Btw, while he’s technically not wrong (as Alexander was probably Bisexual instead of fully Gay) he’s still participating in Queer erasure by posting this shit.
I do not believe it is appropriate to apply modern conceptualisations of sexuality to people that would have never thought of themselves this way. For this reason, Alexander was not bisexual.
Alexander was (as we would call him today) UNDOUBTEDLY Bisexual, he just didn’t call himself that because labels like “Gay” or “Bi” simply didn’t exist in his time. That and the Greeks understood male - male relationships differently than we do today. I could elaborate more if you want, but I think I’ll leave it there : )
Well, this is like calling a bavarian from the 17th century german. The idea of the german nation did not exist yet, so if you call him german you will kind of give a wrong idea of who he was.
It is not just the case that the words did not exist yet, the concepts did not exist. People then understood sexuality in a completely different way.
Well I am not sure he would agree with the former part of what you said. He would certainly consider himself male and not bisexual. Sexual orientation was not a thing, if someone slept with men it did not become a part of his identity, it was simply a thing he did. I am not entirely appreciative of the essentialist approach that is now often taken towards these matters.
You say he would consider himself male. If you mean “male as defined during his time period”, sure. But they didn’t have the term bisexual then, so in that case, I don’t see how your point makes sense.
If you think he’d identify as male using today’s standards, then we can make the same assumption about today’s standards for bisexual. He might very simply have looked at the term and said “yup, I like doing men and women”. There’s no reason to assume he wouldn’t.
Of course he would consider himself to be male by the standard of his day. So what? He was a man because that is how he understood himself to be and this is a social role he held.
Why does it matter what he would have believed if he travelled through time and saw our society if he didn’t? He had a radically different conceptualisation of sexuality, so who cares what would happen if he was presented with ours? But I doubt he would identify as bisexual anyway.
Whether or not he was bisexual depends on what bisexuality is.
If it is an immutable trait of character that people are born with or otherwise can’t change you can probably say he was bi, but I would say this is an incorrect understanding of sexiality.
But if bisexuality is a way that a person relates to society and himself and also a conceptual tool for understanding sexuality. The former meaning forbids assigning this label to Alexander, as this is not the way he would understand himself, nor is it accurately reflecting his social role, as the social role of “bisexual” did not exist yet. You are imposing our social categories and conceptual frameworks on people that existed in completely different social structures and understood themselves completely differently.
Feel free to offer your own account of what it is.
Btw, while he’s technically not wrong (as Alexander was probably Bisexual instead of fully Gay) he’s still participating in Queer erasure by posting this shit.
I do not believe it is appropriate to apply modern conceptualisations of sexuality to people that would have never thought of themselves this way. For this reason, Alexander was not bisexual.
Alexander was (as we would call him today) UNDOUBTEDLY Bisexual, he just didn’t call himself that because labels like “Gay” or “Bi” simply didn’t exist in his time. That and the Greeks understood male - male relationships differently than we do today. I could elaborate more if you want, but I think I’ll leave it there : )
Well, this is like calling a bavarian from the 17th century german. The idea of the german nation did not exist yet, so if you call him german you will kind of give a wrong idea of who he was.
It is not just the case that the words did not exist yet, the concepts did not exist. People then understood sexuality in a completely different way.
Exactly. He also wasn’t male and greek for the same reason.
Well I am not sure he would agree with the former part of what you said. He would certainly consider himself male and not bisexual. Sexual orientation was not a thing, if someone slept with men it did not become a part of his identity, it was simply a thing he did. I am not entirely appreciative of the essentialist approach that is now often taken towards these matters.
You say he would consider himself male. If you mean “male as defined during his time period”, sure. But they didn’t have the term bisexual then, so in that case, I don’t see how your point makes sense.
If you think he’d identify as male using today’s standards, then we can make the same assumption about today’s standards for bisexual. He might very simply have looked at the term and said “yup, I like doing men and women”. There’s no reason to assume he wouldn’t.
Of course he would consider himself to be male by the standard of his day. So what? He was a man because that is how he understood himself to be and this is a social role he held.
Why does it matter what he would have believed if he travelled through time and saw our society if he didn’t? He had a radically different conceptualisation of sexuality, so who cares what would happen if he was presented with ours? But I doubt he would identify as bisexual anyway.
Whether or not he was bisexual depends on what bisexuality is. If it is an immutable trait of character that people are born with or otherwise can’t change you can probably say he was bi, but I would say this is an incorrect understanding of sexiality.
But if bisexuality is a way that a person relates to society and himself and also a conceptual tool for understanding sexuality. The former meaning forbids assigning this label to Alexander, as this is not the way he would understand himself, nor is it accurately reflecting his social role, as the social role of “bisexual” did not exist yet. You are imposing our social categories and conceptual frameworks on people that existed in completely different social structures and understood themselves completely differently.
Feel free to offer your own account of what it is.