Is sexual life of historical figures relevant and, if so, when?

[garbon]

It is?

Of course. That's why we homosexuals have to go through the dreadful process of coming out.

So heterosexuality is normal, and homosexuality is a deviancy?

I'm not sure I'd go that far as you're now inputting emotionally/morally charged words.

[Valmy]

It's only when there's a hint of homosexuality that this is objectionable or even noticed. Then, apparently, it's identity politics ruining history

Heh.  That is weird my experience is that people readily accept so-and-so was gay uncritically that is why I tend to say something about it.  And then we get crap like Braveheart where Piers Gaveston and Edward act like modern homosexual stereotypes.  I get that that historical person being gay is interesting and exciting and all that but we need to be true to the sources.

[garbon]

I'm not sure hollywood movies are places where we need to be true to the sources.

[Valmy]

I'm not sure hollywood movies are places where we need to be true to the sources.

I was young then

I was so angry by everything wrong in that movie I may have never watched another Hollywood history movie again.

[Sheilbh]

Indeed. The other thing is that I think we tend to project our sexuality onto the past in Hollywood movies anyway - look at William Wallace's relationship in the same movie, which is far more historically problematic - I mean if real couples engaged in Hollywood style displays of affection it would've been scandalous.

But it's tough for a film to present historically accurate sexual conduct without handing out a guidebook beforehand. Our expectations are that if people are in love, or in a relationship, then they can demonstrate it and do things to show it. The way we represent things changes. Now we're not where we were in the 90s in terms of representation of the gays maybe we can have a more subtle depiction of Edward's 'undue' intimacy with Gaveston. But that still wouldn't be accurate.

For some reason it makes me think of that Salman Rushdie character (I think in Midnight's Children) who makes his millions by coming up with fruit in Bollywood films. He can't show someone kissing so one character would bite an apple, then the other character would. For that his scripts make him a lot of money and inspire a lot of copycats, but without the context of not showing kissing it doesn't make much sense.

I know I may be the only one, but I find the more interesting issue, and the one queer history tends to be about, is what sexuality was actually like in the past. For example, what were Medieval people doing before they got married, normally in their late twenties?

[dps]

For example, what were Medieval people doing before they got married, normally in their late twenties?

Dying young, mostly. 

[Razgovory]

It is?

Of course. That's why we homosexuals have to go through the dreadful process of coming out.

So heterosexuality is normal, and homosexuality is a deviancy?

I'm not sure I'd go that far as you're now inputting emotionally/morally charged words.

Maybe you should rethink your position then.

[Josquius]

I know I may be the only one, but I find the more interesting issue, and the one queer history tends to be about, is what sexuality was actually like in the past. For example, what were Medieval people doing before they got married, normally in their late twenties?

The whole craftsman apprenticeship seniority system does kind of have a whiff of public school  style homosexuality about it....

[Agelastus]

I'm not sure hollywood movies are places where we need to be true to the sources.

I was young then

I was so angry by everything wrong in that movie I may have never watched another Hollywood history movie again.

I remember sitting and watching it with an uncle who insisted on pointing out that metallurgy was not good enough for the period to do what one character was doing while I was privately wondering where the Bridge had gone at the battle of Stirling Bridge...

I loathe that film...

[Martinus]

It's only when there's a hint of homosexuality that this is objectionable or even noticed. Then, apparently, it's identity politics ruining history

Heh.  That is weird my experience is that people readily accept so-and-so was gay uncritically that is why I tend to say something about it.  And then we get crap like Braveheart where Piers Gaveston and Edward act like modern homosexual stereotypes.  I get that that historical person being gay is interesting and exciting and all that but we need to be true to the sources.

I can assure you that this movie is considered homophobic and a disgrace, rather than being considered favourably by gay people.

[garbon]

It is?

Of course. That's why we homosexuals have to go through the dreadful process of coming out.

So heterosexuality is normal, and homosexuality is a deviancy?

I'm not sure I'd go that far as you're now inputting emotionally/morally charged words.

Maybe you should rethink your position then.

You haven't given me any reason to.

[Viking]

It's only when there's a hint of homosexuality that this is objectionable or even noticed. Then, apparently, it's identity politics ruining history

Heh.  That is weird my experience is that people readily accept so-and-so was gay uncritically that is why I tend to say something about it.  And then we get crap like Braveheart where Piers Gaveston and Edward act like modern homosexual stereotypes.  I get that that historical person being gay is interesting and exciting and all that but we need to be true to the sources.

I can assure you that this movie is considered homophobic and a disgrace, rather than being considered favourably by gay people.

Isn't that just because Gibson is a homophobe and a disgrace?

[Malthus]

The sex lives of famous historical figures are of interest in three ways:

(1) The same as any other celebrity - because scandal and gossip about people we know about is of inherent interest (if only for amusement) and may, arguably, shed some light on their character.

(2) Obviously, most modern Western people (well, educated ones) do not regard engaging in homosexual acts as a "scandal" in and of itself - but people in the past did, in many cases. The fact that the accusation or imputation was made can be of historical interest concerning the motives of the people making the accusation or imputation. Same with having affairs.

(3) If the particular sexual relationships at issue affected their behaviour and motives in ways that lent an impact on history, it is obviously worth exploring. Did Edward the 2nd have what amounted to affairs with male courtiers? Did this piss off his wife Isabella, leading her in return to take Mortimer as her lover? If so, it is significant.

[Martinus]

The sex lives of famous historical figures are of interest in three ways:

(1) The same as any other celebrity - because scandal and gossip about people we know about is of inherent interest (if only for amusement) and may, arguably, shed some light on their character.

(2) Obviously, most modern Western people (well, educated ones) do not regard engaging in homosexual acts as a "scandal" in and of itself - but people in the past did, in many cases. The fact that the accusation or imputation was made can be of historical interest concerning the motives of the people making the accusation or imputation. Same with having affairs.

(3) If the particular sexual relationships at issue affected their behaviour and motives in ways that lent an impact on history, it is obviously worth exploring. Did Edward the 2nd have what amounted to affairs with male courtiers? Did this piss off his wife Isabella, leading her in return to take Mortimer as her lover? If so, it is significant.

I think what you are saying is true mainly for political leaders.

There are also other aspects that may be of interest, e.g. for artists, and how/whether that influenced their art. The fact that the muscular Jesus in Michaelangelo's Last Judgement has a face of his lover is significant for his work's interpretation (which otherwise would have been a pretty canon counter-reformation agit prop, but suddenly becomes quite subversive).