I don’t care what they tell you in school, Alexander The Great was Black.
I mean. Perhaps not gay but it’s near universally agreed that he was at least bi given the amount of confirmed gay lovers he had….
Homosexuality in classical Greece wasn’t as widely accepted as it is popularly believed, but that quote from the Roman historian pretty much settles the debate whether it’s fine to portray Alexander as gay.
I don’t think the societies we’re talking about has strict sexuality the way we talk about it now.
He for sure fucked a load of dudes though
Based gay gigachad
Every Netflix show is woke! What is happening to the world /s
I was under the impression that he just fucked anything that moved regardless of gender.
Gay is probably a difficult term to use in an ancient context, as are most modern terms regarding sexuality. But ignoring sexual relationships with men completely in a show about Alexander the Great would be very, very weird.
That being said: just about everything else about this show seems wrong. The set design, the sensationalism, the Persians being the ultimate ‚other‘… this doesn’t look good.
Applying terminology like ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’ in this context is always a bit iffy, since how we tend to describe sexuality is very different from back in those days, but if I was pressed for an answer I’d sooner call Alexander bi than anything else. Basically everyone was back then, I hope the roots of western society aren’t *that* muddled nowadays.
[deleted]
He certainly wasn’t “gay”, since it’s a modern concept, but he probably had sex with men
Gay but extremely hot masculinity.
They made a whole fucking article about a tweet made by an account called EndWokeness…
Journalism is so fucking dead.
The Ancient Greeks didn’t have the modern concept of gay/straight as we see it today, to them it was about dominance and submission. Just about the “gayest” or most submissive thing that a man could do within Ancient Greek or Roman society was to perform oral sex on a woman since it was seen as putting yourself lower than her. Alexander the Great wouldn’t have given a fuck about whether what he was fucking was male or female, all that mattered in his society was that he was the one doing the fucking and not the one getting fucked.
Albanians disown him now. 🤣
A powerful man of his times
“Sexuality” is a modern concept based on a modern philosophy. I’ll use “homosexual” here to refer to same-sex relationships, but understand that the concept is meaningless and culturally unrelated to the Ancients.
The internet has taken and run with homoerotic elements of Ancient Greek culture as if they’re representative of a liberated, gay culture- but the truth is far bleaker. Even many sources cited as advancing homonormativity are specious, like Pammenes’ commentary on Theban military organisation… which refers to love between soldiers, but makes no comment whatever on sexual relationships.
Largely, Ancient Greece was a profoundly heteronormative culture, although this varied widely between Poleis.
Certainly, some of the Poleis (such as Thebes) were more tolerant and accepting of these types of behaviours, but many others rejected the concept wholesale. Homosexuality was forbidden in the Spartan agoge (i.e. between boys of equal age) and deemed abominable (indeed, Xenophon’s *Symposium* contains a detailed critique of the place of homosexuality in military formations) and this reveals a deeper underlying truth: homosexuality was not an expression of camaraderie, or of love, or of propinquity in Ancient Greece, but rather an element of parochial social dominance.
An *Erastes* (older man & social better) would select a teenaged *Eromenos* to serve as his sexual “partner” (which is, frankly, a grim euphemism) and functionally groom them for some social position in exchange for sex- not as equals, but as a dominated inferior.
Pederastic relationships were never interpreted as equivalent or equal to relationships between men and women- but rather all relationships were judged by a strict socio-sexual ethic, based on a hierarchy of domination (that is, the person penetrating being superior to the person being penetrated) that prevailed over much of the Eastern Mediterranean basin at the time. It is this same culture that gives rise to Biblical prohibitions on male homosexual intercourse- like Greece, the Ancient Jewish authors of the Bible concern themselves only with the ethic of “debasing” men by having them be penetrated, and gives no thought to romantic relationships, or relationships between women (whether romantic or sexual), who are always understood to be social inferiors under this paradigm.
This was not, it should be keenly stressed, modern Homosexuality. These relationships were not equivalent to a marriage, and they were not organised between equals. Indeed, these relationships would be illegal and dismissed as statutory rape in the modern United Kingdom, akin to a teacher raping a student. The modern romanticisation of these deeply unequal and predatory relationships is, frankly, bizarre.
Indeed, Erastai would still ordinarily take wives and procreate. This is true of all of the great Ancients associated with homosexuality by modern ideologues- the events of the Iliad follow Achilles being humiliated by Agamemnon, who steals Briseis, a Cilician princess, who had been given to Achilles as a prize. It is a natural consequence of power and dominance, in Ancient Greece, that Greek Heroes be presented as engaging in homoerotic relationships- it is a reflection of this facet of near-eastern Mediterranean culture.
And in that sense, Alexander absolutely wasn’t gay. Hephaestion, his closest male companion, was his own age, but a profound social inferior. He was also a general and somatophylax in Alexander’s companion cavalry (all that to say that he wasn’t brought on campaign as Alexander’s lover). A sexual relationship between the two of them need not have been symbolic of anything romantic or erotic, but rather of social dominance, companionship, opportunism, and, bluntly, stress relief.
Alexander, during his campaign, took three wives- Stateira, Parysatis, and Roxana. Roxana, chiefest among these, is said to have thoroughly enraptured him- he fell deeply in love with her (and wished to name her Queen of Macedon), and they even had a child together, Alexander IV.
Obviously, none of this is to say that homosexuals did not exist in Ancient Greece. If these people were resurrected in 2024, perhaps they would find themselves in very different parts of the sexuality spectrum than they did in their day. The idea, however, that these figures can be claimed as homosexual, is modern political absurdity. They were mostly predatory rapists, and I see absolutely no moral value in assigning to them some modern, culturally incompatible label.
This aint the USA, stop trying to outrage us with dumb shit.
>“Just FYI from my reading of history, Alexander the Great was a well known bisexual who actually preferred men,” read another comment
Another comment made by, would you believe that, the QShaman.
So what if he was?
Labels are stupid. Just cuz he fucked a bunch of guys doesn’t mean he was gay
The show is very odd. Its like they are trying to actively convey a message that “Alexander wasn’t that great”
It doesn’t focus that much on his military capabilities, portrays him as a rash hot head who attacks without thinking, and focus way more time trying to show him as a tyrant (which was normal at the time).
Regarding his sexuality, its basically common knowledge that he was bisexual.
Regardless of him being gay or bi, the man conquered half of the KNOWN world by the age of 32. What have yall done? 🙂
I don’t know why is so hard to understand. He was Serb like everyone on this planet, you are all serbs
Serbs are no no gay so he wasn’t gay he was great man fucked hot women serbian women so no no gay, serbs straight as arrow
He was bi according to the series.
I thought it is a historical fact that Alexander the Great was bisexual? Am I wrong?
Gay? No,no,no, the man is a bisexual icon.
Who cares…
A guy conquered half of the know world at the time, 2000 years later, people are discussing who he fucked.
Social media are full of bots and multiple account, I am not sure anything is accurate from them
Yea, beeing bi was totally accepted.. only the church made it a sin.. imagine following the rules of some religious idiots.
Another “one person posted something on Twitter, then others posted something on Twitter” article.
Thanks for nothing.
I fuck men because I love sex
You fuck men because you like men
We are not the same
Funnily enough, the series historical consultant (associate professor of history and director of the Ancient Mediterranean Studies Program @University of Nebraska and novelist) Jeanne Reames wrote some greatt stuff about this topic (and how the producers ignored some of her input or went a different way, for example with their silly nicknames)
> Unfortunately protestors and advocates alike tend to view the question as if Alexander and Hephaistion lived now. But they didn’t. They lived then. And they thought about it all very differently than we do.
> Too many insist on filtering data through the beliefs and customs of their own society (or religion, or political agenda), and don’t recognize that people in other places and times can think quite differently about the most basic of things — including sex. Some just don’t realize their ways of thinking are different, but others don’t want to have their safe ideas about the world challenged.
> Alexander and Hephaistion would’ve been baffled by all the hullabaloo, not to mention the label “gay.” I have elsewhere argued that I think “queer” is fine applied to Alexander because it’s a very flexible term, but “gay” brings with it modern assumptions that don’t fit antiquity (“Was Alexander the Great Gay?”). Not to mention Alexander had sexual relationships with both sexes.
> The ancient Greeks didn’t worry so much about who one had sex with, but with what role one took. It was all about power and social position. If a guy took the passive role with someone of lesser social status, that was a Bad Thing. He was making himself like a woman. But if he took the dominant role, it didn’t matter. His partner could be a woman, a boy, a slave, or a younger man. Among some groups, love between two men was considered superior because, of course, men were superior. Thus, love with an inferior woman would always be an inferior love.
> See, the ancient Greeks (and Macedonians) had an entirely different set of assumptions about what sex — and love — were for. Once again, we’re back to the idea that people in different times and places can think quite differently about quite basic things.
This why I avoid the term “gay” for any ancient Greek figure. It’s anachronistic, bringing to mind modern pairings with different dynamics and expectations. The best term to use for Greek same-sex attraction is “homoerotic.” Or, again, just “queer.” Alexander wasn’t gay, but he was queer.
> How we talk about a subject reflects the ways in which our culture and language conceptualizes the world. How do we discuss — or even conceive of — categories for which we have no words? And ancient Greek had no word that corresponded to our “homosexual” (or heterosexual or bisexual). In fact, modern categories of sexuality are recent constructs reflecting modern (particularly Western) views. Are they absolutes? Well, personally, I don’t believe in absolutes. If there’s an objective reality, we can’t know it, caught as we are in our own time, culture, and personal story.
> A more interesting question is whether the ancients understood what modern psychology might label gay, straight, and bisexual, regardless of whether they had a word for it. The answer is,”Perhaps.” Ancient sources do suggest at least some Greeks recognized people might prefer their own sex, the other sex, or both sexes in varying degrees of intensity. But here’s where categorization gets tricky. Even if they recognized these tendencies, they clearly didn’t think them important enough to create labels, much less conceptualize them in the same ways we do.
> While it’s true that male-male relationships tended to involve partners of differing ages, that’s a notably Athenian pattern based on Athenian evidence, and quite a mistake to impose Athenian norms on other Greek city-states. (Rather like assuming everyone in the whole US shares New York sensibilities.) In fact, we have evidence that in Macedonia at least, the erastes and eromenos could be much closer in age than was (apparently) considered acceptable in Athens. Sostratos and Hermolaos, Pages in Alexander’s army (and infamous for participating in the Pages’ Conspiracy), are referred to in Arrian (4.13.3) specifically with the erastes/eromenos terminology, yet they could only have been a few years apart. No one remarked on that as unusual, suggesting it wasn’t considered so.
> Do I think Alexander and Hephaistion lovers? Certainly in my fiction, I’ve depicted them as being so. But were they historically? It’s very possible, even likely, at least when they were young. But being lovers was not how they defined their relationship. Alexander called Hephaistion “Philalexandros” — Alexander’s (dearest) friend — and that mattered to them most. For the ancient Greeks, philia was the higher love over mere eros (desire).
So even the “he was GAAAAY” or “BIIII” people aren’t really any better than the “he was a straight male gentlemen” group. We just don’t know if the had a sexual realitonship with him, at the time it wasn’t really weird or that important (atleast when they were younger) but we do know he absolutely loved him in the most important way (for their times). IF a documentary is making it clear that it’s 50/50 and would not mean that he was gay in a modern way then i don’t see a big problem here. But dunno if they did.
The Bagoas (a eunuch) story is of course trickier but kissing the winner of a contest in public was the norm and the story was coming from someone having great beef with Alexander at the time. One of the reasons why Bagoas was seen as a fictional character for many time ( also picking and choosing which ancient writer modern day historians find trustworthy). Non-Persians would accept Alexander as “queer” and fucking everyone but even they had some red lines and one of them where eunuchs. It was something oriential tyrants would do (and fuck) but not the “civilized greeks”.
> So, first, the TL;DR version: The Greeks looked at what was done and the status (not gender) of the one doing it. Everything else is the flavor of your dipping sauce.
To what degree Alexander was attracted to men or women, we don’t know. Although today we recognize sexuality as a range, this does not mean that people in different eras used, let alone understood, modern labels.
We have sources that claim (or hint) that Alexander had relations with both sexes. Keep in mind, in Ancient Greek societies homosexual relations did not have the same taboo connotations that exist in most societies today.
Nevertheless, Alexander was not ‘gay’ as we understand the term. This is a modern term that describes modern attitudes and sensibilities. This so-called (dramatized) documentary’s purpose is not to reveal and analyze homosexual relations at the time among Greeks or in particular in the Macedonian Kingdom or Alexander’s court, but to provoke (and in some cases pander certain demographics) in order to attract attention and viewers.
Simply put, it’s easier (and probably cheaper) to provoke than to do proper research and prepare an interesting, thoughtful, and faithful documentary.
After 10 minutes in a “historical” drama series, you’re watching a gay soft porn. Netflix is a fucking joke.
Didn’t this “storm” already happen about 20 years ago with the Colin Farrell version? Who clicks this shit?
37 comments
I don’t care what they tell you in school, Alexander The Great was Black.
I mean. Perhaps not gay but it’s near universally agreed that he was at least bi given the amount of confirmed gay lovers he had….
Homosexuality in classical Greece wasn’t as widely accepted as it is popularly believed, but that quote from the Roman historian pretty much settles the debate whether it’s fine to portray Alexander as gay.
I don’t think the societies we’re talking about has strict sexuality the way we talk about it now.
He for sure fucked a load of dudes though
Based gay gigachad
Every Netflix show is woke! What is happening to the world /s
I was under the impression that he just fucked anything that moved regardless of gender.
Gay is probably a difficult term to use in an ancient context, as are most modern terms regarding sexuality. But ignoring sexual relationships with men completely in a show about Alexander the Great would be very, very weird.
That being said: just about everything else about this show seems wrong. The set design, the sensationalism, the Persians being the ultimate ‚other‘… this doesn’t look good.
Applying terminology like ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’ in this context is always a bit iffy, since how we tend to describe sexuality is very different from back in those days, but if I was pressed for an answer I’d sooner call Alexander bi than anything else. Basically everyone was back then, I hope the roots of western society aren’t *that* muddled nowadays.
[deleted]
He certainly wasn’t “gay”, since it’s a modern concept, but he probably had sex with men
Gay but extremely hot masculinity.
They made a whole fucking article about a tweet made by an account called EndWokeness…
Journalism is so fucking dead.
The Ancient Greeks didn’t have the modern concept of gay/straight as we see it today, to them it was about dominance and submission. Just about the “gayest” or most submissive thing that a man could do within Ancient Greek or Roman society was to perform oral sex on a woman since it was seen as putting yourself lower than her. Alexander the Great wouldn’t have given a fuck about whether what he was fucking was male or female, all that mattered in his society was that he was the one doing the fucking and not the one getting fucked.
Albanians disown him now. 🤣
A powerful man of his times
“Sexuality” is a modern concept based on a modern philosophy. I’ll use “homosexual” here to refer to same-sex relationships, but understand that the concept is meaningless and culturally unrelated to the Ancients.
The internet has taken and run with homoerotic elements of Ancient Greek culture as if they’re representative of a liberated, gay culture- but the truth is far bleaker. Even many sources cited as advancing homonormativity are specious, like Pammenes’ commentary on Theban military organisation… which refers to love between soldiers, but makes no comment whatever on sexual relationships.
Largely, Ancient Greece was a profoundly heteronormative culture, although this varied widely between Poleis.
Certainly, some of the Poleis (such as Thebes) were more tolerant and accepting of these types of behaviours, but many others rejected the concept wholesale. Homosexuality was forbidden in the Spartan agoge (i.e. between boys of equal age) and deemed abominable (indeed, Xenophon’s *Symposium* contains a detailed critique of the place of homosexuality in military formations) and this reveals a deeper underlying truth: homosexuality was not an expression of camaraderie, or of love, or of propinquity in Ancient Greece, but rather an element of parochial social dominance.
An *Erastes* (older man & social better) would select a teenaged *Eromenos* to serve as his sexual “partner” (which is, frankly, a grim euphemism) and functionally groom them for some social position in exchange for sex- not as equals, but as a dominated inferior.
Pederastic relationships were never interpreted as equivalent or equal to relationships between men and women- but rather all relationships were judged by a strict socio-sexual ethic, based on a hierarchy of domination (that is, the person penetrating being superior to the person being penetrated) that prevailed over much of the Eastern Mediterranean basin at the time. It is this same culture that gives rise to Biblical prohibitions on male homosexual intercourse- like Greece, the Ancient Jewish authors of the Bible concern themselves only with the ethic of “debasing” men by having them be penetrated, and gives no thought to romantic relationships, or relationships between women (whether romantic or sexual), who are always understood to be social inferiors under this paradigm.
This was not, it should be keenly stressed, modern Homosexuality. These relationships were not equivalent to a marriage, and they were not organised between equals. Indeed, these relationships would be illegal and dismissed as statutory rape in the modern United Kingdom, akin to a teacher raping a student. The modern romanticisation of these deeply unequal and predatory relationships is, frankly, bizarre.
Indeed, Erastai would still ordinarily take wives and procreate. This is true of all of the great Ancients associated with homosexuality by modern ideologues- the events of the Iliad follow Achilles being humiliated by Agamemnon, who steals Briseis, a Cilician princess, who had been given to Achilles as a prize. It is a natural consequence of power and dominance, in Ancient Greece, that Greek Heroes be presented as engaging in homoerotic relationships- it is a reflection of this facet of near-eastern Mediterranean culture.
And in that sense, Alexander absolutely wasn’t gay. Hephaestion, his closest male companion, was his own age, but a profound social inferior. He was also a general and somatophylax in Alexander’s companion cavalry (all that to say that he wasn’t brought on campaign as Alexander’s lover). A sexual relationship between the two of them need not have been symbolic of anything romantic or erotic, but rather of social dominance, companionship, opportunism, and, bluntly, stress relief.
Alexander, during his campaign, took three wives- Stateira, Parysatis, and Roxana. Roxana, chiefest among these, is said to have thoroughly enraptured him- he fell deeply in love with her (and wished to name her Queen of Macedon), and they even had a child together, Alexander IV.
Obviously, none of this is to say that homosexuals did not exist in Ancient Greece. If these people were resurrected in 2024, perhaps they would find themselves in very different parts of the sexuality spectrum than they did in their day. The idea, however, that these figures can be claimed as homosexual, is modern political absurdity. They were mostly predatory rapists, and I see absolutely no moral value in assigning to them some modern, culturally incompatible label.
This aint the USA, stop trying to outrage us with dumb shit.
>“Just FYI from my reading of history, Alexander the Great was a well known bisexual who actually preferred men,” read another comment
Another comment made by, would you believe that, the QShaman.
So what if he was?
Labels are stupid. Just cuz he fucked a bunch of guys doesn’t mean he was gay
The show is very odd. Its like they are trying to actively convey a message that “Alexander wasn’t that great”
It doesn’t focus that much on his military capabilities, portrays him as a rash hot head who attacks without thinking, and focus way more time trying to show him as a tyrant (which was normal at the time).
Regarding his sexuality, its basically common knowledge that he was bisexual.
Regardless of him being gay or bi, the man conquered half of the KNOWN world by the age of 32. What have yall done? 🙂
I don’t know why is so hard to understand. He was Serb like everyone on this planet, you are all serbs
Serbs are no no gay so he wasn’t gay he was great man fucked hot women serbian women so no no gay, serbs straight as arrow
He was bi according to the series.
I thought it is a historical fact that Alexander the Great was bisexual? Am I wrong?
Gay? No,no,no, the man is a bisexual icon.
Who cares…
A guy conquered half of the know world at the time, 2000 years later, people are discussing who he fucked.
Social media are full of bots and multiple account, I am not sure anything is accurate from them
Yea, beeing bi was totally accepted.. only the church made it a sin.. imagine following the rules of some religious idiots.
Another “one person posted something on Twitter, then others posted something on Twitter” article.
Thanks for nothing.
I fuck men because I love sex
You fuck men because you like men
We are not the same
Funnily enough, the series historical consultant (associate professor of history and director of the Ancient Mediterranean Studies Program @University of Nebraska and novelist) Jeanne Reames wrote some greatt stuff about this topic (and how the producers ignored some of her input or went a different way, for example with their silly nicknames)
[Was He (Hephaistion) Really Alexander’s Lover?
](https://jeannereames.net/Hephaistion/lover.html)
> Unfortunately protestors and advocates alike tend to view the question as if Alexander and Hephaistion lived now. But they didn’t. They lived then. And they thought about it all very differently than we do.
> Too many insist on filtering data through the beliefs and customs of their own society (or religion, or political agenda), and don’t recognize that people in other places and times can think quite differently about the most basic of things — including sex. Some just don’t realize their ways of thinking are different, but others don’t want to have their safe ideas about the world challenged.
> Alexander and Hephaistion would’ve been baffled by all the hullabaloo, not to mention the label “gay.” I have elsewhere argued that I think “queer” is fine applied to Alexander because it’s a very flexible term, but “gay” brings with it modern assumptions that don’t fit antiquity (“Was Alexander the Great Gay?”). Not to mention Alexander had sexual relationships with both sexes.
> The ancient Greeks didn’t worry so much about who one had sex with, but with what role one took. It was all about power and social position. If a guy took the passive role with someone of lesser social status, that was a Bad Thing. He was making himself like a woman. But if he took the dominant role, it didn’t matter. His partner could be a woman, a boy, a slave, or a younger man. Among some groups, love between two men was considered superior because, of course, men were superior. Thus, love with an inferior woman would always be an inferior love.
> See, the ancient Greeks (and Macedonians) had an entirely different set of assumptions about what sex — and love — were for. Once again, we’re back to the idea that people in different times and places can think quite differently about quite basic things.
This why I avoid the term “gay” for any ancient Greek figure. It’s anachronistic, bringing to mind modern pairings with different dynamics and expectations. The best term to use for Greek same-sex attraction is “homoerotic.” Or, again, just “queer.” Alexander wasn’t gay, but he was queer.
> How we talk about a subject reflects the ways in which our culture and language conceptualizes the world. How do we discuss — or even conceive of — categories for which we have no words? And ancient Greek had no word that corresponded to our “homosexual” (or heterosexual or bisexual). In fact, modern categories of sexuality are recent constructs reflecting modern (particularly Western) views. Are they absolutes? Well, personally, I don’t believe in absolutes. If there’s an objective reality, we can’t know it, caught as we are in our own time, culture, and personal story.
> A more interesting question is whether the ancients understood what modern psychology might label gay, straight, and bisexual, regardless of whether they had a word for it. The answer is,”Perhaps.” Ancient sources do suggest at least some Greeks recognized people might prefer their own sex, the other sex, or both sexes in varying degrees of intensity. But here’s where categorization gets tricky. Even if they recognized these tendencies, they clearly didn’t think them important enough to create labels, much less conceptualize them in the same ways we do.
> While it’s true that male-male relationships tended to involve partners of differing ages, that’s a notably Athenian pattern based on Athenian evidence, and quite a mistake to impose Athenian norms on other Greek city-states. (Rather like assuming everyone in the whole US shares New York sensibilities.) In fact, we have evidence that in Macedonia at least, the erastes and eromenos could be much closer in age than was (apparently) considered acceptable in Athens. Sostratos and Hermolaos, Pages in Alexander’s army (and infamous for participating in the Pages’ Conspiracy), are referred to in Arrian (4.13.3) specifically with the erastes/eromenos terminology, yet they could only have been a few years apart. No one remarked on that as unusual, suggesting it wasn’t considered so.
> Do I think Alexander and Hephaistion lovers? Certainly in my fiction, I’ve depicted them as being so. But were they historically? It’s very possible, even likely, at least when they were young. But being lovers was not how they defined their relationship. Alexander called Hephaistion “Philalexandros” — Alexander’s (dearest) friend — and that mattered to them most. For the ancient Greeks, philia was the higher love over mere eros (desire).
So even the “he was GAAAAY” or “BIIII” people aren’t really any better than the “he was a straight male gentlemen” group. We just don’t know if the had a sexual realitonship with him, at the time it wasn’t really weird or that important (atleast when they were younger) but we do know he absolutely loved him in the most important way (for their times). IF a documentary is making it clear that it’s 50/50 and would not mean that he was gay in a modern way then i don’t see a big problem here. But dunno if they did.
The Bagoas (a eunuch) story is of course trickier but kissing the winner of a contest in public was the norm and the story was coming from someone having great beef with Alexander at the time. One of the reasons why Bagoas was seen as a fictional character for many time ( also picking and choosing which ancient writer modern day historians find trustworthy). Non-Persians would accept Alexander as “queer” and fucking everyone but even they had some red lines and one of them where eunuchs. It was something oriential tyrants would do (and fuck) but not the “civilized greeks”.
Another great post fom Dr. Reames:
[Ancient Greek Sex[uality] for Dummies
](https://awomanscholar.blogspot.com/2021/02/could-you-write-short-ancient-greek.html)
> So, first, the TL;DR version: The Greeks looked at what was done and the status (not gender) of the one doing it. Everything else is the flavor of your dipping sauce.
To what degree Alexander was attracted to men or women, we don’t know. Although today we recognize sexuality as a range, this does not mean that people in different eras used, let alone understood, modern labels.
We have sources that claim (or hint) that Alexander had relations with both sexes. Keep in mind, in Ancient Greek societies homosexual relations did not have the same taboo connotations that exist in most societies today.
Nevertheless, Alexander was not ‘gay’ as we understand the term. This is a modern term that describes modern attitudes and sensibilities. This so-called (dramatized) documentary’s purpose is not to reveal and analyze homosexual relations at the time among Greeks or in particular in the Macedonian Kingdom or Alexander’s court, but to provoke (and in some cases pander certain demographics) in order to attract attention and viewers.
Simply put, it’s easier (and probably cheaper) to provoke than to do proper research and prepare an interesting, thoughtful, and faithful documentary.
After 10 minutes in a “historical” drama series, you’re watching a gay soft porn. Netflix is a fucking joke.
Didn’t this “storm” already happen about 20 years ago with the Colin Farrell version? Who clicks this shit?