The ‘nature or nurture’ debate has been central to the discussion of sexuality for over two hundred years. In brief, the nature school believes that human behaviour is largely inherited, while nurturists believe it is the result of experiences in childhood, particularly in our interactions with our parents and siblings.
The nature or nurture argument over sexuality spreads out into other areas of thought. So let’s examine it.
Sex, folks, is real. So are Sexuality and Gender. But these are not always related as people might expect them to be. So let’s have a look at them.
In all sexually dimorphic species there are two morphs, which are directly linked to reproduction; that, after all, why sexual dimorphism exists. One of these produces large, relatively static cells called gametes, which contain half the DNA needed to make a new individual. The other produces small, highly motile gametes, which contain the other half. The former are called ova and the latter spermatozoa or sperm.
Perhaps incredibly, Roman sex remains the standard model in most of the world. It is only the Benighted West that thinks it’s different.
One of many orgy scenes in the film ‘Caligula’. This was probably fairly accurate.
There was no equivalent, anywhere in the Ancient World, to modern concepts like ‘gay’. There was a class of males usually called cinaidus or catamite, and these were exactly equivalent to the modern Homosexual, highly feminised, submissive, receptive in sex and often dressing as women.
‘Same-sex’ intercourse was commonplace and indeed, enthusiastically pursued, but only according to social conventions. Breaking these would incur no criminal penalty but the culprits might be shunned or excluded from society. This, in Rome, was a severe penalty.
[kofi]
Roman sex was dictated by two sets of rules. The first set was known as the mos maiorum , which translates to “the way of the elders”. It was an unwritten code of honour.