Would the greeks support transsexuals?

Don't have the source. I read it in history class way back in middle school. I remember reading they also used masks.
I think the reason was simply because women are less intelligent than men. Greeks were redpilled like that. The word hysteria is greek, after all. And it meant utherus. Because it's a women's thing.
Did you know some playwright (don't remember, but i think it was Eurypides) was literally killed by a mob of angry women, because they were sick of how he portrayed them in his plays

>Don't have the source. I read it in history class way back in middle school.
ok well I'm not going to take your word for it if that's ok with you.

Actual women were seen as subhumans by the greeks.
Why do you think they loved boy pussy so much.

Greece is what happens when you let masc gay men run the show

There was a cult of men who worshiped the goddess cybele. Initiation into the cult required the man to castrate himself and dress like a woman

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybele

some would, some wouldn't

greeks loved bp so yes

it's mentioned in several places on wikipedia
the origins of greek theatre are unclear, but some propose it evolved from cultic rituals
these may have involved male priests, and the tradition of only using guys could have been grandfathered in from there.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_of_ancient_Greece

Attached: Screen shot 2019-02-24 at 11.22.05 PM.png (197x492, 64K)

>some playwright (don't remember, but i think it was Eurypides) was literally killed by a mob of angry women, because they were sick of how he portrayed them in his plays
Fucking based, women have really become beta since the olden days.

What if someone is attracted to women but himself does not attract them? If faced between the choice of no sex and sex with one who resembles but is not the true object of his desire, is this person gay?

Cybeles wasn't originally greek, but frygian. But yeah, i've read about that. Though i read it on a footnote explaining a reference to Catullus, in Lovecraft's The rats in the walls

>frygian
>not phyrigian
Spaniard detected

Fucking anglophile. Why have a phonem if you're not using it? I understand in th's case, but there's not much difference between f and ph

>implies an attraction to the facet of maleness within them
rectally derived claim. 170 cubic centimeters a gay man does not make. traps are scientifically 0.25% gay by volume. "straight" men achieve such levels through normal friendship activities.

It shows you etymology. "Ph" in a word? It's Greek.

yes - let's say somebody was vegan. due to some circumstance all food he had access to was meat and animal products. If he drank cow milk wishing it was in fact basedmilk, and thought that cow milk was a good substitute for onions milk, he would not be vegan

forgot some beans are censored here, If he drank cowmilk, wishing it was almond milk and thought that cow milk was a good substitute for almond milk, he would not be vegan

basedmilk?? onions milk???

Glycine max

If a woman participates in male activities or has a level of male-like traits, does that having mean an attraction to them means you're gay? No, it does not. You are attracted to the female components of them. In the same way you can be attracted to a tall woman but not be a "lover of tall women", it is not gay to be attracted to a vessel containing both femininity and masculinity, as you are attracted to one facet and not the other. Unless heterosexuality is the love of those possessing pure femininity and nothing but femininity, in which case being attracted to almost all women would be gay, as they harbour masculinity. Thus, by exalting the feminine and accepting (or ignoring entirely) the masculine as a trait which does not infringe upon the former, is a love for traps most certainly not gay.

But, if there exists a love for the masculine within the trap, then it is most definitely gay to like traps. But they who have an attraction to traps are not faggots, for, to love traps but not men, there must exist a love for both the masculine and the feminine. Thus, they cannot be heterosexual - for they love the feminine and accept the masculine - nor a faggot - for they love the masculine and accept the feminine. The lover of the masculine aspects of a trap cannot be gay, for they accept the feminine too. Such a person is neither gay nor heterosexual, but is instead a trapsexual, for they accept both the feminine and masculine, and seek the balance present in traps, instead of simply seeking the exaltation of one aspect above all others.

incoherent question, as it is overlaying a contemporary political question onto a society that lacked the the whole conceptual apparatus to even understand it.
that said, sexual fluidity was not alien to their mythos: britannica.com/topic/Tiresias

neo-lib males were given the moniker of "soi-boi", and the mods filtered the actual words because it hit too close to home, lmao

Apply this kind of thought to Christianity and realise how silly you are.
Most Christians would think you are a crazy larping hobo if you went out on a ministry preaching trying to heal people.
They wouldn't think you were inspired by god if ate poop and lay on your side for a hundred days.

i think you are making my point for me
which is basically that context and 'historicity' matters to the meaningfulness of actions (which includes 'questioning')

uh why are you spoonfeeding me you're supposed to tell me to lurk more

and I was just kidding

They had the god Hermaphrodite

The answer is of course: no. You can, "Well they did this thing or that thing," but that none of that equates to the mental delusion that is transgenderism. You are asking if they would think that people have an aspect of their being known as "gender identity," which is either self-determined or biologically determined (whichever is more convenient for propaganda), and that this "gender identity" may be in contrast to their biological sex, and that if this is the case, all other people are required to treat them as if their "gender identity" were their biological sex (i.e. if they claim to be female despite being a man, then they must be treated exactly as a biological woman would be), and that this "gender identity" may be further actualized through a mutilation of their genitals to make them appear to be the other sex's genitals, which must then of course be treated as if they are the real thing. You can't demonstrate that they would accept something this perverse and delusional.

I didn't read any of your fag cope. Saged and reported

Are there many trannies in this cult now?

I don't think there's any inherint cowardice in liking traps. I, for instance, enjoy androgony in men and women, but also like extremely feminine women and masculine men. I do not delude myself into thinking "femboys" or "traps" are not gay, because they are men and harboring an attraction for them is homosexual by definition.
Yes it's still gay. There's no amount of mental gymnastics that makes liking men not gay. But there's noting wrong with liking men, just admit it and be comfortable with your faggotry. There doesn't need to be this stygma that "gay" is a bad thing. It's just a thing.
Kek
Bisexual. You're literally describing bisexuality. Stop being such a fucking memelord.