Christian Boylove Forum

In one of Heather's posts.....


Submitted by 194 on March 1 2002 15:34:21


....I see there is an implication that while sex between free Roman men was condemned, that there is no record of condemnation of a Roman man having sex with his (male or female) slaves.[Correct me, Heather, if I have got this wrong, please:-)].

If so, I get the impression that it may not have been homosexuality per se which was being condemned, otherwise it would have been condemned with slaves as well.

I get the impression that perhaps, since slaves would be of a lower social status, that it was the social meaning of sexual behaviour was an issue; I get the impression that perhaps the socio-sexual meaning of sexual behaviour didn't matter when it came to slaves; that it didn't matter if the Roman freeman's sexual motivation was exploitative of the slave.

Regards
194............
  • Heather's Post


  • Follow ups:

    Post a follow up message:

    Username:

    Password:

    Email (optional):
    Subject:


    Message:


    Link URL:

    Link Title:


    Automatically append sigpic?