My sole point was that rumours are not a sound basis for an historical discussion. Also, I thought your allegation in the OP that "[v]ery often homosexuality is seen as a quite recent phenomenon, that the ancients would be absolutely baffled or even disgusted by" was ridiculous, seeing as how even primary school children know that the Greeks and Romans practiced homosexuality quite regularly..
The rumours were based on the fact that homosexuality in Ancient Rome was common. And the discussion was on Ancient Egypt, i simply tried to use other parts of the ancient world as context. So i am not founding my historical discussion on rumours. And my allegation of homosexuality being seen as a recent phenomenon is not nearly as ridiculous as you imagine. This is the paradox of human history and society. Every generation sees the past as something more pure, more perfect than their current generation. Even if it is well known that homosexuality was common in Greece and Rome, we still have people today (christian conservatives for instance) who see homosexuality as a result of the good old values of the past being lost or abandoned. Even in Ancient Rome more than 1500 years ago as you mention allegations of homosexuality were used to slander or attack prominent officials. How else would that be possible, unless we imagine that the Romans like some christian conservatives also saw their past as something more pure or more innocent than the generation in which they lived?
I refrained from specifically discussing Egypt because I do not personally know much about the subject, but since you yourself mentioned homosexuality in Rome, specifically in regards to Julius Caesar and Octavian, you made a discussion of such matters fair game. It would be rather like starting a discussion on German actions in WWI, mentioning the Russian Front, then complaing when others brought it up because you wanted to discuss only the Western Front. If you don't wish to discuss a topic, don't discuss it. Don't talk crap when other people also talk about a subject you yourself mentioned in your OP! .
I have no objection to questions being raised about homosexuality in Ancient Rome or any of the historic cultures i mentioned in the OP. But you seem to be missing the point. As you yourself admit every school child knows homosexuality was common in Ancient Rome, I simply used two famous names from Ancient Rome to point that out. It does not matter if the rumours concerning the expoitative relationship between Julius and his nephew Octavius were based on the truth; the point is homosexuality in Ancient Rome was a common thing, which you cooly point out, even if only in an attempt to show my idea as ridiculous.
Considering the fact that you started the pissing contest with your comment "And my you sound like a defender of Caesar's manhood. What is so unlikely about a Roman being gay--are you serious?" you don't really have the right to complain when I ask you to be a little more respectful in your demeanour. I certainly said nothing to disrespect you prior. And I also posted something very meaningful to the topic, as I already stated above. If you don't want to discuss homosexuality in Rome, maybe you shouldn't bloody mention it in your OP, then repeatedly through the thread. If you only wish to discuss homosexuality in Egypt, with no discussion of surrounding or contemporary cultures, then by all means, don't discuss the surrounding or contemporary cultures. But if you mention them, then others in your threads must be free to discuss them.
Also, you've (unfortunately) proven my original opinion of you correct by acting like a dick when I attempted to laugh off your disrespectful behaviour. In case you didn't notice, I used the 'mischief' mischief smilie specifically to make light of your previous, dickish behaviour, in the hope that you would recognise a mild reprove. Your response is a return to dickishness. You should note that people on these boards are far less likely to discuss things with you seriously if you behave like a tool on the boards.
I've given you a chance to respond reasonably, but if you continue to not do so and attempt to elevate the pissing contest you yourself began, I'll kindly bow out of wasting my time discussing things with. As, I warn you, will the majority of respondents in the history forum. You'll note that LightSpectra, and NovaKart, whom you seem interested in speaking with, have not returned since you began acting this way, and that Plotinus himself has backed me up in pointing out that the discussion of topics you yourself mentioned in the OP is perfectly legitimate. Feel free to either discuss them or not, but don't behave foolishly in doing so. I admit my use of the 'rolleyes' rolleyes smilie in my original post may have been misconstrued as sarcastic - I was using it in response to your failure to provide any sort of source for your claims, which you have now partially remedied - but that in no way excuses your subsequent behaviour.
Well am not sure if reference to male genitilia is warranted, here (even if the discussion is homosexuality).But nonetheless i will admit humbly that I may have to appreciate that vigorous disagreement is not always a challenge to mortal combat or even a challenge to a vulgar wrestling match. And out of respect i will refrain from making any explicit freudian connection between you having so much dick on your mind and at the same time being so defensive about Julius Caesar's heterosexuality.