I wonder if it was one of those things like having a jacked up pickup truck with lights all over it and loud exhaust. Yeah, some consider it “manly”, but most are like “Yeah, no…” but historians picked up the notes where people people liked getting blowjobs and now everyone in ancient Rome liked brojobs as a sign of manliness.
Well, it’s a bit of a thing about Roman sexuality not lining up to modern ideas of sexuality. Essentially, ‘homosexual’ and ‘heterosexual’ were not widely recognized groupings. Instead, sexuality was largely figured on an ‘active’ vs. ‘passive’ dichotomy. Attraction to the same sex (at least for men - women were given less attention in this field) was not considered abnormal, nor was same-sex behavior. But which role you took in same-sex behavior was extremely important.
In addition, it’s widely recognized that Roman men used sexuality as an expression of their own virility and power. While they could go overboard and receive censure (moderation was highly valued amongst the Romans), in general, a Roman man who ‘conquered’ a non-Roman (or very certain Romans - actors were considered acceptable partners) man was thought to be exercising an entirely normal and manly behavior.
In that sense, it’s not so different than sexuality today (or at least, when I was a youth, I guess I’m pretty detached from ‘normal’ social circles anymore), wherein men are generally thought well of for high levels of sexual activity. The difference is that in that modern conception, only women would be praiseworthy for taking as a partner, whereas in the Roman conception, anyone you ‘top’ would be praiseworthy for taking as a partner (and conversely, anyone you ‘bottomed’ for, including a woman, would be emasculating).
We kinda already have modern examples. Pre-internet(wide spread), shows like Beverly Hills, 90210 gave foreigners the impression that everyone in the US acted that way. Yeah, sure, some Americans acted that way, but not many.
I wonder if it was one of those things like having a jacked up pickup truck with lights all over it and loud exhaust. Yeah, some consider it “manly”, but most are like “Yeah, no…” but historians picked up the notes where people people liked getting blowjobs and now everyone in ancient Rome liked brojobs as a sign of manliness.
Well, it’s a bit of a thing about Roman sexuality not lining up to modern ideas of sexuality. Essentially, ‘homosexual’ and ‘heterosexual’ were not widely recognized groupings. Instead, sexuality was largely figured on an ‘active’ vs. ‘passive’ dichotomy. Attraction to the same sex (at least for men - women were given less attention in this field) was not considered abnormal, nor was same-sex behavior. But which role you took in same-sex behavior was extremely important.
In addition, it’s widely recognized that Roman men used sexuality as an expression of their own virility and power. While they could go overboard and receive censure (moderation was highly valued amongst the Romans), in general, a Roman man who ‘conquered’ a non-Roman (or very certain Romans - actors were considered acceptable partners) man was thought to be exercising an entirely normal and manly behavior.
In that sense, it’s not so different than sexuality today (or at least, when I was a youth, I guess I’m pretty detached from ‘normal’ social circles anymore), wherein men are generally thought well of for high levels of sexual activity. The difference is that in that modern conception, only women would be praiseworthy for taking as a partner, whereas in the Roman conception, anyone you ‘top’ would be praiseworthy for taking as a partner (and conversely, anyone you ‘bottomed’ for, including a woman, would be emasculating).
We kinda already have modern examples. Pre-internet(wide spread), shows like Beverly Hills, 90210 gave foreigners the impression that everyone in the US acted that way. Yeah, sure, some Americans acted that way, but not many.