this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
589 points (98.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

9172 readers
1348 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ReadyUser31@lemmy.world
aeronmelon@lemmy.world
needanke@feddit.org
589
Highly Advanced Culture (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 week ago by not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
63 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 53 points 1 week ago (4 children)

As a straight guy, some of those seem kinda mean. I thought, they liked their twinks.

To my gay brothers, are they mean? Or am I just too straight to get it?

[–] napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.org 98 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They are probably meant to be mean, because the people described had a very low social status in society.

The primary dichotomy of ancient Roman sexuality was active / dominant / masculine and passive / submissive / feminine. Roman society was patriarchal, and the freeborn male citizen possessed political liberty (libertas) and the right to rule both himself and his household (familia). "Virtue" (virtus) was seen as an active quality through which a man (vir) defined himself. The conquest mentality and "cult of virility" shaped same-sex relations. Roman men were free to enjoy sex with other males without a perceived loss of masculinity or social status as long as they took the dominant or penetrative role. Acceptable male partners were slaves and former slaves, prostitutes, and entertainers, whose lifestyle placed them in the nebulous social realm of infamia, so they were excluded from the normal protections afforded to a citizen even if they were technically free. Freeborn male minors were off limits at certain periods in Rome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 63 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Disappointing and unproductive.

Imagine, you are a top and you are looking for a bottom but the bottoms hide their bottom-ness because they get shit for it.

Praise bottoms and enjoy the fruits of a healing environment.

Of course, there are better reasons to not be a bigot but self-interest should be a convincing one.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago

They liked their twinks like many men today like their women.

I.e. they don't like them as people. But they enjoy their bodies.

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 23 points 1 week ago

People loved to fuck them but didn't value them. Like how people are about prostitutes

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

No they did not. The roman republic was very similar to modern America except the guy who ruined it was a bisexual hobag who seemed to care about the proleterii. As a note, it would be culturally improper to refer to a Roman man who exclusively tops men and women as bisexual, but a man who bottoms for men as well as topping women would fit that term. Julius Caesar's bisexuality was a political scandal, and he was referred to by his political opponents as "every woman's man and every man's woman".

Rome loved twinks like America loves trans women, the sex industry and political world tell wildly different stories, and there was cultural back and forth between "hell yeah" "fucking degenerates" and "lol f@g"