How true is it that white people introduced homophobia throughout the world?

[AnimeGirlConnoisseur]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the deal was that most people hated gays since time immemorial, it's just that European colonizers were the first to write down anti-gay laws. These laws were then kept on the books after the end of European empires and now everyone thinks the white man invented homophobia and forced everyone else to be homophobic.

 

[SwanSwanson]

Why would this be true? "Homophobia" the practice of recognizing that male-female relationships are normal and male-male and female-female relationships are deviant existed since humans could first have proper thoughts. So, the people who can take credit for homophobias invention would be the human 1.0. Known currently as "Africans".

 

[Harbinger of Kali Yuga]

I wish I was the Prometheus of Transphobia.

 

[Gravemind]

I inspire and perpetuate every form of bigotry imaginable by existing on the same planet as the entirety of the human population simply by virtue of my light skin tone.

 

[PipTheAlchemist]

No, but I wish it were true because that would be based as shit...

 

[Psyduck]

Issue #58 of "I wish we were half as based as how they believe we are"

 

[SpergioLeonne]

Side note:

I’m fucking tired of brainrotted wokeists citing Native Americans as a form of validation on account of “two spirits.”

“Two spirits” would be better understood as Native American euphemism for their version of NEETs. Men that don’t do men’s jobs.

The however many “genders” people talk about are actually terms that describe something like social position. Imagine if instead of the word “woman,” we called females “mothers” or “not yet mothers.”

They took that and tried to use it to justify dick decapitations

 

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

A lot of those brown people seem to be under the impression that it's the exact opposite:

White people invented faggotry and gender-bending.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Human society is naturally homophobic because humanity in the end prefer people who can reproduce.

It's not that reason. Reasons to hate homos:
1. Source of disease. Only the miracles of modern medicine makes buttsex to be something that isn't a good way to catch an STD or a nasty infection.
2. Dangerous to people around them. The rate of homosexuals raping children is way higher than normal people, which isn't only dangerous but causes the victims to become homos themselves, perpetuating the cycle.
3. Generally annoying.

 

[PipTheAlchemist]

You attempt at rationalizing homophobia is admirable but what about the dykes?

Lesbianism is only acceptable if the two girls making-out with one another are hot.

 

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

1. Source of disease. Only the miracles of modern medicine makes buttsex to be something that isn't a good way to catch an STD or a nasty infection.

Modern medicine barely does anything at all in that regard, lmao.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

When all this woke shit is dead and we travel to space in the centuries, we will revert back to our natural state and be what the woke calls “bigots”.

Other way around. Our civilization supports homosexuality and even more deviant behavior like transgenderism because we have the technology to support it. If we are a spacefaring civilization, our society can support ever more deviant behaviors, especially since you can't monitor people more than a few light years away. There are very few people out there who consider actual space colonization from a conservative standpoint, and they really should, because turning space into the transhumanist (i.e. transgenderist) playground will do nothing but damn us all.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the deal was that most people hated gays since time immemorial, it's just that European colonizers were the first to write down anti-gay laws. These laws were then kept on the books after the end of European empires and now everyone thinks the white man invented homophobia and forced everyone else to be homophobic.

Way older than that. Jews have the Book of Leviticus in the Torah. And Zoroastrianism said that having anal sex is akin to demon worship, and demon worshippers are to be executed ASAP and even says that murdering a dude you find having buttsex is a good thing.

Side note:

I’m fucking tired of brainrotted wokeists citing Native Americans as a form of validation on account of “two spirits.”

“Two spirits” would be better understood as Native American euphemism for their version of NEETs. Men that don’t do men’s jobs.

The however many “genders” people talk about are actually terms that describe something like social position. Imagine if instead of the word “woman,” we called females “mothers” or “not yet mothers.”

They took that and tried to use it to justify dick decapitations

They weren't NEETs, they were flaming faggots because anyone who takes a dick up their ass is obviously a woman.

 

[Montalbane]

I am perfectly ok with whites being labeled as genetically homophobic and the rest of humanity being niggerfaggots

 

[AnsemSoD1]

I think we all just need to have a big gay kiwi orgy!

 

[draggs]

The weird thing is a lot of the eunuchs were (presumably) straight. Women at times would use them as sex toys and force the eunuchs to pleasure them with their mouth and finger

Many eunuchs are still capable of getting hard and orgasming despite no balls. There's just no baby batter to go with it. Eunuchs were favorite servants of royalty back in the day not because they couldn't dick down the women in the royal family, but because they couldn't get them pregnant if they did

 

[Fruttasecca]

Mehmed II raped teenage European noblemen

Thats just slander, the only sources speaking of that were asshurt (not literary) Greeks and Venetians who were kvetching in Italy about another crusader. Turkish sources never mention such things and Mehmed II had four wives and over 9000 children that were to slaughter each other in a battle royale for the throne, as was tradition.
"Gay history" is just based on speculation, poor sources and sometimes its literary just made up shit, like Mehmed II having a sexual relationship with Radu or Antinous being Hadrians lover, just made up bullshit that is repeated continuously in hopes it sticks and can thous be used to justify the absolute state of the west in 8 ACY (after current year).

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Thats just slander, the only sources speaking of that were asshurt (not literary) Greeks and Venetians who were kvetching in Italy about another crusader. Turkish sources never mention such things and Mehmed II had four wives and over 9000 children that were to slaughter each other in a battle royale for the throne, as was tradition.
"Gay history" is just based on speculation, poor sources and sometimes its literary just made up shit, like Mehmed II having a sexual relationship with Radu or Antinous being Hadrians lover, just made up bullshit that is repeated continuously in hopes it sticks and can thous be used to justify the absolute state of the west in 8 ACY (after current year).

For most of history, having gay sex was not incompatible with having kids. That was the biggest obligation a nobleman had, and one they took seriously since marriage was a business deal after all. A dude who gets his asshole reamed every night is still gay if he has sex with his wife every now and then.

It's pretty obvious Mehmed molested Radu. He was described as such by contemporary historians, his nickname "the beautiful" ("frumos") shows his effeminacy (i.e. catamite), and Romanian historians for centuries after considered him an absent ruler who spent most of his time away from Wallachia being a fag with the Sultan. He also only had one kid, despite his brothers and father having 3-5 each (almost like he was too busy taking it up the ass to fuck his wife). Mehmed does not get such treatment in Ottoman histories because he was a good ruler, and being a sodomite was something associated with decadent and corrupt rulers. That was how the template of writing Islamic history went--you overlooked a good ruler's degeneracy while highlighting the degeneracy of a bad ruler.

 

[The Connected Nose]

turning space into the transhumanist (i.e. transgenderist) playground will do nothing but damn us all.

The Eldar sure fucked around and found out.

 

[Fruttasecca]

It's pretty obvious Mehmed molested Radu.

You are just talking out of your ass. This premise is even more ridiculous because Vlad and Radu were both taken hostage as a guarantee from Vlad II, they werent Mehmeds slaves they were his guests and the heirs of his vassal. Doing something so heinous to them would have had consequences even for him, so even if he was gay/bi he wouldnt have had a relationship with either of them. Also they were in a castle and not in Istanbul so how often did Mehmed really see them? Maybe once when he greeted them.

He was described as such by contemporary historians,

As what?

his nickname "the beautiful" ("frumos") shows his effeminacy (i.e. catamite),

You can be beautiful/effeminate and straight

Romanian historians for centuries after considered him an absent ruler who spent most of his time away from Wallachia being a fag with the Sultan.

And how would they know that? I would say he was "absent" because he couldnt hold on to the throne and people were trying to kill him.

He also only had one kid, despite his brothers and father having 3-5 each (almost like he was too busy taking it up the ass to fuck his wife).

What a ridiculous statement, so you have few kids that means you are gay, but if you have a lot of kids that still means your are gay lmao gtfo of here

Mehmed does not get such treatment in Ottoman histories because he was a good ruler, and being a sodomite was something associated with decadent and corrupt rulers.

He was unpopular because of his constant warring which he financed with lives and higher taxes, his contemporaries didnt consider him a good ruler.

See, this is what I mean. You are just talking out your ass with circumstantial evidence presented so it suits you.
Radu only had one kid? Must mean he was gay. Ridiculous.

 

[KiwiFuzz]

One of the things that I think gets lost is that our modern American/Western definition of homosexuality is just that: modern and American/Western.

We see being gay as something you're born as that is immutable, but other people didn't have that concept per se, or if they did, it was less about "This is a guy who only fucks other guys" and more about "This is a guy who doesn't like girls" or "This is a guy who prefers the asses of slave boys to his own wife's pussy but he still wanders in there a few times a year to do the needful."

We think a grown man fucking pubescent boys is degenerate, but for large parts of the world for large parts of history, a rich man fucking a 12-year-old slave boy in the ass was damn near expected.

One of the things that also gets left out of the discussion of homosexuality among non-White people is how much of it involved slaves, children, or people of subordinate social classes.

For example, wealthy Mayans would buy boy slaves for their sons to fuck.

Much progressive, very LGBTQ+.