals were modeled upon the Greeks... and often employed the efforts of Greek artists, continued the tradition of celebrating the naked human body... both in life and in art. Their sculpture and painting is again just as likely... or more-so... to celebrate the naked female body as the male. The nude conveyed any number of ideas: it could suggest vulnerability... and as such slaves and conquered enemies were often displayed as naked. The nude could also suggest the perfection of the Gods, who were above any need for clothing. Of course nudity also alluded to sexuality... and the Romans... even more than the Greeks... openly celebrated human sexuality in their art and literature.

The loss of the mastery of the anatomy of the human form as seen in the art of the Middle Ages is owed directly to the Christian rejection of Greco-Roman ideals that glorified the "here and now"... the physical reality of the human body (and especially sexuality). The focus of Medieval art was upon the non-physical aspects of humanity... the soul or spirit as opposed to the body. The celebration of the human figure returns to Western art with the Renaissance and the development of Neo-Platonic Ideals in which intellectuals and theologians of the era struggled to create a balance between Greco-Roman ideals and those of Christianity.

...was it because they liked nude men with muscly bodied and so took up statues making and painting just to get that bit closer to what they really fancied but could not have because of their supressed beliefs.

Sexuality is certainly one of the major driving forces behind art... although any art student can tell you that there is a distinct gap between the outsider's fantasies of the imagined sexual relationship between the artist and his model, and the somewhat less exciting reality. Most artist's models fall far short of being anyone's sexual fantasy. Art students are forever subjected to learning to draw the human body from middle-aged (and older), overweight, and flaccid models that are far from inspiring thoughts of an erotic nature. It is little wonder that so many student artists-in-the-making abandon all thoughts of drawing or painting the nude, and turn to landscape, still life, and abstraction. It should also be noted that one is also far more likely to be able to attain one's desire of beautiful lovers (male or female) through the attainment of wealth (and thus majoring in business or law) than through the long, difficult, arduous, and often financially unstable path of the artist. Even in the instances in which the model is indeed attractive... and maybe even the mistress of the artist... the actual artistic process... while not entirely devoid of moments of erotic tension... is far more mundane... professional... focused upon the artistic efforts... than is suggested in some fantasy.

I should also note that the Greeks and Romans were far from being having to suppress their sexual desires as a result of their religious beliefs, and far more open and celebratory of human sexuality than even our culture.

[MarkBastable]

I guess this brings to think about the evidence of body image present amongst the Greeks and the Romans ie through the enormous amount of statues of naked bodies men mainly and women that one might well wonder the reasons behind it all.

Was it because the Greeks and Romans were body conscious and did not measure and so spend most of their time daydreaming of being one, a perfectly formed body which they could not have, and so produced thousands of perfect bodies under a form of a naked statue? was it a cry for help? were they really that nasty looking.
This is one possibilty not to be sniffed at.
Or was it because they liked nude men with muscly bodied and so took up statues making and painting just to get that bit closer to what they really fancied but could not have because of their supressed beliefs.

Cacian... it seems to me that it would make some sense to do a little research into these questions concerning history that seemingly intrigue you, rather than airing every ridiculous theory in public.

Over on "The Art Thread" I offered a somewhat in-depth history of the development of "the Nude" as a subject matter in Greco-Roman art:

I explored the development of the "nude" in art here:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64250

Again, I would caution you against making suppositions concerning the thinking of another culture based upon your own biases, values, and beliefs... especially while wholly ignoring the history of the culture you are speaking of.

It is indeed true that the nude evolves as a major subject matter of art in Greek and Roman art to an extent greater than appears in other cultures. But it is not unique. You need only look to the art of India and the whole of Western art from the Renaissance to the present.

The "fixation" upon the nude human figure as a major subject matter in Western art truly does begin with the Greeks... and owes much to the Greek belief... beginning especially in Sparta... that the human body was the most aesthetically beautiful of forms, and that it represented some ideal rooted in proportions, ratios, mathematics, motion, etc... and that the ideal toward which all sophisticated men should aspire is the combination of the perfect mind and perfect body. The average Greek youth was far more likely to have attained this physical ideal, than the average modern Westerner due to the continual physical exertions of labor. As such... the nudes in Greek art are most definitely not cries for help or representations of an unattainable ideal. Our own culture is far more guilty of such in the form of unnaturally thin models employed in fashion magazines.

I say "men" specifically, because this concept was applied initially to men, and not women. The Greek ideal was an intelligent, educated athlete/warrior. Greek men frequently exercised in the nude and Greek athletes competed in the nude. The very idea that a man should be ashamed of his naked body was imagined as a sign of lowly barbarism. With the exception of the Spartans, women were excluded from displays of public nudity... or even from attending events at which they might see nude men exercising or engaged in sporting competitions.

This had nothing to do with the sexual preferences of the Greeks, although certainly homosexuality existed then as much as it has at any time and in any culture. We should recognize that the institution of what later became derogatorily termed "Greek Love"... the idea so earnestly celebrated in the Odes of Pindar and in the dialogs of Plato, in which the notion is put forth that the love between two young men is nobler and more "natural" than between a man and a woman was not inherently sexual. It could also simply refer to a profound friendship between men... one that might be strengthened by having shared the intense experiences of battle.

The bias against the display of female nudity was primarily an issue of decorum. Allowing women to participate in events of public nudity... even only as observers... was imagined as inherently bringing sexuality and vulgarity into something "ideal" and sacred. Wives, mothers, and sisters should not be seen nude in public... while courtesans and prostitutes were not the class of women that would be allowed to participate in sacred rituals or revered sporting events... nor commemorated in art. Even the idea of a nude Venus... the goddess of love and sex... was thought of as heresy. This was echoed throughout Greek society. Men habitually wore nothing more than a short cloak and exercised in the nude, while women went about draped from head to foot. Their role in the culture was nearly wholly limited to the domestic. Again, the Spartan women were the sole exception, and they scandalized the rest of Greece by showing their thighs during sporting competitions.

No female nude appears in art until the 5th century BCE... and these are largely crude in comparison to the male nudes of the era, and probably the product of lesser provincial artists.

By the end of the 5th century, sculptors began to exhibit a mastery of the female figure... but still avoided the heresy of the female nude (while reveling in it) through the invention of the draped nude. It is here, prior to Praxiteles, that we must search to find the female nude in art. Through employing a light, semi-transparent, clinging garment (wet drapery) the artist was able to at once conceal and reveal the body. As Kenneth Clark states, "The section of a limb as it swells and subsides may be delineated precisely or left to the imagination; parts of the body that are plastically satisfying can be emphasized, those less interesting can be concealed; and awkward transitions can be made smooth by the flow of line." The wet drapery is perhaps best known from the masterful figures from the Parthenon (part of the Elgin Marbles).

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_wetdrapery.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/?action=view&current=wetdrapery.jpg)

The representation of the female figure catches up with those of the male in the late 5th/4th century B.C. The so-called Venus Genetrix fully reveals the beauty of the female body through its drapery...

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_509970020_7411ab36ca_o.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/?action=view&current=509970020_7411ab36ca_o.jpg)

From the time of the great Greek master, Praxiteles (mid-4th century BCE) onward, the female nude becomes as common... and often far more common than the male nude in subsequent Greek art.

The Romans, whose art and aesthetic ideals were modeled upon the Greeks... and often employed the efforts of Greek artists, continued the tradition of celebrating the naked human body... both in life and in art. Their sculpture and painting is again just as likely... or more-so... to celebrate the naked female body as the male. The nude conveyed any number of ideas: it could suggest vulnerability... and as such slaves and conquered enemies were often displayed as naked. The nude could also suggest the perfection of the Gods, who were above any need for clothing. Of course nudity also alluded to sexuality... and the Romans... even more than the Greeks... openly celebrated human sexuality in their art and literature.

The loss of the mastery of the anatomy of the human form as seen in the art of the Middle Ages is owed directly to the Christian rejection of Greco-Roman ideals that glorified the "here and now"... the physical reality of the human body (and especially sexuality). The focus of Medieval art was upon the non-physical aspects of humanity... the soul or spirit as opposed to the body. The celebration of the human figure returns to Western art with the Renaissance and the development of Neo-Platonic Ideals in which intellectuals and theologians of the era struggled to create a balance between Greco-Roman ideals and those of Christianity.

...was it because they liked nude men with muscly bodied and so took up statues making and painting just to get that bit closer to what they really fancied but could not have because of their supressed beliefs.

Sexuality is certainly one of the major driving forces behind art... although any art student can tell you that there is a distinct gap between the fantasies of the artist and his model and the reality. Most artist's models fall far short of being anyone's sexual fantasy. One is also far more likely to be able to attain one's desire of beautiful lovers (male or female) through the attainment of wealth than through the long, difficult, arduous, and often financially unstable path of the artist. Even in the instances in which the model is indeed attractive... and maybe even the mistress of the artist... the actual artistic process... while not entirely devoid of moments of erotic tension... is far more mundane... professional... focused upon the artistic efforts... than is suggested in some fantasy. I should also note that the Greeks and Romans were far from being having to suppress their sexual desires as a result of their religious beliefs, and far more open and celebratory of human sexuality than even our culture.

Possibly the longest and most articulate weary sigh in the history of LitNet.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

:lol:

[tonywalt]

I guess this brings to think about the evidence of body image present amongst the Greeks and the Romans ie through the enormous amount of statues of naked bodies men mainly and women that one might well wonder the reasons behind it all.

Was it because the Greeks and Romans were body conscious and did not measure and so spend most of their time daydreaming of being one, a perfectly formed body which they could not have, and so produced thousands of perfect bodies under a form of a naked statue? was it a cry for help? were they really that nasty looking.
This is one possibilty not to be sniffed at.
Or was it because they liked nude men with muscly bodied and so took up statues making and painting just to get that bit closer to what they really fancied but could not have because of their supressed beliefs.

Cacian... it seems to me that it would make some sense to do a little research into these questions concerning history that seemingly intrigue you, rather than airing every ridiculous theory in public.

Over on "The Art Thread" I offered a somewhat in-depth history of the development of "the Nude" as a subject matter in Greco-Roman art:

I explored the development of the "nude" in art here:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64250

Again, I would caution you against making suppositions concerning the thinking of another culture based upon your own biases, values, and beliefs... especially while wholly ignoring the history of the culture you are speaking of.

It is indeed true that the nude evolves as a major subject matter of art in Greek and Roman art to an extent greater than appears in other cultures. But it is not unique. You need only look to the art of India and the whole of Western art from the Renaissance to the present.

The "fixation" upon the nude human figure as a major subject matter in Western art truly does begin with the Greeks... and owes much to the Greek belief... beginning especially in Sparta... that the human body was the most aesthetically beautiful of forms, and that it represented some ideal rooted in proportions, ratios, mathematics, motion, etc... and that the ideal toward which all sophisticated men should aspire is the combination of the perfect mind and perfect body. The average Greek youth was far more likely to have attained this physical ideal, than the average modern Westerner due to the continual physical exertions of labor. As such... the nudes in Greek art are most definitely not cries for help or representations of an unattainable ideal. Our own culture is far more guilty of such in the form of unnaturally thin models employed in fashion magazines, while in reality, many in our culture are overweight and out of shape to to our access to excess in food and sedentary lifestyle.

I say "men" specifically, because this concept was applied initially to men, and not women. The Greek ideal was an intelligent, educated athlete/warrior. Greek men frequently exercised in the nude and Greek athletes competed in the nude. The very idea that a man should be ashamed of his naked body was imagined as a sign of lowly barbarism. With the exception of the Spartans, women were excluded from displays of public nudity... or even from attending events at which they might see nude men exercising or engaged in sporting competitions.

This had nothing to do with the sexual preferences of the Greeks, although certainly homosexuality existed then as much as it has at any time and in any culture. We should recognize that the institution of what later became derogatorily termed "Greek Love"... the idea so earnestly celebrated in the Odes of Pindar and in the dialogs of Plato, in which the notion is put forth that the love between two young men is nobler and more "natural" than between a man and a woman was not inherently sexual. It could also simply refer to a profound friendship between men... one that might be strengthened by having shared the intense experiences of battle.

The bias against the display of female nudity was primarily an issue of decorum. Allowing women to participate in events of public nudity... even only as observers... was imagined as inherently bringing sexuality and vulgarity into something "ideal" and sacred. Wives, mothers, and sisters should not be seen nude in public... while courtesans and prostitutes were not the class of women that would be allowed to participate in sacred rituals or revered sporting events... nor commemorated in art. Even the idea of a nude Venus... the goddess of love and sex... was thought of as heresy. This was echoed throughout Greek society. Men habitually wore nothing more than a short cloak and exercised in the nude, while women went about draped from head to foot. Their role in the culture was nearly wholly limited to the domestic. Again, the Spartan women were the sole exception, and they scandalized the rest of Greece by showing their thighs during sporting competitions.

No female nude appears in art until the 5th century BCE... and these are largely crude in comparison to the male nudes of the era, and probably the product of lesser provincial artists.

By the end of the 5th century, sculptors began to exhibit a mastery of the female figure... but still avoided the heresy of the female nude (while reveling in it) through the invention of the draped nude. It is here, prior to Praxiteles, that we must search to find the female nude in art. Through employing a light, semi-transparent, clinging garment (wet drapery) the artist was able to at once conceal and reveal the body. As Kenneth Clark states, "The section of a limb as it swells and subsides may be delineated precisely or left to the imagination; parts of the body that are plastically satisfying can be emphasized, those less interesting can be concealed; and awkward transitions can be made smooth by the flow of line." The wet drapery is perhaps best known from the masterful figures from the Parthenon (part of the Elgin Marbles).

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_wetdrapery.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/?action=view&current=wetdrapery.jpg)

The representation of the female figure catches up with those of the male in the late 5th/4th century B.C. The so-called Venus Genetrix fully reveals the beauty of the female body through its drapery...

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_509970020_7411ab36ca_o.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/?action=view&current=509970020_7411ab36ca_o.jpg)

From the time of the great Greek master, Praxiteles (mid-4th century BCE) onward, the female nude becomes as common... and often far more common than the male nude in subsequent Greek art.

The Romans, whose art and aesthetic ideals were modeled upon the Greeks... and often employed the efforts of Greek artists, continued the tradition of celebrating the naked human body... both in life and in art. Their sculpture and painting is again just as likely... or more-so... to celebrate the naked female body as the male. The nude conveyed any number of ideas: it could suggest vulnerability... and as such slaves and conquered enemies were often displayed as naked. The nude could also suggest the perfection of the Gods, who were above any need for clothing. Of course nudity also alluded to sexuality... and the Romans... even more than the Greeks... openly celebrated human sexuality in their art and literature.

The loss of the mastery of the anatomy of the human form as seen in the art of the Middle Ages is owed directly to the Christian rejection of Greco-Roman ideals that glorified the "here and now"... the physical reality of the human body (and especially sexuality). The focus of Medieval art was upon the non-physical aspects of humanity... the soul or spirit as opposed to the body. The celebration of the human figure returns to Western art with the Renaissance and the development of Neo-Platonic Ideals in which intellectuals and theologians of the era struggled to create a balance between Greco-Roman ideals and those of Christianity.

...was it because they liked nude men with muscly bodied and so took up statues making and painting just to get that bit closer to what they really fancied but could not have because of their supressed beliefs.

Sexuality is certainly one of the major driving forces behind art... although any art student can tell you that there is a distinct gap between the outsider's fantasies of the imagined sexual relationship between the artist and his model, and the somewhat less exciting reality. Most artist's models fall far short of being anyone's sexual fantasy. Art students are forever subjected to learning to draw the human body from middle-aged (and older), overweight, and flaccid models that are far from inspiring thoughts of an erotic nature. It is little wonder that so many student artists-in-the-making abandon all thoughts of drawing or painting the nude, and turn to landscape, still life, and abstraction. It should also be noted that one is also far more likely to be able to attain one's desire of beautiful lovers (male or female) through the attainment of wealth (and thus majoring in business or law) than through the long, difficult, arduous, and often financially unstable path of the artist. Even in the instances in which the model is indeed attractive... and maybe even the mistress of the artist... the actual artistic process... while not entirely devoid of moments of erotic tension... is far more mundane... professional... focused upon the artistic efforts... than is suggested in some fantasy.

I should also note that the Greeks and Romans were far from being having to suppress their sexual desires as a result of their religious beliefs, and far more open and celebratory of human sexuality than even our culture.

Hm. On this note - How 'bout them Bears?! Pre season squeak over Browns. Artistic style of play, yet weaved beautifully into muscular Utility.

[MarkBastable]

:lol:

Hey, it's not funny. I entirely approve.

In the context with which stluke was working, my own weary sighs tend to be any compatible two of:

a) longer
b) a lot shorter
c) less articulate


Which is why I tend not to hit 'Send'.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Oh, I found both your comment funny (because it's true) and stluke's post insightful, as always.

[MarkBastable]

Oh, I found both your comment funny (because it's true) and stluke's post insightful, as always.

Yerahno. I was vamping with the second post.

[Sydneysider]

I work in the entertainment business. As a result I am surrounded by gay and straight and bisexual people. I have no problem other than nobody wants to sleep with me.

[cacian]

I work in the entertainment business. As a result I am surrounded by gay and straight and bisexual people. I have no problem other than nobody wants to sleep with me.

Hi Sydneysider.
Sleeping is the easy bit it is the getting there that is not.
May you should make the move instead of waiting and hoping someone will.

[Sydneysider]

Hi Sydneysider.
Sleeping is the easy bit it is the getting there that is not.
May you should make the move instead of waiting and hoping someone will.


Thanks for the welcome cacian.

Sadly I am so ugly the thought of me with another insults my aesthetic ideal. And theirs! :-)

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I like you, Sydney. :lol:

[Sydneysider]

There is hope yet!!! :-D

Nice to meet you. :-)

[cacian]

Thanks for the welcome cacian.

Sadly I am so ugly the thought of me with another insults my aesthetic ideal. And theirs! :-)

May I ask which side of the entertainment world are you in if that is OK. It would help to get a broader picture of where you are coming from.

[Sydneysider]

I have at times been involved in performance, lugging and sweat, television, film, management, etc. I am a musician by trade. My entire family is in this business.

All prettier than I. ;-)

Of course this thread is not about me. I am sorry if I have derailed it.

[cacian]

I have at times been involved in performance, lugging and sweat, television, film, management, etc. I am a musician by trade. My entire family is in this business.

All prettier than I. ;-)

Of course this thread is not about me. I am sorry if I have derailed it.

Lugging and sweat is an expression I have never heard of until now.
A whole family involved is incredible. I could not begin to imagine.

[Sydneysider]

It is a small family. My brother is very successful staging shows all around the world. I believe over six hundred so far this year. He is a producer.

His son is a film maker.

Our 85 year old dad manages a rehearsal studio.

I play drums and percussion having begun my professional career in the early 80's. Toured heavily until burnout set in. I mainly teach now. Have worked on tv, radio, stage etc.

This career put me in touch with many gay people. I well remember when aids first struck. Many friends and colleagues passed away, both male and female. That horrible disease took many friends.

[cacian]

It is a small family. My brother is very successful staging shows all around the world. I believe over six hundred so far this year. He is a producer.

His son is a film maker.

Our 85 year old dad manages a rehearsal studio.

I play drums and percussion having begun my professional career in the early 80's. Toured heavily until burnout set in. I mainly teach now. Have worked on tv, radio, stage etc.

This career put me in touch with many gay people. I well remember when aids first struck. Many friends and colleagues passed away, both male and female. That horrible disease took many friends.

You are one lucky person to have had such a diverse and musical experiences.
Many people dream of it all from the sofa of their living room.
Aids is indeed one terrible thing.
It is scary because it affects everybody regardless of sexual orientations.

[Sydneysider]

Yes indeed aids is dreadful. In the early days when people did not understand it, many friends who had been diagnosed began acting bizzarely. Mainly leaping into shows as if desperate to perform. I played several such shows, wondering what was going on? Some months later these people had died.

Happily the disease is better managed today and I have not lost a friend to it in years.

Getting back to the gay and straight issue, I don't care about a person's sexual orientation. Indeed most gay men I have known have been the most civilised people I have yet met. I equate homophobia with racism. That is my choice of course. Rightly or wrongly.

Not many gay people have beaten straight people to death. Many straight people have on the other hand killed many homosexuals.

[cacian]

Yes indeed aids is dreadful. In the early days when people did not understand it, many friends who had been diagnosed [QUOTE]began acting bizzarely. Mainly leaping into shows as if desperate to perform. I played several such shows, wondering what was going on? Some months later these people had died.

Happily the disease is better managed today and I have not lost a friend to it in years.

Yes that is one amasing strength mankind does show which is the ability to come together to fight something as tragic as this.



Getting back to the gay and straight issue, I don't care about a person's sexual orientation. Indeed most gay men I have known have been the most civilised people I have yet met. I equate homophobia with racism. That is my choice of course. Rightly or wrongly.
I think gay or not people are just like any other, civislised and most of all humans.
I think the issue is not the sexual orientations as such, but the actual pyschic of someone finding faults in everything one comes across with.
Homesexuality is just the cause that allows for hatred to breed.
Hatred is out of touch and more often it is the root cause to the inability to associate with people of different aspirations roots or orientations. Finding a reason to dislike something is because that something is either out of reach for someone to understand it or because the concerned cannot associate anything with anybody.
It is an alienation towards anything that is normally just another fact of life which becomes suddenly the abnormality because the subjected to it does not have a grasp of his or her own self/ feelings/environment/identity and so treats it as a hostility rather then the norms.


Not many gay people have beaten straight people to death. Many straight people have on the other hand killed many homosexuals.

That is true reality across the globe and goes beyond culture religion or faith.

[Sydneysider]

I could not agree more. Well said.

I dislike all forms of xenophobia. Recently I watched an old documentary on the history of rock n roll. So many arguments against it based in the idea of the "savage rhythm" being evil and dangerous. This idea existed in Nazi Germany as well. Rhythm itself seen as evil. All these mindless stereotypes based in the false comfort that is the idea that one type of human is better than another, is madness.

At least to me.

[cacian]

I could not agree more. Well said.

I dislike all forms of xenophobia. Recently I watched an old documentary on the history of rock n roll. So many arguments against it based in the idea of the "savage rhythm" being evil and dangerous. This idea existed in Nazi Germany as well. Rhythm itself seen as evil. All these mindless stereotypes based in the false comfort that is the idea that one type of human is better than another, is madness.

At least to me.

Xenophobia is like a venerial disease it spreads quickly but slowly and does not go away until one day a mighty drug comes along and destroys it once and for all.
I am a firm believer in justice. Umpredictable is often seen as unlucky because it catches one unprepared but it also has its moment of true goodness and when it does hit the nail it does do justice where justice's due.
I have never heard of 'savage rythm' although I have heard of lily savage though haha the two are not related of course.
I cannot imagine how a rhythm that is exact and which create a tune could be evil.
I guess evil is the drive that wants to dismantle/wreck anything because it did not could not get there first.