Sexuality of Alexander

[Linda]

JanetMany religious groups try to prescribe what is normal in sexual behaviour, and this has extended to what sexual positions can be used...One can argue from "nature" or any other way of deciding what is moral/immoral, natural/perverse. eg as Sikander said, homosexuality is evident in the animal kingdom. It just is. A leading opponent of gay rights in the UK, Baroness Young, was shown evidence of animals indulging in same sex relations, and she just screwed up her eyes and looked away. She didn't want to believe it existed, as it undermined all her feelings that homosexuality was a human perversion brought on by godlessness and the devil. There is some evidence of a homosexual gene - but for people who are religious that is a difficult thing to deal with or say how it influences what they believe (if it does at all), but that is their own concern.However, you are arguing that Alexander was upright, moral etc within his own society. That society did not censure homosexual behaviour or feelings per se, and nor did Alexander. I think you are putting onto him your own feelings of what is right and moral, and being selective in your reading of events. Which is, I suppose, something we all have to be careful of.Anyway. It's a beautiful day. :)Linda

[jan]

Hi Linda,I believe that everyone does exactly what you say, and that is places Alexander where they want him to be. My viewpoint is not so much what I want him to be, as he is of yesterday, and it does not really matter now anyway, but rather, what I am reading and how it comes across. I consider the source.Alexander is a bit of prig. It is that simple.He is highminded, and quite lofty. As for the gay world today, all who wish to make Alexander will, and all who are straight, will do that too. It is a matter of ideals, I suspect.To

[jan]

I was interrupted, but I read in Curtius that supposedly Bagoas used his body to please Alexander. That kind mean anything, but I am inclined to believe that when a man is castrated his body part is not the usual. So I had no real idea of what Curtius meant. I imagine that the world of sodomists believe that he practiced sodomy. However, I believe that Curtius used a story intended to hurt and malign as a gossip does, and that there is little truth in it at all. After all Orxines hurled his comments with sarcasm and anger, so that I believe Alexander and Bagoas innocent of the implication.

[S]

Greetings Jan,First, castration can take several forms, and depending on how it is done, a man may or may not appear to have a normal organ. Also, depending on the cut, a man may or may not be able to "perform". There is no single way of castration and no single result to the primary sex organ.Sodomy is not the only act that gay men utilize- nor do only gay men do so- it's a common enough act for *all* sorts; I won't go into details because that information is available elsewhere and I prefer to have this site non-censured by American libraries. However, I think a lot of focus is on penetration, when it need not be an aspect of sex at all. Regards,
Sikander

[Linda]

Jan This could go on for ages, this discussion, but I don't think there is any implication in Curtius that Alexander is doing anything morally wrong, only that he listened to a favourite rather than a nobleman. The moalistic scorn is poured on Bagoas. Such are the double standards.. Your earlier point that A was a prig - well, again, I think that this is something that has developed during the dark years when historians ignored his interest in men/boys. He wasn't interested in women very much they said, so therefore he was not interested in sex. Whereas, Arrian, says little about this, Curtius has various sexual stories, and Plutarch says he has a normal appetite. The "p" word is not mentioned. He doesnt have the same reputation as his father, as a lusty lad, but he isn't a prig. Disapproval of rape and prostitution does not mean he was a prig.However, I do think it is interesting that the statement about "sleep and sex reminding him he is mortal" is nowaday mostly used to determine his attitude to sex rather than his attitude to his mortality/immortality. Does show our preoccupations.. Maybe he could equally have said sleep and going to the toilet.