Classical Roman views of female homoeroticism, though more numerous than the Greek references, can be just as hard to evaluate due to a tendency to displace discussions of f/f sex onto past eras and foreign locations. We've encountered some of the same difficulty in trying to interpret how mythological data can shed light on real-life dynamics. We also run into the problem of scholars projecting their preconceptions about f/f relations onto the Classical data and reading-in interpretations that may not be present in the data. Boehringer does a good job of calling out these interpretive additions (though sometimes they seem to be dismissed without significant discussion). In reviewing the Roman evidence, always keep in mind the critical importance in Roman social and legal dynamics of social status. "Male" and "female" are rarely the most relevant categories when evaluating actions.
Comments