Trembling Before G-d - a documentary about gay Jews

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

Ariel,

It isnt a myth about same-sex relations and it's relative acceptance.  One only need to go to a musuem and look at any section on Greek art.

Do not most artists today lean on the Left?

Wait until you read what the forum has to say, and the sources they cite, as opposed to pictures of art.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

Ariel,

That is a nice point you made about not being able to wear shorts in hot weather because of your tattoos, as well as the message it might send to a younger person.  I hope perhaps at some  point int he future you can have laser resurfacing to remove the tattoos

Thank you.  I too hope to one day be able to afford the laser removal.  It is an expensive process [one tattoo is a half-sleeve, Im just glad I didnt get a full one!]... somewhat frustrating to me because I paid near nothing for the actual tattoos because my friend is a tattoo artist.  I think with what is opening as a possible career for me may very much be able to accomplish the task.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

The myth of homosexuality being admired in Greece is just that, a myth.  Yes homosexuality occurred there, but it was not praiseworthy, in fact it was considered an insult to label someone as homosexual.

That's only if you consider sex with male children to be 1.  not a homosexual act and 2. not a perverse disgusting thing worse than homosexual sex with a male adult.

Only if one thinks that sex with children is ok can they give lip service to ancient greek sexual tradition and call it ok.   Only if one thinks that "with a boy doesn't count as gay" can they call it "not gay."

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

This website is down now, but it should be back up [I will post when it is active again].  I post there.  The majority of people on this board speak and read Greek and have debunked for all to read what "scholars" put forth as truth about the acceptance/promotion of homosexuality.  The lies spread about Greece are just one more way the Liberal community tries to promote homosexuality in lieu of true history.

I also don't understand what you mean.  Was Plato part of today's "liberal community" and is Plato a scholar putting forth promotion of homosexuality as a leftist shill?   (I ask that rhetorically).

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Ariel,

It isnt a myth about same-sex relations and it's relative acceptance.  One only need to go to a musuem and look at any section on Greek art.

I agree...

Look at this greek artwork and tell me it is not homo:

   

 

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

Ariel,

It isnt a myth about same-sex relations and it's relative acceptance.  One only need to go to a musuem and look at any section on Greek art.

I agree...

Look at this greek artwork and tell me it is not homo:



http://www.carnaval.com/orpheus/orpheus.htm

Ovid wrote no poems to boys himself but, like his fellow-poets, he assumes the universality of bisexuality. At the beginning of his Loves, he laments that he has "no boy to sing of" or "long-haired girl," these being equally acceptable subjects for the erotic poet.

Not all the homoerotic stories of the Metamorphosis are in book ten. Book three tells the tale of Narcissus. In Ovid's version, Narcissus is loved by girls and boys, but it is specifically a boy he scorns who sets the curse on him; he falls fatally in love with another "lovely boy" when he sees his image reflected in a pool.

Lesbianism is a theme rarely treated in Latin literature, but one story in Ovid's book nine describes the love of two girls. But though Ovid regards the love of boys as commonplace, love between females is unthinkable in his world. Ovid represents Iphis as shocked and horrified when she discovers her feelings; a benevolent goddess resolves the impasse by changing her into a boy.

I could be wrong.  However I have learned a tremendous amount about Greek/Macedonian culture from this forum from some well informed Greeks/Macedonians.  They may have more to say about questions you have.  I was somewhat skeptical about their initial claims because of what traditional history has taught, but they make a fairly powerful argument against what I had previously been taught [not everyone on this site shares a uniform opinion, of course, the debates I witnessed seem to encompass a lot of works].  I wish the site was up, not just for this debate, but along with JTF it is one of my favorite boards on the internet, without it being online the whole of the internet is somewhat lessened to me.

What do colleges and professors teach about Israel vs. what actually goes on in Israel from Israeli perspective?  How often do people try and discredit the Bible for political/social reasons?

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Come on.  It's silly.   I can see already their argument is anachronistic.  They are trying to apply today's situation as if conditions were the same then, and they want to cast all the characters in a mold that did not appear on the scene until the modern era.  They can't reinvent plato.    If they don't agree with the past, great.   Let's move on.   But they are in denial it seems.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

This website is down now, but it should be back up [I will post when it is active again].  I post there.  The majority of people on this board speak and read Greek and have debunked for all to read what "scholars" put forth as truth about the acceptance/promotion of homosexuality.  The lies spread about Greece are just one more way the Liberal community tries to promote homosexuality in lieu of true history.

I also don't understand what you mean.  Was Plato part of today's "liberal community" and is Plato a scholar putting forth promotion of homosexuality as a leftist shill?   (I ask that rhetorically).

I am not familiar with all of Plato's works, but speaking of Plato, I did watch a debate where accusations of Socrates being homosexual stemming from Plato's work was refuted.  I also saw the accusations of homosexuality regarding Alexander the Great successfully dismissed.  I would do an injustice to us by trying to remember everything of the top of my head; I will let you know when this site is back up, and perhaps my opinions will change under the scrutiny of this board and its members at that time when all can see what I came across.  I could be wrong about everything.  I would be interested in seeing what the more intelligent posters on this other board have to say to your questions if you can ask better ones than I.

I will say, look at how the Torah was translated into the Septuagint, and then translated from Greek into a thousands of other translations even more inaccurate.  Understanding Hebrew allows one to see the fallacies of the Septuagint and its derivatives, no?  Yet the majority of the world does not understand the Torah as it is actually written.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

Come on.  It's silly.   I can see already their argument is anachronistic.  They are trying to apply today's situation as if conditions were the same then, and they want to cast all the characters in a mold that did not appear on the scene until the modern era.  They can't reinvent plato.    If they don't agree with the past, great.   Let's move on.   But they are in denial it seems.

I will agree to move on, I hope when this site is back up we can continue the conversation.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I'm not claiming Plato was homosexual.  I'm claiming he wrote the Symposium.  No one disputes this.   Read that and then reconsider what that forum is saying.

Secondly, by these apologists, apparently "boys don't count" so when they say "not a homosexual" about Alexander or whoever else, they really mean things like "he also had relations with women" and "he only had sex with young boys but not adult men" and "he was not on the receiving end."    Such arguments are pointless.  I don't care if they were "homosexual" in today's definition of the term in political discourse.  The point is that their cultural norm was sex with boys.   That is nothing to be proud of.  Even if they have other things to be proud of.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Come on.  It's silly.   I can see already their argument is anachronistic.  They are trying to apply today's situation as if conditions were the same then, and they want to cast all the characters in a mold that did not appear on the scene until the modern era.  They can't reinvent plato.    If they don't agree with the past, great.   Let's move on.   But they are in denial it seems.

I will agree to move on, I hope when this site is back up we can continue the conversation.

I didn't mean us literally I meant the human species, move on from a very ugly past.  Or at least for the Greeks since they were the ones involved in this.  They should move on, and I think they have.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

I'm not claiming Plato was homosexual.  I'm claiming he wrote the Symposium.  No one disputes this.   Read that and then reconsider what that forum is saying.

Secondly, by these apologists, apparently "boys don't count" so when they say "not a homosexual" about Alexander or whoever else, they really mean things like "he also had relations with women" and "he only had sex with young boys but not adult men" and "he was not on the receiving end."    Such arguments are pointless.  I don't care if they were "homosexual" in today's definition of the term in political discourse.  The point is that their cultural norm was sex with boys.   That is nothing to be proud of.  Even if they have other things to be proud of.

When I get the chance I will ask specifically about this.  I do not remember any specific arguments to this end, it will be interesting to me what the people I talk to have to say about this.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

http://homosexualityinancientgreece.wordpress.com/category/laws-against-homosexual-and-pederastic-relations/

This is a blog which was linked to Macedoniaontheweb.  It is not as thorough as the site I have been speaking of is because question and answer is not possible, but it does showcase some of the arguments  and texts I have seen which raised my curiosity at the time.  The above link chronicles some of the laws in place at the time of the ancients.

[muman613]

Enough of this "Greek Homo" drek; you all sound like Sharpton.  I only want to hear from people who watched the film and have a response to it!!

You can't always get what you want, but you get what you need...

[MassuhDGoodName]

It's not just ancient Greece that practiced and exalted homosexuality.

It was almost the entire known ancient world which did so.

China, Japan, the Buddhist world -- even the Vikings would routinely sodomize those they defeated in battle.

All of these "apologetics" for Greek culture are just that:  Phony academicians inventing historical revisions to promote their own personal homosexual agendas.

Here are some actual FACTS:  In ancient Greece, it was believed by all that a man's "character" was transmitted through his semen.  When a young upper class Greek boy reached the age of twelve, they celebrated what was their equivalent of a "coming of age" ceremoney, at which the parents were overjoyed to take their son to a philosopher teacher such as Plato or Aristotle, and drop him off to be the teacher's personal servant, student, and "butt boy" for a duration of time.  The Greek parents were overjoyed, believing that having an esteemed old man philosopher sodomize their son every day and ejaculate inside him transferred to their son the esteemed "character" of the boy's teacher.
Women at their time were considered something like a sex toy with the sole purpose of getting pregnant and bearing a child.  Outside that relationship with women, men were mostly homosexual with each other.  "Love" was considered something homosexual between men and not something that applied to a relationship with a woman.  Men would seduce women, dump them, and nine months later the woman would bear a child.  Ancient Greeks, when meeting children or adults, asked "Who is your mother?" because it was considered normal and proper that a woman have any number of children by any number of men, most of the time unsure as to which man got them pregnant. 

 

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Are you seriously trying to defend homosexual civilizations, Ben?

Gee... does this have anything to do with why you thought my pictures were so gross?

[JTFenthusiast2]

Kahane  was right,

You misinterpreted what I wrote, I said for them it was normative, not for us

Furthermore, when you say:
 "And don't give me this garbage about Orthodox community not teaching parents how to deal with these issues or "ignorance" in the orthodox community etc...   (I am referring to some comments here, not to hamantaschen).   Because no community teaches anyone how to deal with this issue and what exactly is there to teach?  Give me a break.     People react as they see fit.   The only difference there might be is that in secular society, now in the school systems we are brainwashed to "accept" gayness and think that it's ok, so now secular parents may be more inclined NOT to shun their gay kids as opposed to before.  However, it's still going to happen if they have strong feelings on the subject and it certainly does.   It's just now considered "bigoted" by the PC propaganda."

You need to not be so defensive and haughty in your comments here.  It isn't garbage, it's a fact for some described in the movie.  Orthodox Jews aren't perfect; no one is.  What kind of loving father refuses to see his son for over 20 years?  You think that's part of being a good Jew?  You don't help your children become moral people by abandoning them.  Lastly, don't rant at me because you don't like my opinion over facts depicted in the film

[muman613]

Kahane  was right,

You misinterpreted what I wrote, I said for them it was normative, not for us

Furthermore, when you say:
 "And don't give me this garbage about Orthodox community not teaching parents how to deal with these issues or "ignorance" in the orthodox community etc...   (I am referring to some comments here, not to hamantaschen).   Because no community teaches anyone how to deal with this issue and what exactly is there to teach?  Give me a break.     People react as they see fit.   The only difference there might be is that in secular society, now in the school systems we are brainwashed to "accept" gayness and think that it's ok, so now secular parents may be more inclined NOT to shun their gay kids as opposed to before.  However, it's still going to happen if they have strong feelings on the subject and it certainly does.   It's just now considered "bigoted" by the PC propaganda."

You need to not be so defensive and haughty in your comments here.  It isn't garbage, it's a fact for some described in the movie.  Orthodox Jews aren't perfect; no one is.  What kind of loving father refuses to see his son for over 20 years?  You think that's part of being a good Jew?  You don't help your children become moral people by abandoning them.  Lastly, don't rant at me because you don't like my opinion over facts depicted in the film

JTFEnthusiast2,

I think the point KWRBT was making is that this is not only a Jewish problem. There are others who would shun such a son... When it is made out like this is a Jewish problem when it isn't is what KWRBT appears to be upset about...

I do not think he condones such behavior, but is simply saying that the problem is not solely a problem with the Orthodox Jewish community. It also happens in Christian, Hindu, and other cultures also.

I hope you understand the hurt which a father goes through when he is told his son is not going to produce offspring, to pass on the family tradition and name for the next generation... It is devestating...

[Rubystars]

Maybe the film isn't trying to portray it as just a Jewish problem, but to show how this problem affects the Jewish community and offer a solution (although the solution they suggest is the wrong one). It's not saying other communities aren't affected by the same problem, it's just showing how the Jewish community itself is affected by it.

I have seen another film about Muslims in Iran, that face Islamic penalties for such acts (much harsher than shunning). There have been other documenataries about Christian parents and the Christian community struggling with this problem. None of those really seemed to say it was a Muslim-only or Christian-only problem.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

It's not just ancient Greece that practiced and exalted homosexuality.

It was almost the entire known ancient world which did so.

China, Japan, the Buddhist world -- even the Vikings would routinely sodomize those they defeated in battle.

All of these "apologetics" for Greek culture are just that:  Phony academicians inventing historical revisions to promote their own personal homosexual agendas.

Here are some actual FACTS:  In ancient Greece, it was believed by all that a man's "character" was transmitted through his semen.  When a young upper class Greek boy reached the age of twelve, they celebrated what was their equivalent of a "coming of age" ceremoney, at which the parents were overjoyed to take their son to a philosopher teacher such as Plato or Aristotle, and drop him off to be the teacher's personal servant, student, and "butt boy" for a duration of time.  The Greek parents were overjoyed, believing that having an esteemed old man philosopher sodomize their son every day and ejaculate inside him transferred to their son the esteemed "character" of the boy's teacher.
Women at their time were considered something like a sex toy with the sole purpose of getting pregnant and bearing a child.  Outside that relationship with women, men were mostly homosexual with each other.  "Love" was considered something homosexual between men and not something that applied to a relationship with a woman.  Men would seduce women, dump them, and nine months later the woman would bear a child.  Ancient Greeks, when meeting children or adults, asked "Who is your mother?" because it was considered normal and proper that a woman have any number of children by any number of men, most of the time unsure as to which man got them pregnant. 

I don't see why accurate translations of Greek are considered apologetic. - Accurate translations of Tanakh refute all Christian claims for Jews to believe in Jesus [to Jews at least, however a greatly higher percentage of people on the planet believe differently than Jews do despite being shown accurate translations]. - Many of us have seen, "The truth about the Talmud" websites run by Nazis and Muslims, where they propagate many inaccurate translations of the Talmud which list a totally different meaning or message than is actually written.

I am curious to see your information verified.  I don't doubt what you say, it is shocking to me, and I have never heard anything like what you are saying before.  I am not a professional historian, just a person with an general interest in history.   If you can show me a site online which I can also see what you have told me laid out I would be willing to check it out.

Also, Socrates was killed by Greeks.  Plato was sold into slavery twice by Greeks, and nearly killed.  Aristotle had to flee from Athens because he thought he would be killed by Athenians [he went to Macedonia because his father was Phillips fathers doctor at one time].  During their time these philosophers were only esteemed by a minority.

1,000 years from now people could come across German porn all across the globe of women having sex with dogs, fisting, and "poop sex" and who knows what else [as well as the internet in general, the net is a filthy place but I still think most people are decent people], as well as literature from homosexual organizations around the world including NAMBLA] and Liberals and make assumptions about us.  People could come across "Dana International" [a man/woman entertainer who has been on MTV] and think different thoughts about Israelis than we think of ourselves...  or from older Jewish times the "Frankists" [Jews who interpret Judaism to include orgies].  Despite all of the pedophilia in Islam  the majority of people in the world think Muslims do no wrong, once again relying on bad translations.

------

EDIT:  It may have been the Greeks, perhaps the Romans, or even the Persians, but I do remember some attacker of the Jews who would cut off our circumsized penises as a trophy, to add extra insult to us if we were killed in battle.  I do not remember where I know this from.

[muman613]

Arial,

The Jewish narrative is that Greece was quite perverted in its sexual passions...

This is from Aish.com

http://www.aish.com/jl/h/48939587.html


HELLENISM

The Greeks were not only military imperialist but also cultural imperialist. Greek soldiers and settlers brought their way of life: their language, art, architecture, literature, and philosophy, to Middle East. When Greek culture merged with the culture of the Middle East it created a new cultural hybrid-Hellenism (Hellas is the Greek word for Greece) whose impact would be far greater and last for far longer than the brief period of Alexander's empire. Whether through the idea of the pitched battle, art, architecture or philosophy, Hellenism's influence on the Roman Empire, Christianity, and the West was monumental.

The Greeks showcased all human talents - literature, drama, poetry, music architecture, sculpture, etc. They glorified the beauty of the human body, displaying athletic prowess in the Olympics. Nothing regarding the human body was considered embarrassing, in need of hiding, or private for that matter.

(Athletic competitions performed in the nude were the norm in Greece. Our modern word "gymnasium" is derived from the Greek word "gumnos" which means naked. Public toilets often consisted of a bench on main street with holes in it; people sat there and did their business as others walked by.)

Naturally, human passions were venerated and this meant there were few sexual taboos -- even pedophilia and pederasty. Indeed, the sexual initiation of a young boy by an older man was considered the highest form of love and vital part of a boys education. Plato wrote of this in his Symposium (178C):

    "I, for my part, am at a loss to say what greater blessing a man can have in earliest youth than an honorable [older] lover ..."

Even Greek gods were described in human terms and were often bested by human beings in Greek mythology; with time, it became the style of intellectual Greeks to denigrate their gods and speak of them with biting cynicism and disrespect.

In short, the Greeks introduced into human consciousness an idea which is going to come into play as one of the most powerful intellectual forces in modern history - humanism. The human being is the center of all things. The human mind and its ability to understand and observe and comprehend things rationally is the be-all-and-end-all. That's an idea which comes from the Greeks.

Above all, the Greeks thought that this was enlightenment, the highest level of civilization. They had a strong sense of destiny and believed that their culture was ordained to become the universal culture of humanity.

The Jews had a different vision. The Jews believed that a world united in the belief in one God and ascribing to one absolute standard of moral values -- including respect for life, peace, justice, and social responsibility for the weak and poor -- was the ultimate future of the human race.

This Jewish ideology was wedded to an extreme, uncompromising exclusivity of worship (as demanded by the belief in one God) and a complete intolerance of polytheistic religious beliefs or practices. There was only one God and so only one God could be worshipped, end of story.

To the Jews, human beings were created in the image of God. To the Greeks, gods were made in the image of human beings. To the Jews, the physical world was something to be perfected and elevated spiritually. To the Greeks the physical world was perfect. In short, to Greeks, what was beautiful was holy; to the Jews what was holy was beautiful.

Such disparate views were bound to clash, sooner or later.
[/quote]

[Zelhar]

I think that while certain form of perversity was legitimized and glorified in ancient Greece, it doesn't mean that it was actually the norm to practice, even among the privileged class.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

Arial,

The Jewish narrative is that Greece was quite perverted in its sexual passions...

This is from Aish.com

http://www.aish.com/jl/h/48939587.html


HELLENISM

The Greeks were not only military imperialist but also cultural imperialist. Greek soldiers and settlers brought their way of life: their language, art, architecture, literature, and philosophy, to Middle East. When Greek culture merged with the culture of the Middle East it created a new cultural hybrid-Hellenism (Hellas is the Greek word for Greece) whose impact would be far greater and last for far longer than the brief period of Alexander's empire. Whether through the idea of the pitched battle, art, architecture or philosophy, Hellenism's influence on the Roman Empire, Christianity, and the West was monumental.

The Greeks showcased all human talents - literature, drama, poetry, music architecture, sculpture, etc. They glorified the beauty of the human body, displaying athletic prowess in the Olympics. Nothing regarding the human body was considered embarrassing, in need of hiding, or private for that matter.

(Athletic competitions performed in the nude were the norm in Greece. Our modern word "gymnasium" is derived from the Greek word "gumnos" which means naked. Public toilets often consisted of a bench on main street with holes in it; people sat there and did their business as others walked by.)

Naturally, human passions were venerated and this meant there were few sexual taboos -- even pedophilia and pederasty. Indeed, the sexual initiation of a young boy by an older man was considered the highest form of love and vital part of a boys education. Plato wrote of this in his Symposium (178C):

    "I, for my part, am at a loss to say what greater blessing a man can have in earliest youth than an honorable [older] lover ..."

Even Greek gods were described in human terms and were often bested by human beings in Greek mythology; with time, it became the style of intellectual Greeks to denigrate their gods and speak of them with biting cynicism and disrespect.

In short, the Greeks introduced into human consciousness an idea which is going to come into play as one of the most powerful intellectual forces in modern history - humanism. The human being is the center of all things. The human mind and its ability to understand and observe and comprehend things rationally is the be-all-and-end-all. That's an idea which comes from the Greeks.

Above all, the Greeks thought that this was enlightenment, the highest level of civilization. They had a strong sense of destiny and believed that their culture was ordained to become the universal culture of humanity.

The Jews had a different vision. The Jews believed that a world united in the belief in one G-d and ascribing to one absolute standard of moral values -- including respect for life, peace, justice, and social responsibility for the weak and poor -- was the ultimate future of the human race.

This Jewish ideology was wedded to an extreme, uncompromising exclusivity of worship (as demanded by the belief in one G-d) and a complete intolerance of polytheistic religious beliefs or practices. There was only one G-d and so only one G-d could be worshipped, end of story.

To the Jews, human beings were created in the image of G-d. To the Greeks, gods were made in the image of human beings. To the Jews, the physical world was something to be perfected and elevated spiritually. To the Greeks the physical world was perfect. In short, to Greeks, what was beautiful was holy; to the Jews what was holy was beautiful.

Such disparate views were bound to clash, sooner or later.

[/quote]

From my understanding, Plato was quite unpopular in ancient Greece.  He was sold into slavery twice, and many people of his day sought to kill him.

Aeschines was a Greek who wrote about Greek law, much of this law is cited in "Against Timarchus".  While undesirable, disgusting Greek sexual relationships existed, it would seem Greek society had laws against them with stern punishments [perhaps one reason Plato was persecuted?].

http://homosexualityinancientgreece.wordpress.com/category/laws-against-homosexual-and-pederastic-relations/

Here we will post a list of laws against homosexual and pederastic relations as recorded in the text of Aeschines  known as Against Timarchus.

But first lets add a little bit of info. We’re in the middle of the 4th cent. BC during which the 2nd Athenean Alliance is in a great crisis due to the continuous growing power of Philip. The Atheneans, are separated into two major groups, one lead by Demosthenes and Hyperides which considers Philip nothing more than a tyrranic conqueror which will enslave and alienate the Atheneans and the rest of the Hellenes from their democratic norms and a secondlead by Isocrates, Phokion and Aeschines which see him as the great hope to finally unite the Hellenes under one leader and destroy the Barbarian threat (see Persian empire). Under the circumstances one can understand that backstabing, accusations of treason, bribery..etc were common.

In an attempt to present the agreement made by the Athenean ambassadors and Philip as void (since it desolved 2nd Athenean Alliance), Demosthenes’ “group” accused Aeschines of taking bribes from Philip. Aeschines’ prosecutor is Timarchus, a member of Demosthenes “group”. Aeschines, instead of trying to refute the accusations against him, takes a totally different turn and tries to totally avoid the trial by making reference to laws that existed since the time of Solon (7th cent. BC) and by doing so, literally deprived Timarchus of all his political rights.

Laws:

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 12

    Hellenic Original

    [Οἱ δὲ τῶν παίδων διδάσκαλοι ἀνοιγέτωσαν μὲν τὰ διδασκαλεῖα μὴ πρότερον ἡλίου ἀνιόντος, κλειέτωσαν δὲ πρὸ ἡλίου δύνοντος. καὶ μὴ ἐξέστω τοῖς ὑπὲρ τὴν τῶν παίδων ἡλικίαν οὖσιν εἰσιέναι τῶν παίδων ἔνδον ὄντων, ἐὰν μὴ υἱὸς διδασκάλου ἢ ἀδελφὸς ἢ θυγατρὸς ἀνήρ: ἐὰν δέ τις παρὰ ταῦτ᾽ εἰσίῃ, θανάτῳ ζημιούσθω. καὶ οἱ γυμνασιάρχαι τοῖς Ἑρμαίοις μὴ εἄτωσαν συγκαθιέναι μηδένα τῶν ἐν ἡλικίᾳ τρόπῳ μηδενί: ἐὰν δὲ ἐπιτρέπῃ καὶ μὴ ἐξείργῃ τοῦ γυμνασίου, ἔνοχος ἔστω ὁ γυμνασιάρχης τῷ τῆς ἐλευθέρων φθορᾶς νόμῳ. οἱ δὲ χορηγοὶ οἱ καθιστάμενοι ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου ἔστωσαν τὴν ἡλικίαν ὑπὲρ τετταράκοντα ἔτη

    Translation

    The teachers of the boys shall open the school-rooms not earlier than sunrise, and they shall close them before sunset. No person who is older than the boys shall be permitted to enter the room while they are there, unless he be a son of the teacher, a brother, or a daughter's husband. If any one enter in violation of this prohibition, he shall be punished with death. The superintendents of the gymnasia shall under no conditions allow any one who has reached the age of manhood to enter the contests of Hermes together with the boys. A gymnasiarch who does permit this and fails to keep such a person out of the gymnasium, shall be liable to the penalties prescribed for the seduction of free-born youth. Every choregus who is appointed by the people shall be more than forty years of age

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 13

    Hellenic Original

    ἐάν τινα ἐκμισθώσῃ ἑταιρεῖν πατὴρ ἢ ἀδελφὸς ἢ θεῖος ἢ ἐπίτροπος ἢ ὅλως τῶν κυρίων τις, κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ μὲν τοῦ παιδὸς οὐκ ἐᾷ γραφὴν εἶναι, κατὰ δὲ τοῦ μισθώσαντος καὶ τοῦ μισθωσαμένου, τοῦ μὲν ὅτι ἐξεμίσθωσε, τοῦ δὲ ὅτι, φησίν, ἐμισθώσατο

    Translation

    if any boy is let out for hire as a prostitute, whether it be by father or brother or uncle or guardian, or by any one else who has control of him, prosecution is not to he against the boy himself, but against the man who let him out for hire and the man who hired him

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 16

    Hellenic Original

    [Ἄν τις Ἀθηναίων έλεύθερον παῖδα ὑβρίσῃ, γραφέσθω ὁ κύριος τοῦ παιδὸς πρὸς τοὺς θεσμοθέτας, τίμημα ἐπιγραψάμενος. οὗ δ᾽ ἂν τὸ δικαστήριον καταψηφίσηται, παραδοθεὶς τοῖς ἕνδεκα τεθνάτω αὐθημερόν. ἐὰν δὲ εἰς ἀργύριον καταψηφισθῇ, ἀποτεισάτω ἐν ἕνδεκα ἡμέραις μετὰ τὴν δίκην, ἐὰν μὴ παραχρῆμα δύνηται ἀποτίνειν: ἕως δὲ τοῦ ἀποτεῖσαι εἱρχθήτω. ἔνοχοι δὲ ἔστασαν ταῖσδε ταῖς αἰτίαις καὶ οἱ εἰς τὰ οἰκετικὰ σώματα ἐξαμαρτάνοντες.]

    Translation

    If any Athenian shall outrage a free-born child, the parent or guardian of the child shall demand a specific penalty. If the court condemn the accused to death, he shall be delivered to the constables and be put to death the same day. If he be condemned to pay a fine, and be unable to pay the fine immediately, he must pay within eleven days after the trial, and he shall remain in prison until payment is made. The same action shall hold against those who abuse the persons of slaves.

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 17

    Hellenic Original

    ἴσως ἂν οὖν τις θαυμάσειεν ἐξαίφνης ἀκούσας, τί δή ποτ᾽ ἐν τῷ νόμῳ τῷ τῆς ὕβρεως προσεγράφη τοῦτο τὸ ῥῆμα, τὸ τῶν δούλων. τοῦτο δὲ ἐὰν σκοπῆτε, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, εὑρήσετε ὅτι πάντων ἄριστα ἔχει: οὐ γὰρ ὑπὲρ τῶν οἰκετῶν ἐσπούδασεν ὁ νομοθέτης, ἀλλὰ βουλόμενος ὑμᾶς ἐθίσαι πολὺ ἀπέχειν τῆς τῶν ἐλευθέρων ὕβρεως, προσέγραψε μηδ᾽ εἰς τοὺς δούλους ὑβρίζειν. ὅλως δὲ ἐν δημοκρατίᾳ τὸν εἰς ὁντινοῦν ὑβριστήν, τοῦτον οὐκ ἐπιτήδειον ἡγήσατο εἶναι συμπολιτεύεσθαι.

    Translation

    Now perhaps some one, on first hearing this law, may wonder for what possible reason this word “slaves” was added in the law against outrage. But if you reflect on the matter, fellow citizens, you will find this to be the best provision of all. For it was not for the slaves that the lawgiver was concerned, but he wished to accustom you to keep a long distance away from the crime of outraging free men, and so he added the prohibition against the outraging even of slaves. In a word, he was convinced that in a democracy that man is unfit for citizenship who outrages any person whatsoever.

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 21

    Hellenic Original

    Ἐάν τις Ἀθηναῖος ἑταιρήσῃ, μὴ ἐξέστω αὐτῷ τῶν ἐννέα ἀρχόντων γενέσθαι, μηδ᾽ ἱερωσύνην ἱερώσασθαι, μηδὲ συνδικῆσαι τῷ δήμῳ, μηδὲ ἀρχὴν ἀρχέτω μηδεμίαν, μήτε ἔνδημον μήτε ὑπερόριον, μήτε κληρωτὴν μήτε χειροτονητήν, μηδ᾽ ἐπὶ κηρυκείαν ἀποστελλέσθω, μηδὲ γνώμην λεγέτω, μηδ᾽ εἰς τὰ δημοτελῆ ἱερὰ εἰσίτω, μηδ᾽ ἐν ταῖς κοιναῖς στεφανηφορίαις στεφανούσθω, μηδ᾽ ἐντὸς τῆς ἀγορᾶς τῶν περιρραντηρίων πορευέσθω. ἐὰν δέ τις παρὰ1 ταῦτα ποιῇ, καταγνωσθέντος αὐτοῦ ἑταιρεῖν, θανάτῳ ζημιούσθω

    Translation

    If any Athenian shall have prostituted his person, he shall not be permitted to become one of the nine archons, nor to discharge the office of priest, nor to act as an advocate for the state, nor shall he hold any office whatsoever, at home or abroad, whether filled by lot or by election; he shall not be sent as a herald; he shall not take part in debate, nor be present at public sacrifices; when the citizens are wearing garlands, he shall wear none; and he shall not enter within the limits of the place that has been purified for the assembling of the people. If any man who has been convicted of prostitution act contrary to these prohibitions, he shall be put to death.

Here we must note a mistake in the translation.
While the translation speaks of “prostituting his person” the original makes no reference what so ever to “prostitution” but clearly states ἑταιρήσῃ .
According to the comprehensive “Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon” ἑταιρήσῃ = unchastity.

The difference is indicated further in the text:

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 29

    Hellenic Original

    φησί, “μὴ ἐστρατευμένος, ὅσαι ἂν αὐτῷ προσταχθῶσιν, ἢ τὴν ἀσπίδα ἀποβεβληκώς,” δίκαια λέγων. τί δή ποτε; ἄνθρωπε, τῇ πόλει, ὑπὲρ ἧς τὰ ὅπλα μὴ τίθεσαι ἢ διὰ δειλίαν μὴ δυνατὸς εἶ ἐπαμῦναι, μηδὲ συμβουλεύειν βουλεύειν ἀξίου. τρίτον τίσι διαλέγεται; “ἢ πεπορνευμένος,”φησίν, “ἢ ἡταιρηκώς:” τὸν γὰρ τὸ σῶμα τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἐφ᾽ ὕβρει πεπρακότα, καὶ τὰ κοινὰ τῆς πόλεως ῥᾳδίως ἡγήσατο ἀποδώσεσθαι. τέταρτον τίσι διαλέγεται

    Translation

    “Or the man who has failed to perform all the military service demanded of him, or who has thrown away his shield.” And he is right. Why? Man, if you fail to take up arms in behalf of the state, or if you are such a coward that you are unable to defend her, you must not claim the right to advise her, either. Whom does he specify in the third place? “Or the man,” he says, “who has debauched or prostituted himself.” For the man who has made traffic of the shame of his own body, he thought would be ready to sell the common interests of the city also. But whom does he specify in the fourth place?

The use of both terms πεπορνευμένος (according to Liddle & Scott “to prostitue” and ἡταιρηκώς ( according to Liddle & Scott = to keep company) clearly indicates that the laws did NOT apply ONLY to those that had prostituted themselves, but also to those that had formed homosexual relations.

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 46

    Hellenic Original

    ἐὰν μὲν οὖν ἐθελήσῃ ὁ Μισγόλας δεῦρο παρελθὼν τἀληθῆ μαρτυρεῖν, τὰ δίκαια ποιήσει: ἐὰν δὲ προαιρῆται ἐκκλητευθῆναι μᾶλλον ἢ τἀληθῆ μαρτυρεῖν, ὑμεῖς τὸ ὅλον πρᾶγμα συνίδετε. εἰ γὰρ ὁ μὲν πράξας αἰσχυνεῖται καὶ προαιρήσεται χιλίας μᾶλλον δραχμὰς ἀποτεῖσαι τῷ δημοσίῳ, ὥστε μὴ δεῖξαι τὸ πρόσωπον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ὑμῖν, ὁ δὲ πεπονθὼς δημηγορήσει, σοφὸς ὁ νομοθέτης ὁ τοὺς οὕτω βδελυροὺς ἐξείργων ἀπὸ τοῦ βήματος.

    Translation

    If therefore Misgolas is willing to come forward here and testify to the truth, he will be doing what is right; but if he prefers to refuse the summons rather than testify to the truth, the whole business will be made clear to you. For if the man who did the thing is going to be ashamed of it and choose to pay a thousand drachmas into the treasury rather than show his face before you, while the man to whom it has been done is to be a speaker in your assembly, then wise indeed was the lawgiver who excluded such disgusting creatures from the platform.

We move on to Misgolas, Timarchus’ ‘lover’s’ testimony, (who makes no reference to payment) the accounts of others and the conclusion that he not only had homosexual relations but also prosituted himself.

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 52

    Hellenic Original

    ἐὰν δ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἀναμνήσας ἐπιδείξω, ὑπερβαίνων τούσδε τοὺς ἀγρίους, Κηδωνίδην καὶ Αὐτοκλείδην καὶ Θέρσανδρον, αὐτοὺς δὲ λέγων ὧν ἐν ταῖς οἰκίαις ἀνειλημμένος γέγονε, μὴ μόνον παρὰ τῷ Μισγόλᾳ μεμισθαρνηκότα αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τῷ σώματι, ἀλλὰ καὶ παρ᾽ ἑτέρῳ καὶ πάλιν παρ᾽ ἄλλῷ, καὶ παρὰ τούτου ὡς ἕτερον ἐληλυθότα, οὐκέτι δήπου φανεῖται μόνον ἡταιρηκώς, ἀλλὰ （μὰ τὸν Διόνυσον οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως δυνήσομαι περιπλέκειν ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν） καὶ πεπορνευμένος: ὁ γὰρ εἰκῇ τοῦτο καὶ πρὸς πολλοὺς πράττων καὶ μισθοῦ, αὐτῷ μοι δοκεῖ τούτῳ ἔνοχος εἶναι.

    Translation

    But if, saying nothing about these bestial fellows, Cedonides, Autocleides, and Thersandrus, and simply telling the names of those in whose houses he has been an inmate, I refresh your memories and show that he is guilty of selling his person not only in Misgolas’ house, but in the house of another man also, and again of another, and that from this last he went to still another, surely you will no longer look upon him as one who has merely been a kept man, but—by Dionysus, I don’t know how I can keep glossing the thing over all day long—as a common prostitute. For the man who follows these practices recklessly and with many men and for pay seems to me to be chargeable with precisely this.

While the translation “kept man” may be misleading, the definition provided by the Liddle and Scott provides little doubt to what is actually written.

Finally a quote that actually depicts what they believed about such relations:

Aeschines, Against Timarchus 185

    Hellenic Original

    ἔπειθ᾽ οἱ μὲν πατέρες ὑμῶν οὕτω περὶ τῶν αἰσχρῶν καὶ καλῶν διεγίγνωσκον, ὑμεῖς δὲ Τίμαρχον τὸν τοῖς αἰσχίστοις ἐπιτηδεύμασιν ἔνοχον ἀφήσετε; τὸν ἄνδρα μὲν καὶ ἄρρενα τὸ σῶμα, γυναικεῖα δὲ ἁμαρτήματα ἡμαρτηκότα; τίς οὖν ὑμῶν γυναῖκα λαβὼν ἀδικοῦσαν τιμωρήσεται; ἢ τίς οὐκ ἀπαίδευτος εἶναι δόξει τῇ μὲν κατὰ φύσιν ἁμαρτανούσῃ χαλεπαίνων, τῷ δὲ παρὰ φύσιν ἑαυτὸν ὑβρίσαντι συμβούλῳ χρώμενος;

    Translation

    Such, then, was the judgment of your fathers concerning things shameful and things honorable; and shall their sons let Timarchus go free, a man chargeable with the most shameful practices, a creature with the body of a man defiled with the sins of a woman? In that case, who of you will punish a woman if he finds her in wrong doing? Or what man will not be regarded as lacking intelligence who is angry with her who errs by an impulse of nature, while he treats as adviser the man who in despite of nature has sinned against his own body?

The phrase παρὰ φύσιν ἑαυτὸν ὑβρίσαντι (to wax wanton himself against nature) actually says it all.

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

בס''ד

I watched a few minutes of this atrocious film and couldn't stand it any more. The purpose of this film is to condemn Torah Judaism for opposing the destructive homosexual lifestyle.

Any film on homosexuality should have only one objective: to help homosexuals overcome this very serious challenge that they have. If a film does not do that, the film is evil. And if a film actually encourages homosexuals to feel that they can continue to live a self-destructive existence, then such a film is a crime.

Hamantaschen, I love my fellow Jews and I love righteous Gentiles. If you truly love someone, you don't tell them it's acceptable to be a drug addict and then give them more drugs, or it's acceptable to be an alcoholic, or it's acceptable to rebel against the laws of G-d.

Active homosexuals will not have a place in the next world. They will lose eternal life. For what? For an insane lifestyle that only brings misery and death?

This film is a pack of lies. Only Torah Judaism represents the truth. Someday you will see that the Torah is completely true and that those who go against it will regret their dreadful mistake. It is my duty as a Jew to do my best to spread that message to my brothers and sisters whom I love with all my heart.

[Ben m]

Are you seriously trying to defend homosexual civilizations, Ben?

Gee... does this have anything to do with why you thought my pictures were so gross?

no,but i think yu have a serious problems with undersatnding simple sentneces.show me one proof that i defended homosexuality.