Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:05, 5 May 2012

This article was nominated for deletion on 16 March 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Classical Greece and Rome Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Misplaced Pages's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. LGBTQ+ studies This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Greece Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 40 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Robotic pederasty

A robot called AstaBOTh15 has attached a foreign language edition of the Pederasty in ancient Greece article (a copy is here), which looks to me like a recreation of the last Haiduc edit (26 July 13:32). Much of the phrasing appears to be the same, even identical in parts, though I am using only my Latin/Italian to decipher it. I think it's Portugese. Its appearance here in this article, where there has been a struggle to weed out Haiduc's crap, introduces some interesting issues. Amphitryoniades (talk) 10:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if you think that spanish version of this article is not good, but that article has passed the local requirements there and is a good article, as you can see here, linking to others languages GA is allowed --by Màñü飆¹5 18:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The discussion Manuel links did not, in fact, contemplate interwiki good-article symbols (as opposed to symbols on English GA's). I am addressing this on that same linked talk page. Wareh (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I voted "Support" for the English wiki only. I did not think my vote was meant to support it's use on other wikis. Xtzou (Talk) 19:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

etymology of paiderastia

It's incorrect, though in a minor way, to say that paiderasteia "is a compound of pais ("child", plural paides) and erastês." It is a compound of pais and the abstract noun erasteia. Erasteia may be formed from the agent noun erastês, which in turn is formed from the verb "to love" with a standard suffix for an agent noun; or perhaps the abstract noun paiderasteia is formed from the verb paiderasteuein. I originally had something like this, to which Wareh objected because I cited L&S and a grammar book on word formation. Wareh was right to note that a dictionary, even the standard dictionary of ancient Greek, and a student grammar are not ultimate sources, but they are better sources for the formation of Greek words than the general-purpose English dictionaries now cited. The agent noun erastes and the abstract noun erasteia should be distinguished. Paiderasteia is an abstract noun. The agent noun paiderastês exists, and seems to have a specific and (I gather) negative connotation. I'm rather mystified as to why English dictionaries (with no editions or other info cited) should supersede the standard Greek dictionary and Greek grammar books on the formation of Greek words. I doubt this was Wareh's intention. Cynwolfe (talk) 04:23, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

A few clarifications. The version prior to my change derived paiderastia (not paiderasteia, by the way) from "erasteuein ('to love, be a lover of')." This was simply an error, and not, I believe, one for which any correctly understood source has been cited. I wonder whether the connection between paiderasteuo and paiderastia is based on an imperfect understanding of the conventions of LSJ; the fact that the second lemma is given in abbreviated form in a block of type that begins with the first is only a space-saving convention and has no etymological import whatsoever. As far as I can tell, any suggestion of an etymology in "the abstract noun erasteia" is new; but no such abstract noun is extant. One way or another, the truth of the matter is that paiderastia is a noun built from paiderastes, which in term is composed of pais and erastes. If the only real point of disagreement is that the intermediate step should not be omitted, by all means I support its insertion into the article. In any case, the etymology given by the American Heritage Dictionary is basically correct (and Calvert Watkins is no mean authority), and I am not yet aware of any "standard Greek dictionary and Greek grammar books" that contradict it. I'm not sure anything except perhaps a better source can be added to the revision I've just made; I do feel that any mention of erasteuo or erasteia would be erroneous. (P.S. The "negative connotation" business--I think you're thinking of LSJ's "lover of boys, mostly in bad sense"--probably deserves a bit of caution before ushering into the article. In fact I'll go out on a limb and say it does not even mean to say "used pejoratively in Greek" but is simply their way of saying "in a sexual sense." Just have a look at LSJ's first citation, Acharnians 265, in which Phales, the personification of the processional phallos, is hailed by the chorus in sheer comic delight as μοιχέ, παιδεραστά: "lover of lads and lover of lasses," as translated by Jeffrey Henderson, who as the author of The Maculate Muse I'd put high above LSJ on sexual vocabulary.) Wareh (talk) 16:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not really arguing with you (and actually I thought someone else had made a change after you had), though high horses may have sounded so. One of the major sources used in the article said paiderastes had negative connotations in contrast to erastes, but I forget who at the moment. My question has nothing to do with semantics, actually, and is simply about word formation: it's my (perhaps wrong) understanding that an abstract noun of this type is formed from a verb, not from an agent noun, which is why I said it was a minor point — of morphology, not meaning. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I hope my hurried response did not come off as argumentative. The suffix -ia is equally used with verb-stems and substantives (Smyth 840a.9), and in this case the derivation is from the noun paiderastes. I'm not sure what verb you had in mind; paiderasteo and paiderasteuo are both likewise derived from the noun. Now, perhaps the most important point in my long answer was that the noun is paiderastia not paiderasteia, because the (non-existent) paiderasteia could in fact have been derived from paiderasteuo. I hope my edit to the article itself is looking like an improvement to you--let me know if not. Cheers, Wareh (talk) 18:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

No dispute or controversy section at all?

I'm not an ancient greece expert, however I think it is rather curious that the article does not present any section about possible controversies about this whole pederastic theory. Since all the documents and artifacts art are so ambiguous, and the theory showing classical greeks as critical sodomites being relatively recent, it seems only logical that at least some historians may have adopted a more skeptical view over that and maybe they should be mentioned too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.157.19.14 (talk) 12:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I've looked for possible dissidents and found about Adonis Georgiades. I don't know anything about the validity of his claims but perhaps the fact that there is some dispute going on should at least be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.157.19.14 (talk) 12:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're saying. I don't know what the phrase "critical sodomites" means. You'll have to be more specific if you'd like your questions addressed. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

No one ever called them "critical sodomites".(?) The idea of buggery was highly frowned upon as making men effeminate and "sexually incontinent", to use Thornton's term (see ref. 40). You need to define where this "critical" sodomy is coming into the picture, as well as how you are defining it. --DanielCD (talk) 15:39, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Population control

I'd like to see more discussion of the population issue, as regards the male population. In a course on Ancient Greek history I remember hearing that the Greeks strongly preferred male children to the extent that they would "expose" female infants (meaning leave them to die), and this produced an excessive male population. The Greek form of pederasty, in this theory, was actually adapted to control excessive male-male sexual interaction in a majority male population. This may have been just an idea presented by one author somewhere, but I think it might be interesting enough to make a comment on. --DanielCD (talk) 15:45, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, for what it's worth, the Greek myths mostly show males being exposed. Ancient demographics are tricky, but life expectancy is often misunderstood (bear with me for an apparent digression): neither Greeks nor Romans seem to find it particularly remarkable for a person to reach age 60, and regard the death of a young person as tragic (in our sense of the word) or at least a waste. What brings down the average age of life expectancy is the staggering rate of infant mortality (including up to age 1), and the fact that the "flower" of youth was regularly culled: by war for males, and childbirth for females. Although it seems strange under those circumstances that there would be concerns about overpopulation, the passage in the article is indeed intriguing; however, the things that come to my mind address an excess of young males. (An excess of females could be addressed by turning them into concubines, or prostitutes, or handmaids.) But young men are usually trouble; hence the Spartan agoge — ya gotta do somethin with 'em. See also fianna in early Irish society, or the Italic ver sacrum. This is an extremely roundabout way of saying I would agree that this is an interesting point, but although I've done a lot of organizational work for this article, and some research, I didn't delve into that particular section. Please feel free to track down your recollections and contribute yourself, or drop any more specific sources or leads you might come up with here, and I (or another editor) will try to read and incorporate what you find. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:08, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Final section

I changed the title of the last section Modern scholarship because the whole article is supposed to be modern scholarship. Reception is more appopriate and, since reception often goes by the name 'Greek love', I made it Reception: Greek love. That is far better than what was there before.

• All unassessed articles
• C-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles
• Top-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles
• All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages
• C-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
• WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
• C-Class Greek articles
• Mid-importance Greek articles
• WikiProject Greece general articles
• All WikiProject Greece pages