The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

State Sponsored Homophobia: World Homosexuality Laws

Alnitak said:
Bomb threat interrupts gay olympics in Moscow
Click to expand...

Follow up.

Russian LGBT Sporting Event On The Verge Of Collapse Over Kremlin Pressure

Multiple venues withdrew from hosting an LGBT sporting event in Moscow at the last minute, organizers said Wednesday, putting the entire games under threat.

...

Organizers also said in a statement on the Open Games Facebook page that some venues said they were responding to “calls from the administration,” referring to the presidential administration of Vladimir Putin.
Click to expand...

LGBT community life in Russia is being snuffed out.
 
Donating to international LGBT charities is a good way for us to help.

I remember about two weeks ago when I saw that horrible documentary 'Hunted' (in an HT thread that DreamTeam created) about how gays in Russia are being stalked, captured, humiliated, beaten, and often killed.

My response immediately after watching? I took out my credit card and I donated £100 (about $165) to the UK-based Kaleidoscope Trust.

http://kaleidoscopetrust.com/

I actually got a personal e-mail back from them, thanking me for my donation. :)

The charity campaigns around the world. On the Uganda issue, they (and others) are calling for (British) Foreign Secretary William Hague and other international organisations to act.

http://kaleidoscopetrust.com/news/62

http://kaleidoscopetrust.com/news/63

I would encourage all JUBbers, if they can, to donate to this or similar charities. ..|
 
Alnitak said:
Uganda has the world's second highest fertility rate. Cultural emphasis on child birth strongly correlates to high levels of homophobia, but there are some exceptions. Russia has relatively low fertility and birth rates. I made this point somewhere else here, but can't recall where.
Click to expand...

The weird thing there is that with a higher birth rate, they should be getting more gays than anyone else, due to the womb effect.
 
Kulindahr said:
The weird thing there is that with a higher birth rate, they should be getting more gays than anyone else, due to the womb effect.
Click to expand...

If it is indeed true.

Most gays in East Africa will either go completely celibate their whole lonely lives, marry and be intimate with someone they find revolting, or have clandestine unsafe sex.

Having a gay relationship is nearly impossible in Uganda now, they will find you and chase you out of town if you don't get beaten first, but I know of a few who have boyfriends, two couples whom were chased out of town.
 
pat grimshaw said:
Is there ANY documentation of the pro-gay laws in Africa prior to the Brits arriving?
Click to expand...

He did not say the British Empire ended pro-gay laws. He said their influence was the origin of anti-gay laws. They are not the same thing. Homosexuality in many premodern cultures was largely socially governed, not legislatively governed, including in societies well known for it like the Roman Empire, which did not even have a word for homosexuals.
 
Is there ANY documentation of gay life in Africa prior to the Brits arriving?
Is there ANY documentation of the gay killings in Africa prior to the Brits arriving?
 
pat grimshaw said:
Is there ANY documentation of gay life in Africa prior to the Brits arriving?
Is there ANY documentation of the gay killings in Africa prior to the Brits arriving?
Click to expand...

Serious question: if there were, would it weigh an ounce on your viewpoint either way?
 
The Romans did not have one catch all term for homosexual, they had a bunch of different words for subcategories. They did NOT approve of sex between men, or men who took it.

"Real Men" did NOT take it up the ass, in exactly the same homophobic (with the same kinds of societal consequences) way that we have today. The exceptions to that are the same we've always had, the wealthy, the powerful, etc.

If you had sex with another man in the army, that you got executed for.

Their ideas about same sex behavior were not ours, but they were by no means lacking in disapproval.

- - - Updated - - -

xbuzzerx said:
Serious question: if there were, would it weigh an ounce on your viewpoint either way?
Click to expand...

Of course not.
 
TX-Beau said:
The Romans did not have one catch all term for homosexual, they had a bunch of different words for subcategories. They did NOT approve of sex between men, or men who took it.

"Real Men" did NOT take it up the ass, in exactly the same homophobic (with the same kinds of societal disapproval) way that we have today. The exceptions to that are the same we've always had, the wealthy, the powerful, etc.

If you had sex with another man in the army, that you got executed for.

Their ideas about same sex behavior were not ours, but they were by no means lacking in disapproval.

- - - Updated - - -



Of course not.
Click to expand...

Those "taboos" were largely in line with the intensive class-consciousness of Roman society. A higher class man, for instance, would be ruined socially if he overly enjoyed bottoming for men of lower social stature. It was perfectly acceptable for him to top men of lower social stature.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that the "restrictions" on homosexuality were in any way out of step with the class boundaries of Roman society on sex in general.
 
But it was NOT "perfectly acceptable" for the men taking it up the ass. Whoever took it was feminized and therefore not a man. Male rape was exactly about that, removing one man's masculinity through penetrative sex. Thus being the "woman."

The reason I posted the above is because you tossed out that tidbit about Rome being "known for it," (which I would contend they would dispute) and how they didn't have a word for it, no they didn't have one word for it, they had a bunch, the great majority of which are derogatory and insulting.

Roman men who took it up the ass were subject to exactly the same kinds of things modern gay men face at the hands of 'phobes, in fact the sentiments of the haters are shockingly similar.

Certainly there were more or less accepting people in Roman society, and almost certainly amongst the educated and wealthy set acceptance was probably higher, but none of the evidence suggests the kind of general societal acceptance of homosexual behavior that we seem to be moving towards today.
 
TX-Beau said:
But it was NOT "perfectly acceptable" for the men taking it up the ass. Whoever took it was feminized and therefore not a man. Male rape was exactly about that, removing one man's masculinity through penetrative sex. Thus being the "woman."

The reason I posted the above is because you tossed out that tidbit about Rome being "known for it," (which I would contend they would dispute) and how they didn't have a word for it, no they didn't have one word for it, they had a bunch, the great majority of which are derogatory and insulting.

Roman men who took it up the ass were subject to exactly the same kinds of things modern gay men face at the hands of 'phobes, in fact the sentiments of the haters are shockingly similar.

Certainly there were more or less accepting people in Roman society, and almost certainly amongst the educated and wealthy set acceptance was probably higher, but none of the evidence suggests the kind of general societal acceptance of homosexual behavior that we seem to be moving towards today.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right-- bottoming was viewed as the passive/receptive/feminine role in sex, but my point was that this was all in step with the Roman view of gender, power in sex, and the relationship of class stature to appropriate sexual relations. I am not asserting that the Roman Empire was an idyllic haven for homosexual people. But it was a society known (even in its artwork) for its open expression of same-gender sexual activity, but did not regard homosexual people as a separate sexual class of people with a body of legislation aimed either for or against them. Homosexual sex was viewed within the lens of how sex and class were regulated universally within Roman society, which was undoubtedly male-power-oriented and class-oriented.
 
^ I mean about pre-18th century Africa; there's more documentary evidence for Rome and Greece



.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top