Greek gods all have one thing in common

[Drifterwood]

So what I'm now wondering is this: were other forms of homosexuality viewed as unacceptable (as was a relationship between two grown men) by the Greeks on account of being 'foreign' and 'un-Greek'?

Taking it up the arse or orally (try saying that with your mouth full), made you unmanly, un Greek, it's what Johnny Foreigner did, the filthy beast. Real men aren't penetrated. That is for women and the uncultured.

Greek Pederasty was completely pure even if you got such a boner diddling boys' dicks that you had to be relieved (frottage and handjobs cultured).

Unbearded is what we would call adolescent, so most definitely illegal in our terms, unless you are a late developer and not yet a real man.

 

[LuxInTenebris]

Taking it up the arse or orally (try saying that with your mouth full), made you unmanly, un Greek, it's what Johnny Foreigner did, the filthy beast. Real men aren't penetrated. That is for women and the uncultured.

Greek Pederasty was completely pure even if you got such a boner diddling boys' dicks that you had to be relieved (frottage and handjobs cultured).

Unbearded is what we would call adolescent, so most definitely illegal in our terms, unless you are a late developer and not yet a real man.

That's exactly what I was trying to get at The questions were partly rhetorical. Your comment would also verify the depictions of the frotting of the ἐραστής cock between the closed thighs of the ἐρώμενος as seen in red-figure pottery, but I'm at a loss as to where I came across it now! It appears, then, that within (documented) Greek culture, homosexuality wasn't actually considered 'homosexuality proper' - and therefore an unclean act - unless it was a relationship of mutual consent between two grown ἄνδροi...bizarre to think about pederasty as being 'preferable' in the 21st century, although it often seems to fall quite neatly into a similar pattern in my experience.
Interestingly, the code which stated that it was acceptable for a grown man to perform the active role, but under no circumstances the passive role, was also quite prevalent in Viking culture.

 

[Drifterwood]

That's exactly what I was trying to get at

I think we would call it grooming today. For a culture that prided itself on rationality, I find their pederasty rather Clitonesque.

BTW, this subject has not previously been allowed for discussion, and it was not the subject of this thread.

 

[Johnny77]

Also, depictions would be based on totally flaccid penises, of average men, so for example,
let's say 5 inches was average then (people were a lot shorter then), and so would not look very big. And a "man" could be 16 easily, I am sure. So, taking those two things into account, and the fact, perhaps, that life was tough then, and therefore they probably didn't have a lot of time to pull on it, (so to speak), flaccid sizes were particularly small. Also, aesthetically, you don't want to distract from the whole image, and they probably considered average (mean proportioned) men, as representing everyone, as our "models" do today, and then, of course, whereas, we cover the genitals (pretty much) this might have been a mild form of "censorship" then. So I guess that is 6 things. Imagine trying to get a pair of size 15 shoes then.