So Solon's poetry and his own words and his laws legitimizing pedophilia reveal his love for young boys; Right?
"Solon did not "legitimize pedohilia"--LOL! He regulated certain instances of it."
Message 28589765
.............................................................................................................................
It didn't take more than the first section of the article that you posted to see that Solon's law forbidding slaves to "have a boy lover" was done not to protect the child but to keep all the hot young boys for himself and his friends: " to recommend it to reputable men by the act of forbidding it to the unworthy."
The two men were at first great friends, party because they were related and partly because of the youthful good looks of Pisistratus, to whom, according to some writers, Solon was passionately devoted. This may very well be the reason why at a later date, when they took opposite sides in politics, their antagonism never carried with it any harsh or vindictive feelings; on the contrary their earlier attachment still lingered in their hearts and kept alive the cherished memory of their affection:
The embers of Zeus's flaming thunderbolt
Still glowing
as Euripides puts it. In Solon's poems, too, we can find evidence of the fact that he could not resist good looks and did not challenge love
To meet him like a boxer in the ring.
He also proposed a law which forbade slaves to rub themselves dry with oil, to practise in the gymnasium or to have a boy lover, so that his intention was evidently to class this as an honourable and dignified practise and thus, in a sense, to recommend it to reputable men by the act of forbidding it to the unworthy.
<<"I find nothing about "anally raped little boys for pleasure"">>
So what did it mean to have a boy lover?
The footnoted article that I posted [Here] states this:
Historians usually characterize the routine rape of children in early states as “love,” whether in their books they entitle Loving Boys,38 by calling the rape “pedophilia” (which translates as “love of children”), or by picturing the rape as an approved instance of “gay rights,” ignoring the fact that the boys are minors, not consenting adults. That children are not harmed by sexual relations with adults is the claim made by dozens of scholarly authors, forming a long tradition of “blaming children for their abuse, accusing children of fabricating stories of abuse” and “inspired by the admiration and gratitude of the victims” toward the abuser.39 Boys are depicted by scholars as being “lonely” and needing sex, “seductive,” and as “routinely fellating older men .... men were addicted to raping young children, both boys and girls, in order to prove their virility and dominance. ... In Sparta and Crete, husbands sometimes didn’t move in with their wives when they got married; they slept in barracks and had sex with boys.54 Wives often complained that their husbands had too little sex with them because of the boys they normally raped. Martial describes a wife yelling: “Bumming a boy again! Don’t I have a rump as well?”55
...................................
All this is what you would have us believe to be "an honourable and dignified practise".
|
