Bryn- Roman Masculinity and Homosexuality

Patriarchal systems are prevalent almost everywhere in the world. As we have explored Italy, we've seen male-centric views ingrained in the country's history, particularly through its religion, art, and politics. These patriarchal practices carry through from ancient Rome, which represented masculinity as domination. In the article we read, "Roman Homosexuality" by Craig A Williams, the author explores this view on masculinity and how the acceptance of same-sex acts between men, particularly pedastry, was less about attraction and more about asserting dominance. This hyper-masculine view targets women and effeminate men as subjects who were vulnerable and easily taken advantage of to prove manliness. 

Although we haven't been to Rome yet, one example we've seen of this portrayal of masculinity is the statue of David in Florence. In the Bible, David is understood to be younger, between the ages of 13 and 19, and yet as a prominent male figure, the statue represents an older and stronger man, not a boy. This represents the fact that young boys were seen in the respect as women, as submissive, passive, and powerless. An example of this vulnerability is seen through much of the artwork and statues we saw of women at the Galleria dell' Accademia in Florence. Whereas the statue of David stands firm and wears a look of concentration and power, the women are often depicted lying supine and look soft rather than strong. This submissive versus dominant comparison is also a crucial factor in the homosexual acts in Ancient Rome. These same sex acts were not an equal relationship, but rather what one man would do to another to prove his power over the other. If the man who was supposed to be dominant was instead the recipient, and if society found out, he would be shunned and degraded as being less masculine and weak. This also meant that a relationship between two grown men was not acceptable, as there must be a distinct power dynamic that favored the dominant man.

Another factor in these homosexual acts was the status of the men or women being taken advantage of, and whether they were a free Roman or a slave. Along with so many other societys much of ancient Rome revolved around slavery and property, which also meant that only your own slaves and not others could you command or have control over. Certain acts done by young free men, however, made them susceptible to being taken advantage of, such as stealing. The hyper-masculine Roman god, Priapus, shows an example of this, as the god showed as a warning to both men and women that they would be violated if they stole from the property. 

Homosexuality in Rome was not as we define or think of it today, as a relationship, but was instead a way to prove your masculinity as dominant. Homosexual practices and there accepatance was also not about accepting people who loved the same sex, and must have involved certain factors that guaranteed a distinct power dynamic. Roman homosexuality at its core, was just another way to emphasize the patriarchal system and its connection with power and property.