Page 2 of 3

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 11:32 pm
by White Man 1
Knowing the distinction between pornography and art is an important value we should be practicing here. The supreme court definitions as listed above are a great benchmark to start with. We need to practice our values here on our home turf it we expect others to follow suit!

Recognizing the culture of sexuality in the past is valuable. It gives us insight into who we were, especially coupled with the vision of who we want to be. We fit into the timeline probably closer to the ancient Greeks than to the superman, but part of reaching for that far off goal is improving our collective concience one person at a time.

Speaking of the Greeks, it should be mentioned, Wade, that although the Spartans were no prudes, they surely were not the free-loving homosexuals that the Jewish media establishment paints them to be. In fact, homosexual behavior was punishable up to death! Now THERE is a culture we should model ourselves after!

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:24 am
by Wade Hampton III
White Man 1 wrote:Speaking of the Greeks, it should be mentioned, Wade, that although the Spartans were no prudes, they surely were not the free-loving homosexuals that the Jewish media establishment paints them to be. In fact, homosexual behavior was punishable up to death! Now THERE is a culture we should model ourselves after!
Actually there were two...ancient Athens, and ancient Sparta. I was referring to the latter....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty ... ece#Sparta

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 3:13 pm
by Will Williams
Wade Hampton III wrote:
Will Williams wrote:We will break the Christian monopoly on Aryan minds by exposing it for what it is, and isn't, without promoting pornography, particularly with with images of homosexual sex -- like you posted and I removed -- no matter how ancient.
Here are links to the images I posted. I do not see any male homosexual activity in
any of them:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/ ... 34x500.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/ ... 34x582.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/ ... 34x614.jpg

Male homosexuality was prevalent in ancient Sparta, and quite probably in ancient Rome
as well. However, and once again, I do not see any of this type of activity in any
of the images. I hope I am wrong about this, but what I suspect may be going on here,
is a carryover from the Christianized era of the NA during the Gliebe-Walker years....
all the more reason to rejoice in their absence!
You're way off base here, Wade. The image I removed was of a man engaged in anal sex with another man who was having sex with a woman -- a "threesome," if you will. That sort of imagery is not acceptable here at WB, no matter how ancient the image is.

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 7:42 pm
by Wade Hampton III
Will Williams wrote:You're way off base here, Wade. The image I removed was of a man engaged in anal sex with another man who was having sex with a woman -- a "threesome," if you will. That sort of imagery is not acceptable here at WB, no matter how ancient the image is.
Well, here is the site I visited to get the images I posted.
Would you please post a link to the image you described? I
would like to see it for myself.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... urope.html

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 8:26 pm
by Will Williams
Wade Hampton III wrote:
Will Williams wrote:You're way off base here, Wade. The image I removed was of a man engaged in anal sex with another man who was having sex with a woman -- a "threesome," if you will. That sort of imagery is not acceptable here at WB, no matter how ancient the image is.
Well, here is the site I visited to get the images I posted. [deleted]
Would you please post a link to the image you described? I
would like to see it for myself.
One of the deleted images was as I described above. We know "obscene" or "sexually-oriented" images when we see them. If people want to see that sort of stuff they can go somewhere besides WB. Once a post is deleted it's gone! I don't save links to The Daily Mail's articles about obscenity in ancient art.

Rules of Conduct for White Biocentrism
Posted Sun Jul 28, 2013

When you register at White Biocentrism you agreed not to post "any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated or any other material that may violate any laws." You are expected to uphold those standards. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 8:38 pm
by Will Williams
White Man 1 wrote:Knowing the distinction between pornography and art is an important value we should be practicing here. The supreme court definitions as listed above are a great benchmark to start with. We need to practice our values here on our home turf it we expect others to follow suit!
Thank you, WM1. Your judgment in such matters is why you are moderator here at WB.
it should be mentioned, Wade, that although the Spartans were no prudes, they surely were not the free-loving homosexuals that the Jewish media establishment paints them to be. In fact, homosexual behavior was punishable up to death! Now THERE is a culture we should model ourselves after!
Uh, oh! Wade begs to disagree:
Male homosexuality was prevalent in ancient Sparta, and quite probably in ancient Rome
as well. However, and once again, I do not see any of this type of activity in any
of the images. I hope I am wrong about this, but what I suspect may be going on here,
is a carryover from the Christianized era of the NA during the Gliebe-Walker years....
all the more reason to rejoice in their absence!
And, I hope I'm wrong about this, but Wade appears to suggest also that the post-Gliebe NA is somehow Christian and prudish. :lol:

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 9:00 pm
by Wade Hampton III
Wade Hampton III wrote:
Will Williams wrote:You're way off base here, Wade. The image I removed was of a man engaged in anal sex with another man who was having sex with a woman -- a "threesome," if you will. That sort of imagery is not acceptable here at WB, no matter how ancient the image is.
Well, here is the site I visited to get the images I posted.
Would you please post a link to the image you described? I
would like to see it for myself.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... urope.html
I would still like to see the image and draw my own conclusions. Where is it?

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:05 am
by Jim Mathias
That the Romans failed to rein in their decadence led to a snowballing trend of degeneracy which then led to the end of their empire. Had they acted decisively, as some wise Romans had wanted, to encourage the birth of only well-born Romans and continually purged their society of its slaves and other ill-born types to keep from interbreeding with them, they might have turned their fortunes around.

We're in the same situation, and like the Roman example that came before, it's snowballing here as well.

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:51 pm
by Wade Hampton III
Jim Mathias wrote:That the Romans failed to rein in their decadence led to a snowballing trend of degeneracy which then led to the end of their empire. Had they acted decisively, as some wise Romans had wanted, to encourage the birth of only well-born Romans and continually purged their society of its slaves and other ill-born types to keep from interbreeding with them, they might have turned their fortunes around.

We're in the same situation, and like the Roman example that came before, it's snowballing here as well.
There were many various items that led to the fall of Rome, but the largest single contributor was the
acceptance of Christianity, beginning with the first Christian Emperor Constantine I around the 3rd Century
Common Era (CE).
56224
56224.JPG
56224.JPG (34.71 KiB) Viewed 5486 times

Re: Romans & Art

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:47 am
by Jim Mathias
Wade Hampton III wrote:
Jim Mathias wrote:That the Romans failed to rein in their decadence led to a snowballing trend of degeneracy which then led to the end of their empire. Had they acted decisively, as some wise Romans had wanted, to encourage the birth of only well-born Romans and continually purged their society of its slaves and other ill-born types to keep from interbreeding with them, they might have turned their fortunes around.

We're in the same situation, and like the Roman example that came before, it's snowballing here as well.
There were many various items that led to the fall of Rome, but the largest single contributor was the
acceptance of Christianity, beginning with the first Christian Emperor Constantine I around the 3rd Century
Common Era (CE).
56224
56224.JPG
True, although without a large slave-class to buy into it, that religion would not have taken hold and gain the prominence in public life that it did. It's hard for a slave-oriented religion to take root in a people who are mostly of a masterful character type.