#which is why i think unfortunately gay people especially latch on to this fantasy of classical greece and rome

[maxellminidisc]

Greek and Roman power structures are why I hesitate to call most things people call "queer" about their societies queer on the internet or like when people ask the stupid question of "Do you think theyd be into bdsm?" I'm like do you WANT that kind of inherently bad for consent society to be into bdsm???

Putting my thoughts under a read more cause its lengthy and something that I've wanted to talk about for a while now!

Like I'm sure queer relationships with like 1) no weird power dynamic and 2) pedastry existed in these societies, we have always existed, but it would not have been easy. They most likely still would have had to have played the part of a man who followed the rule and roles of what a MAN had to to be considered a man on the surface of society, because if they didnt, they would've been ridiculed and seen as lesser men. A big example of one such rule in the sexual realm is men could not and should not be penetrated; penetration was the domain of those lesser than men, if you were a man who liked being penetrated you were a fucking joke. They would've even been called perverse for not having a weird power dynamic in their romantic or sexual relationship with other men.

Slaves, young boys, slave boys, etc were basically equivalent to women in classical Greek society: they are those below the status of men and thus suitable objects of ones sexual desires. Like think about how fucked up that is??? And on top of that courting was also fundamentally tied to this perception of these groups of lesser status and required guidelines, so seeming genuinely invested and lovesick in ones relationship to these lesser beings was also seen as ridiculous.

Like it was all seen as taboo for the WRONG reasons. They'd would be so confused, ridicule you, or frankly be pissed if you pointed out how awful the inherit vacuum for consent these dynamics are and rife for abuse of power these relationships would have been to begin with because you're basically questioning the standards of classical Greek masculinity.

And I also wish we discussed more how the classical periods in Greece and Rome played a part in contemporary homophobia. Like it's not all 100% the result of Christianity moving into these societies, but more so a chain with Christianity being the biggest domino to fall at the end. Rome in particular was influenced by these sexual and social ideas of class and sexual dynamics in Greece, so the undercurrent of homophobia inherit to those ideas made Christianity all the more appealing for aligning with those already establied ideas.

In the end sex was basically used the same way everything else was to men in classical Greek and Roman society: its about power, gaining power, flexing that power and through this, raising ones status in these societies. It left very little room for partnerships of equals and the little room that was there was probably incredibly suffocating for anyone who didn't want to abide by these rules and standards of masculinity or others of which they were expected to.

[spaceorphan18]

Did you see Naya and Heather in Kevin's and Jenna's podcast? Naya said that one of her more difficult scenes was Santana's rant to Kurt in season 6, that it was very mean, it blurred the lines and made Chris upset.

I didn’t listen to it, but I did hear about it!  And yeah, I was thinking about this last night.  

Just some loose thoughts - 

0. This speech isn’t very well written to begin with.  It’s redundant, completely not relevant to what Santana would actually be mad about, and I’m actually wondering if they even cut some of it out of it - because it’s weirdly edited.  I am, admittedly, amused by the Quinn Fabray line, draping over pianos, and the three dance moves, (none of which are the meanest parts of the rant, and the most Kurt-ish of the lines) but the rest of the rant itself is garbage.  

0.B - they kept needling Kurt (and therefore Chris) over his love of old people in season 6.  I’m not sure why this was constantly so funny to the writers.  It isn’t really funny at the first joke.  

1. I’ve never found any of Santana’s (or Sue’s for that matter) elongated rants very funny.  This one isn’t funny, either.  But I don’t think this is the worst one - she’s had meaner and crueler ones -- particularly aimed at Rachel, Finn, and even Rory.  (The one at Finn in Mash Off is my least favorite, but that’s a whole different discussion.) 

2. That said - I do not understand why this particular one went viral. I don’t think there was anything particularly special that made this rant any better or worse than any other rant on the show - save that it was lumped together.   People seem to latch on to overly mean things and I think, in general and I think that’s kind of sad.  

2.B Possibly alienating opinion but - my one issue with the whole push back from the angry Kurt fans was that it felt incredibly hypocritical of them to be this upset over the whole thing when they themselves had been flinging worse things at other people (namely Blaine/Darren) and that no one seemed to be that upset when people like Rory or Brody or even Will got pelted when those lines were blurred as well.  

2.C Mean-spirited things are mean, and I wish all of it had been called out on at length, and not just when flung at favorite characters. 

3. I don’t really believe it’s out of character for Santana to rant.  I do think it’s harsh to point it at Kurt, especially when Santana and Kurt have been rather cordial and tolerant of each other.  It also seems more like a vehicle for the writers to vent their own issues and criticisms (or air criticisms they’ve found online) and hiding it behind a character quirk.   

3.B Which is a thing that Glee did a lot, though they often used Sue more often to do so.  It’s a form of lampshading (a way for writers to acknowledge something without actually doing anything about it - usually as a way to get in a sexist or racist joke, etc), and I find it either lazy or way to be intentionally mean spirited. 

4. Glee could be a mean show.  Like digging into people for no other reason than the could.  Which is why I’ve never been overly fond of the writers.  I got the sense that they a) enjoyed mean spirited humor and b) would often write out mean things when they feel like they’ve been hurt by criticism of the show. 

4.B Glee was sometimes was the internet trolls come to life.  Santana’s speech was, really, just that.  

5. Glee had this weird duality where it was both progressive and regressive at the same time.  I think the duel nature stems from them wanting to push things forward that meant something to the writers -- GLEE CLUB FAMILY, GAY RIGHTS, while being stuck with the mentality of a show stuck in the 80s. 

6. I do agree with Naya’s assessment that the speech blurred the lines of reality and fantasy.  Glee has always done this.  And in season 6, they were constantly doing this - though, again, usually overtly with Sue.  

7. I can only imagine it being an awful thing for Naya to have to do.  Because it’s one thing if you can throw barbs with another actors who can take it, handle it, be comfortable trading insults in such a manner.  It’s another thing to have to throw unveiled criticisms at a good friend (and yes I think Naya and Chris are good friends) when you know that person is possibly sensitive to such criticisms and/or having a difficult time with the presented material.  I completely understand Naya would comment that this would be uncomfortably, awkward, and difficult to do.  

8. I am sad that Chris was upset by the whole thing.  I can only imagine that after having a life time of people hurling shit like this at him his whole life, to be really successful and still have to be forced to face personal insults like this is insensitive at best and cruel at worst. 

9. This is why I just can’t jump on the bandwagon of Ryan and Co being geniuses at their craft.  They claim to be anti-bullying, for example, go out of their way to do story lines around it, and then they play the mean girls themselves when they want to needle someone or someones whom they feel needs a verbal take town. Just not my cup of tea.  

10. All that said, while I’m sorry Naya was put in that position, and while I think it’s unfortunate that Chris had to go through that (again), I’m not as enraged as this post may make it seem.  It sounds like Ryan and Co’s mean spirited nature got way out of hand on this one, which makes me roll my eyes and shake my head.  But at the end of the day, while I’m sure this is another notch on the - Chris won’t be working with RM again - board; I’m sure Chris is over it, is in a pretty happy place with his millions of self-made dollars, lovely boyfriend, and happy puppies.  So there’s no real need to get angry or upset over it on Chris’s behalf.  

That’s my two cents.