I’m quite ill-informed on the Roman Empire, but I have a feeling this foid is immensely wrong

[cromagnon]

Lefty history videos like this that try to align ancient peoples with modern day values always end up being skewed or completely wrong, ngl.

 

[Lebgfinal]

why do she look like me

 

[cromagnon]

why do she look like me

Not really

 

[Gengar]

I thought this was a guy.

 

[NZb6Air]

the roman empire adopted christianity

 

[bishounen0bladee]

You say yourself you are ill informed so let me explain for you
Skirts: Roman men wore skirts into battle, and would wear togas as casual wear which are pretty similar.
Homosexuality: It sort of depends. For male homosexual relationships free Roman citizens were free to have sex with men if they wanted to, just as long as they were the penetrator. Being the penetrated was seen as submissive and feminine, and was usually reserved for slaves, younger men, or just men who were deviant. Female homosexuality was mostly seen as a bit scandalous. Definitely not seen as "sinful" in either case, and being the top in a male homosexual relationship was even seen as completely normal. Even Hadrian, one of the emperors of Rome was a known homosexual, in love with Antoninus (I don't blame him )

Racism: Romans were not racist, but not tolerant in the same way that you would expect of someone who is not racist today. They were usually Roman supremacists, viewing anything outside of Rome as barbarian (this includes celts and gauls who make up a significant genetic portion of modern British, Irish and French people who we would usually call white), and then too black people or Africans who were Roman citizens were fine, because they were Roman.

Her post is a bit misleading and doesn't go into much nuance, but it's overall more accurate than whatever alpha male fantasy you have imagined the Romans to be.

 

[got.daim]

what

 

[iblamechico]

one of the emperors of Rome was a known homosexual, in love with Antoninus (I don't blame him )

You're walking on thin ice boyooo

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

Lefty history videos like this that try to align ancient peoples with modern day values always end up being skewed or completely wrong, ngl.

View attachment 3111786

Romans had racism but in the form of “ethnonstionalism” race as a true concept east a true thing but they did note physical differences between Northern Europeans and Aethiopoans and themselves.

Homosexuality wasn’t a sin until the romans became Christian 380. But it wasn’t something widely practiced as most people have always been heterosexual.

Yes Romans worse skirts and considered “pants” as barbarian clothes makes sense as only European tribes of Germanic Celtic and Slavic extraction worse pants.

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

You say yourself you are ill informed so let me explain for you
Skirts: Roman men wore skirts into battle, and would wear togas as casual wear which are pretty similar.
Homosexuality: It sort of depends. For male homosexual relationships free Roman citizens were free to have sex with men if they wanted to, just as long as they were the penetrator. Being the penetrated was seen as submissive and feminine, and was usually reserved for slaves, younger men, or just men who were deviant. Female homosexuality was mostly seen as a bit scandalous. Definitely not seen as "sinful" in either case, and being the top in a male homosexual relationship was even seen as completely normal. Even Hadrian, one of the emperors of Rome was a known homosexual, in love with Antoninus (I don't blame him )

View attachment 3111892

Racism: Romans were not racist, but not tolerant in the same way that you would expect of someone who is not racist today. They were usually Roman supremacists, viewing anything outside of Rome as barbarian (this includes celts and gauls who make up a significant genetic portion of modern British, Irish and French people who we would usually call white), and then too black people or Africans who were Roman citizens were fine, because they were Roman.

Her post is a bit misleading and doesn't go into much nuance, but it's overall more accurate than whatever alpha male fantasy you have imagined the Romans to be.

Nigger did you just say what I just said but in a long winded way

 

[bishounen0bladee]

You're walking on thin ice boyooo

This whole forum is about measuring how attractive men are
You guys of all people should understand that Antoninus is good looking

 

[bishounen0bladee]

Nigger did you just say what I just said but in a long winded way

Just providing as much info as possible
People on both sides act retarded about Roman civilisation and I just want to make clear the actul truth of the matter.

 

[cromagnon]

Her post is a bit misleading and doesn't go into much nuance,

Which is why I wanted clarification. Leftist people online, like I said originally in the post, tend to skew historical facts and texts towards their own political view with falsified interpretation. A good example of this would be (don’t have the link unfortunately) a self-proclaimed “Bible scholar” who was left-aligned claiming that Leviticus 18:22 does not refer to “men laying with men” but rather “men laying with boys”. As usual, it was completely incorrect…which is why I made this post. To see if she was lying out of her ass or not. I hope this makes sense, quite tired and not mentally focused atm…

@PrinceLuenLeoncur

but it's overall more accurate than whatever alpha male fantasy you have imagined the Romans to be.

Never claimed they were super duper alpha sigma males who were the epitome of masculinity.

 

[bishounen0bladee]

Which is why I wanted clarification. Leftist people online, like I said originally in the post, tend to skew historical facts and texts towards their own political view with falsified interpretation. A good example of this would be (don’t have the link unfortunately) a self-proclaimed “Bible scholar” who was left-aligned claiming that Leviticus 18:22 does not refer to “men laying with men” but rather “men laying with boys”. As usual, it was completely incorrect…which is why I made this post. To see if she was lying out of her ass or not. I hope this makes sense, quite tired and not mentally focused atm…

@PrinceLuenLeoncur


Never claimed they were super duper alpha sigma males who were the epitome of masculinity.

Well I thought that sort of alpha male view of Roman society was what you were implying by saying that she was "immensely wrong" when really the only things that are really an issue in her video are that she presents racism as being completely foreign to Roman society, and that the Roman man she plays says "homosex" which is just retarded because there's not even a latin word for gay sex or being gay because they didn't even really think about it that hard.

 

[Trilogy]

She's not "immensely" wrong but she isn't completely right either. The skirt thing is because the Romans would often wear robes (like the toga) instead of pants, because the Romans associated pants with barbarism since they were worn by Germanics and Celts.

It's true that the Romans didn't have our modern conception of race, but they were still a very chauvinistic people and looked down on others for being "barbarians", so it's not like they'd be opposed to the concept of racism

 

[2d v2]

You say yourself you are ill informed so let me explain for you
Skirts: Roman men wore skirts into battle, and would wear togas as casual wear which are pretty similar.
Homosexuality: It sort of depends. For male homosexual relationships free Roman citizens were free to have sex with men if they wanted to, just as long as they were the penetrator. Being the penetrated was seen as submissive and feminine, and was usually reserved for slaves, younger men, or just men who were deviant. Female homosexuality was mostly seen as a bit scandalous. Definitely not seen as "sinful" in either case, and being the top in a male homosexual relationship was even seen as completely normal. Even Hadrian, one of the emperors of Rome was a known homosexual, in love with Antoninus (I don't blame him )

View attachment 3111892

Racism: Romans were not racist, but not tolerant in the same way that you would expect of someone who is not racist today. They were usually Roman supremacists, viewing anything outside of Rome as barbarian (this includes celts and gauls who make up a significant genetic portion of modern British, Irish and French people who we would usually call white), and then too black people or Africans who were Roman citizens were fine, because they were Roman.

Her post is a bit misleading and doesn't go into much nuance, but it's overall more accurate than whatever alpha male fantasy you have imagined the Romans to be.

"skirt"

toga:

Like saying the japanese samurai wear a dress

So I guarentee this person is confused by modern tranny retard media into thinking they were wearing feminine clothes, when that is wrong.

The homosexuality think is also skewed, it wasn't a common practice until around the end of the roman empire, and only among the rich class. There werent gladiators and soldiers fucking men.

 

[Stunged]

 

[bishounen0bladee]

"skirt"

toga:

Like saying the japanese samurai wear a dress

So I guarentee this person is confused by modern tranny retard media into thinking they were wearing feminine clothes, when that is wrong.

The homosexuality think is also skewed, it wasn't a common practice until around the end of the roman empire, and only among the rich class. There werent gladiators and soldiers fucking men.

Stop being stupid the first one is clearly a skirt.
Togas are clearly not pants, and they over the legs openly, making them Skirt like.
The samurai did wear dresses. Kimono are literally dresses. Guess what, they also wore hakama, which are skirt pants over their kimono.
Homosexuality thing is not skewed. Under Augustus Ovid literally had to justify heterosexual sex, and even he wrote about gay sex, like almost all of his contemporaries. Nero "married" two different men. Never once did I say it was insanely common practice or that every Roman was gay, I simply said it was normal and not really a big deal as long as it was a man penetrating, and there's plenty of evidence for it taking place in the early Roman empire just like the late Roman empire. It is hard to conclusively say whether it was or was not a class thing due to the dubious nature of sources about the sex lives of slaves (outside of them being sex slaves, of which PLENTY were men serving male masters).

 

[2d v2]

Stop being stupid the first one is clearly a skirt.
Togas are clearly not pants, and they over the legs openly, making them Skirt like.
The samurai did wear dresses. Kimono are literally dresses. Guess what, they also wore hakama, which are skirt pants over their kimono.
Homosexuality thing is not skewed. Under Augustus Ovid literally had to justify heterosexual sex, and even he wrote about gay sex, like almost all of his contemporaries. Nero "married" two different men. Never once did I say it was insanely common practice or that every Roman was gay, I simply said it was normal and not really a big deal as long as it was a man penetrating, and there's plenty of evidence for it taking place in the early Roman empire just like the late Roman empire. It is hard to conclusively say whether it was or was not a class thing due to the dubious nature of sources about the sex lives of slaves (outside of them being sex slaves, of which PLENTY were men serving male masters).

Source: Woke liberal LGBT wikipedia articles and reddit transvestites

No dude, what I said is correct, I've got older books on the roman empire from the 80s and 90s. Homosexuality was in the "royal" families and so was pedophilia, because they were part of the "new world" royal families bloodline.

Gladiators and Centurions were not buttfucking

Yes, your viewpoint is skewed by modern day erasure of history, and faggotry shoved down your throat in every tv show, and in all of media.

Those clothes were not worn to look feminine. They were used because it was more convenient to make a piece of cloth into a robe/pants.

You are psyopped.

 

[bishounen0bladee]

Source: Woke liberal LGBT wikipedia articles and reddit transvestites

No dude, what I said is correct, I've got older books on the roman empire from the 80s and 90s. Homosexuality was in the "royal" families and so was pedophilia, because they were part of the "new world" royal families bloodline.

Gladiators and Centurions were not buttfucking

Yes, your viewpoint is skewed by modern day erasure of history, and faggotry shoved down your throat in every tv show, and in all of media.

Those clothes were not worn to look feminine. They were used because it was more convenient to make a piece of cloth into a robe/pants.

You are psyopped.

Thanks for not addressing anything in my argument. What books do you have? BTW Just cus a book is from the 80s and 90s doesn't mean it's more correct on the Roman Empire JFL. My viewpoint is not skewed by "modern day erasure" of history, it is founded in the evidence and the sources. I never said the clothes were worn to look feminine, I just said they were skirts or skirt like... which they are. That doesn't mean feminine it just means it's a skirt.
I am not psyopped but you might be intellectually disabled and/or completely devoid of curiousity and rigour in your approach to forming an account of history.

 

[KT-34]

I want to see her keep that same attitude when she learns they practiced slavery and didn't allow women to vote