The Pseudo Medieval Setting
Jan. 20th, 2004 06:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mishalak-OR-
Mishalak snarks about off the shelf fantasy kingdoms.
Yes I know about the Rough Guide to Fairyland. I keep on meaning to read it and perhaps I'm duplicating some effort here. But I've had a number of conversations about fantasy and what is realistic for fantasy. First of all anything is realistic for fantasy because anything is possible. Except sometimes I sit here saying to myself, "Wait a second, unless there is stuff going on that I don't see this doesn't make any sense."
One of the first things is the standard SCA medieval setting. Now I like this SCA, and I do like learning about the Middle Ages and recreating aspects of it without the nastiness of the setting. But the fact is that it wasn't just because men sucked (though they were literally forbidden to suck) that women, gays, and so on were oppressed. And so I often roll my eyes a bit when I see openly gay men and women living equal lives when otherwise the setting is obviously trying to evoke Europe sometime from A.D. 700 to 1500.
I know that there have been historical times and places where homosexuals were not persecuted, or at least not very much. It is certainly conceivable that the religion that the equivalent of Christianity in the pseudo medieval setting, there's nothing particularly required that homosexuality would be a sin. However the homosexuals would not be gay in the same sense that they are in the modern western world. The subculture that we have with its various stereotypes, in jokes, gay neighborhoods, and so on are a product of these times. It happened because openly homosexual individuals were very strongly persecuted. That produced an underground culture that eventually came out into the public as the influence of religion over the culture started to wane a bit and because the gays were inspired by the actions of blacks.
Because the modern sense of being gay, rather than just sometimes having sex with the same sex, is so linked to modern history I have a hard time figuring out a way to have a gay historical character. It is like having a science fiction fandom in medieval times. Unless there is a gate open to the past for the SCA members I really doubt it would happen.
The historical reason of the persecution of homosexuality was a tribe trying to expand and increase. The Israelites needed lots of children, because otherwise they could not hold their land and have enough people to fight in wars. Many, many children used to die before a better understanding of hygiene and slightly better medical technology. So the religion of the tribe had rules intended to cause the birth of as many babies as possible. Obviously if a guy is having sex with a guy there won't be children of that relationship. Since Christianity came from Judaism the old rule got carried over with the help of a healthy dose of bias in the culture it went into.
Next Time, Why Being A Woman Used to Suck
Mishalak snarks about off the shelf fantasy kingdoms.
Yes I know about the Rough Guide to Fairyland. I keep on meaning to read it and perhaps I'm duplicating some effort here. But I've had a number of conversations about fantasy and what is realistic for fantasy. First of all anything is realistic for fantasy because anything is possible. Except sometimes I sit here saying to myself, "Wait a second, unless there is stuff going on that I don't see this doesn't make any sense."
One of the first things is the standard SCA medieval setting. Now I like this SCA, and I do like learning about the Middle Ages and recreating aspects of it without the nastiness of the setting. But the fact is that it wasn't just because men sucked (though they were literally forbidden to suck) that women, gays, and so on were oppressed. And so I often roll my eyes a bit when I see openly gay men and women living equal lives when otherwise the setting is obviously trying to evoke Europe sometime from A.D. 700 to 1500.
I know that there have been historical times and places where homosexuals were not persecuted, or at least not very much. It is certainly conceivable that the religion that the equivalent of Christianity in the pseudo medieval setting, there's nothing particularly required that homosexuality would be a sin. However the homosexuals would not be gay in the same sense that they are in the modern western world. The subculture that we have with its various stereotypes, in jokes, gay neighborhoods, and so on are a product of these times. It happened because openly homosexual individuals were very strongly persecuted. That produced an underground culture that eventually came out into the public as the influence of religion over the culture started to wane a bit and because the gays were inspired by the actions of blacks.
Because the modern sense of being gay, rather than just sometimes having sex with the same sex, is so linked to modern history I have a hard time figuring out a way to have a gay historical character. It is like having a science fiction fandom in medieval times. Unless there is a gate open to the past for the SCA members I really doubt it would happen.
The historical reason of the persecution of homosexuality was a tribe trying to expand and increase. The Israelites needed lots of children, because otherwise they could not hold their land and have enough people to fight in wars. Many, many children used to die before a better understanding of hygiene and slightly better medical technology. So the religion of the tribe had rules intended to cause the birth of as many babies as possible. Obviously if a guy is having sex with a guy there won't be children of that relationship. Since Christianity came from Judaism the old rule got carried over with the help of a healthy dose of bias in the culture it went into.
Next Time, Why Being A Woman Used to Suck
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Queer history 101
Date: 2004-01-21 07:58 am (UTC)There were no homosexuals before the late 19th century. That is not to say that no homosexual acts took place. The men and women who partook of these acts were no different than anyone else. In some cultures (Classical Greek or Samurai Japanese) these acts were viewed as an expression of the strength of the bond between a man of stature and his servant. In others, though (Judeo-Christian) it became a sin. Not 'being gay,' but simply the act itself. Once punished or atoned, the person could go back to their regular lives without carrying the lifelong stigma of 'homosexual.' People who engaged in such acts came from every level of society (nobility, artists, merchants, clergy) but having committed such an act would not cause the people to self-identify as different from everyone else.
It was only with the dawn of psychoanalysis that the category of 'homosexual' came into being. From that point on, with one single act, a person's entire life could be orderly confined to a specific set of rules. Once the label came into being, it only followed that the identity of the 'homosexual' did as well. Once this idea was propagated through society, individuals who took part in homosexual acts started to self-identify as gay and things such as gay culture began to form. Before, these men and women poured their creative output into whatever they chose in their lives, seeing themselves as no different from anyone else. Now that they were officially 'different' no matter what they do, many chose to separate themselves from an unwelcoming society and instead focus on creating communities where these 'different' people could come together in safety.
Re: Queer history 101
Date: 2004-01-22 05:28 am (UTC)While perhaps the label made a difference for some bisexuals there is a group of solidly homosexual men. My ex-boyfriend tried to have sex with a girl in high school and he related that he couldn't get it up at all. My own experience was to have one encounter with a girl and simply not being as "turned on" by women. It might have gone either way for me before the label of homosexual was invented, though I suspect I would have lived a life of unsatisfied desire and fear. Like Michael Wigglesworth, that fire and brimstone preacher from Puritan New England, who revealed in coded diary entries that he was attracted to men and struggled with it all his life.
But atonment was rarely allowed unless a person was powerful. The penalty was death in most Western countries. It certainly was in most of the American colonies.