• A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    Is this refering to specific historical figures?

    Or just that homosexuality was way more widespread than history books would make us believe?

    edit: thanks, my question has been answered.

    • Hexarei@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      22 hours ago

      It’s just referring to the common pattern of history books and information at places like museums erasing gay people by calling them “friends” instead. Including stuff like two men buried together in ways that only married couples would have been in their culture or paintings that show two women very obviously being intimate in some way in a bed being labelled as two “good friends”

    • Aqarius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      There’s a meme that historians are willfully blind to obvious gay relationships of historical figures.

      The reality is, as usual, more complicated, but the versions of stories that reach the general public aren’t really known for nuance.

    • MeatPilot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Just referring to situations when there is obviously a homosexual relationship and some historians description will say “best friends” or “roommates” because they are so arrogant or bigoted they can’t see it for what it really is.

      Mostly seems to happen with women, because god forbidden two women love each other before the current era.

      For example this would be incorrectly labeled “two roommates startled well getting dressed for dates with their boyfriends.”