That’s at minimum bi. I didn’t mean in the sense of identifying as gay

If I recall, gay greeks existed but not the same as today since they did not have husbands

Marriages also were not for love back then. They were for procreation and familial unions.

Lovers of the Theban Sacred Band took ‘sacred oaths’ to one another and retired from service together, so I would say that at the very least, Thebes has a close analogue.

and it was no where near as common as homosexuality today.

Other way around. Male same-sex behavior was rampant in Ancient Greece. Name an ancient Greek male past the 5th century BCE whose sex life is known to any serious degree, and chances are pretty good that same-sex behavior or rumored same-sex behavior is included.

I remember reading somewhere that it was still frowned upon but idk if that’s true. I might be mixing up the Roman’s. Take this comment with less than a grain of salt and if anyone knows otherwise I’d be interested to hear if I’m wrong.

The Romans had a somewhat different view of things.

To most of the Greeks (and as mentioned, the Sacred Band of Thebes breaks this somewhat; but also that there is a great deal of variance not only between city-states but also through the centuries of Classical Greek history), male same-sex behavior was acceptable within the context of a ‘lover’ and ‘beloved’, with age and social status being key to the two participants; as a sexual or romantic union, it must be considered as ‘passing’ and not replacing heterosexual relationships. An excellent example is Achilles and Patroclus in Greek mythology - whatever the intentions of Homer, many later Greeks definitely interpreted them as ‘lover’ and ‘beloved’, in which both were part of a romantic and ennobling union that degraded neither of them - yet Achilles remained married (and considered to love his wife), and Patroclus was a suitor of Helen.

For the Romans, male same-sex behavior was acceptable within the context of ‘penetrator’ and ‘penetrated’; it was never acceptable for a Roman citizen to be penetrated, but always acceptable, and even empowering, for a Roman citizen to penetrate another male - even another Roman citizen (who would be shamed by his passivity, in giving up the dignity that is essential in being a citizen of the Republic). Thus in the Roman conception, rather than being a matter of ‘mentor/student’ style relationships as Greeks, it was very much a ‘master/servant’ or, if one wishes to be more lenient, ‘Husband/wife’ within the context of antiquity patriarchy.

As the Greeks did not see the ‘passive’ participant as being a ‘wife’, effeminate and womanly, there was much less shame attached to it; as the Romans did see it this way, there was considerable shame associated with degrading one’s status of a (male) citizen with ‘womanly’ behavior. The Romans associated the more ‘romantic’ mode of same-sex behavior with the Greeks even as Hellenic influence on Rome increased, and even Romans who engaged in same-sex behavior were fond of moralizing on how the Greek influence towards loving boys was RUINING GOOD HONEST ROMAN MORALITY.

Funny enough, we DO have records of same-sex marriage celebrations amongst the Romans, though unrecognized by law, as neither party was legally a woman who could be given away to another family. At least two emperors engaged in such ceremonies, and it was at least widespread enough to merit a very strict law passed against it once the much-less-penetration-friendly faith of Christianity assumed control of the state in the 4th century AD.

Choosing to believe he was talking about boobs.

And that by young he meant 20.