sittnick
Apr 19, 01:50 PM
BREAKING NEWS --- 1979 --
http://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/3_ab121w.jpghttp://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/4_gebw.jpg
RCA Launches Suit Against General Electric for infringement of 9" b&w television interface and "look and feel."
Spokesmen for RCA maintain that GE's misappropriation of the LīfLīk� Trūwūd� woodgrain finish, leading consumers to confuse the GE imitation with the RCA original.
Also note GE's nearly identical VHF and UHF controllers ... placed in the same location on the chassis as the RCA original. Even the speaker is located in the same way.
RCA patented the use of separate VHF and UHF knobs in 1958, the click-stop UHF knob in 1972, and the ergonomically efficient upper right location of tuner knobs in 1952. The characteristics are innovations that help the consumer recognize an RCA television, and any use of these unique features without RCA's explicit permission is a breach of patent, trademark and copyright.
http://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/3_ab121w.jpghttp://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/4_gebw.jpg
RCA Launches Suit Against General Electric for infringement of 9" b&w television interface and "look and feel."
Spokesmen for RCA maintain that GE's misappropriation of the LīfLīk� Trūwūd� woodgrain finish, leading consumers to confuse the GE imitation with the RCA original.
Also note GE's nearly identical VHF and UHF controllers ... placed in the same location on the chassis as the RCA original. Even the speaker is located in the same way.
RCA patented the use of separate VHF and UHF knobs in 1958, the click-stop UHF knob in 1972, and the ergonomically efficient upper right location of tuner knobs in 1952. The characteristics are innovations that help the consumer recognize an RCA television, and any use of these unique features without RCA's explicit permission is a breach of patent, trademark and copyright.
intlplby
Nov 28, 07:51 PM
i agree with this on one condition:
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
intlplby
Nov 28, 07:51 PM
i agree with this on one condition:
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
benthewraith
Nov 28, 08:02 PM
they said that their music was driving sales of iPods so they deserved a cut of iPod profits from Apple.
What if I don't use my iPod for their crap? What if everything on my iPod was made by independents or music labels independent of the RIAA/MPAA fascists?
What if I don't use my iPod for their crap? What if everything on my iPod was made by independents or music labels independent of the RIAA/MPAA fascists?
Astro7x
Apr 6, 11:34 AM
This is Bowl *****!!! Come on man....I see these claims with absolutely NO, ZERO proof to back it up...Links? Pics? Video???? IF anything, MORE people have joined the FCP camp...because more people than EVER are buying Macs! Even though Adobe and Avid are cross platform, the affordability of FCP is a real bonus. Everyone I know that uses FCP and has been using FCP has ZERO interest in flipping. Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases! Today's speed of the new Macs....MBP, iMacs, Mac Pros...makes the transition from AVC, XDCam, DVCPro, etc to Pro-Res, is actually a very speedy process. Even Canon stepped up last spring with a plug in to increase transition speed almost a 1,000% (used to take a minute or two to transform...now done in 10 seconds or less!!!). Once in Pro Res, editing is an absolute breeze...a cake walk, easy as pie:) Especially if you have a recent generation Mac from the last couple of years.
Seconding this. And also would like to add... What businesses out there can just switch operating systems on a whim because they latest and greatest came out for another platform? Sure if you are Joe Schmo freelancing out of your house you can do it, but any actual business with existing equipment doesn't just switch like that. I just can't picture anybody going "Damn Apple won't support the Mercury Engine, I'M SWITCHING BACK TO WINDOWS!!!"
Seconding this. And also would like to add... What businesses out there can just switch operating systems on a whim because they latest and greatest came out for another platform? Sure if you are Joe Schmo freelancing out of your house you can do it, but any actual business with existing equipment doesn't just switch like that. I just can't picture anybody going "Damn Apple won't support the Mercury Engine, I'M SWITCHING BACK TO WINDOWS!!!"
Willis
Jul 27, 02:19 PM
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKF9GOE2q38
Anyone wanting to know about the Mhz myth shall find it there.
These new chips are to prove that the Mhz myth doesnt exist. Just by changing their arch. they can provide more performance with the same mhz, instead of increasing it (such as the Pentiums)
Imagine. If the Intel's were'nt annouced in January... we'd only have them for a month or two now instead of 7. Crazy.
Just goes to show the MBP's truely are designed for Merom
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKF9GOE2q38
Anyone wanting to know about the Mhz myth shall find it there.
These new chips are to prove that the Mhz myth doesnt exist. Just by changing their arch. they can provide more performance with the same mhz, instead of increasing it (such as the Pentiums)
Imagine. If the Intel's were'nt annouced in January... we'd only have them for a month or two now instead of 7. Crazy.
Just goes to show the MBP's truely are designed for Merom
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 03:59 PM
Okay here's the deal....
None of the Radio Shack stores in our area
know anything yet because there is a conference
call within the hour.
Let me explain...
Called another RS store in the area. Was told
that they don't know anything about iPhone preorders
tomorrow simply because they are all due for a
conference call within the hour from corporate to
discuss what the procedure will be.
So, perhaps you store already got the news.
I will say this. The woman at the second RS
store took down my phone number and said she
would personally call me later today to give me
all the details.
None of the Radio Shack stores in our area
know anything yet because there is a conference
call within the hour.
Let me explain...
Called another RS store in the area. Was told
that they don't know anything about iPhone preorders
tomorrow simply because they are all due for a
conference call within the hour from corporate to
discuss what the procedure will be.
So, perhaps you store already got the news.
I will say this. The woman at the second RS
store took down my phone number and said she
would personally call me later today to give me
all the details.
littleman23408
Dec 7, 08:10 AM
I settled for 2nd on that test. Gold isnt worth the aggravation.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
Dunepilot
Nov 29, 08:13 AM
Stopping short of a foul-mouthed tirade against Universal and the other majors ... just.
Vinyl and FairplayAAC only for me these days. Screw these jokers.
Vinyl and FairplayAAC only for me these days. Screw these jokers.
mygoldens
Apr 27, 08:22 AM
Ok, somebody go slap the lawyers that are initiating the lawsuit!
Apple tracking everyone, ya right, like they have to?!
Apple tracking everyone, ya right, like they have to?!
newyorksole
Apr 11, 02:52 PM
Honestly, I don't mind waiting. The iPhone 4 is a BEAUTIFUL phone. Takes great pictures, fast, responsive, high-res screen etc etc. New apps are being released all the time and getting updated.
While I enjoy the 4 Apple is trying to make the iPhone 5 and iOS 5 amazing so that it'll be MORE than ready for prime time.
We have so much to look forward to: Lion, New MobileMe, Server Farm, iPhone 5, iOS 5
While I enjoy the 4 Apple is trying to make the iPhone 5 and iOS 5 amazing so that it'll be MORE than ready for prime time.
We have so much to look forward to: Lion, New MobileMe, Server Farm, iPhone 5, iOS 5
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
Couldn't Samsung just claim that the Galaxy S line is an evolution of the Samsung F700? Pretty strong argument for samsung.
Glideslope
Apr 25, 03:50 PM
i would bet anything that these two "customers" happen to also be lawyers.
They just can't earn clean money, always have to rip some one to earn it.
+1 ;)
They just can't earn clean money, always have to rip some one to earn it.
+1 ;)
CalBoy
Apr 11, 05:00 PM
Apple can create Christmas any day of the year.
Well that's just it; Apple usually relies on two Christmases per year for each of it's major products.
The first is the initial launch and the second is the Christmas shopping season.
The reason for this is two-fold. The first is so supplies are not constrained for an extended period at one time and the second is so Apple can make use of multiple news cycles to get free press.
If the iPhone 5 is launched just before Christmas it would wreak havoc on Apple's ability to supply the market of not only the US, but also the world. Apple usually uses the downtime from late summer to Christmas to shore up production and supplies for Christmas. There just isn't a good basis for this rumor.
Well that's just it; Apple usually relies on two Christmases per year for each of it's major products.
The first is the initial launch and the second is the Christmas shopping season.
The reason for this is two-fold. The first is so supplies are not constrained for an extended period at one time and the second is so Apple can make use of multiple news cycles to get free press.
If the iPhone 5 is launched just before Christmas it would wreak havoc on Apple's ability to supply the market of not only the US, but also the world. Apple usually uses the downtime from late summer to Christmas to shore up production and supplies for Christmas. There just isn't a good basis for this rumor.
Popeye206
Apr 25, 02:06 PM
UGH! That didn't take long before the sharks swarmed!
How ridiculous. :rolleyes:
How ridiculous. :rolleyes:
appleguy123
Feb 28, 08:19 PM
It matters that you describe it as fornication.
What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
He's trying to equate in our minds homosexuality, rape, and pedophilia.
What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
He's trying to equate in our minds homosexuality, rape, and pedophilia.
Silentwave
Aug 26, 10:47 PM
This is interesting, BUT, from what I know, Intel announced the desktop (Conroe) Core 2 Duo proccessor on July 27, and as far as I know, no Conroe systems are shipping right now, almost a month later.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
MacQuest
Jul 21, 05:42 AM
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
Word.
Word.
Gugulino
Apr 6, 04:43 AM
precision editor? there are a million bajillion ways to "precision edit" in FCP that are easy and accurate. Just because there's no "one click" flashy UI to go with it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Yes, there are ways in FCP, but they are clunky! It was much easier for my project to do it in iMovie. Naturally, it is not true for every project.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
Yes, there are ways in FCP, but they are clunky! It was much easier for my project to do it in iMovie. Naturally, it is not true for every project.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
bretm
Apr 11, 09:51 AM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
david77
Apr 25, 02:31 PM
I should have become a lawyer.
Easy money at this point.
Easy money at this point.
�algiris
Mar 31, 02:32 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
One of the last? Oh boy ...
One of the last? Oh boy ...
DoFoT9
Aug 12, 04:48 AM
Multi-quote madness!!! :eek:
haha thats nothing ;)
haha thats nothing ;)
