Little Known Facts...

[midnytserenade.livejournal.com]

-Most everyone outside of myself and a select few others who claim to be fans of Arthurian legends have seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail

-83.9% of all statistics are made up on the spot

-John Steinbeck wrote out his own rendition of the Grail quest

-People actually believe that the holy grail was an actual artifact

-the rest of the facts on this list are meant to entertain you and contain little to no relevance to this topic

-everyone who is not homophobic and claims to be purely heterosexual are actually bisexual in SOME way

-there's going to be a loud uproar of people shouting and hating on me for posting that fact

-Constantine, who made the Christian church the official religion of Rome, was a pagan

-the writer of this has a hamster over her head. His name is Skipper and he is a gray long-furred hamster bought at PetSmart

-the writer of this post also spends her time writing stuff that she wishes others would read but they never do and dreams of being a writer, but her main goal is to write a story about Sir Marrok the Wolf

Comments

[ladyshrew.livejournal.com]

Hee. Pics of the hamster on your head? ;-)

And I used to think I was purely heterosexual. Then I studied Classics and realised I was not.

Also I think a lot of homphobes are probably a bit bisexual too. :-P (They're just TOO AFRAID!)

[neneithel.livejournal.com]

I am purely heterosexual (sorry). Personally, I think the more scared someone is of homosexual people, the more likely they are to have urges in that direction. My own sexuality is not in doubt, so I don't feel threatened by other people's. Therefore, I have no hostility towards them.

Please see Monty Python at once! It's shocking that you haven't

[midnytserenade.livejournal.com]

my dear, this is the philosophy behind that is: if you see someone walk by and you can appreciate their outer and inner beauty, then you are bisexual in that you aren't running away and hiding under a rock. It's much easier to explain in person.

[gaidig.livejournal.com]

I think appreciation and sexuality are two different issues. Sexuality requires sexual attraction. If I think a horse is beautiful and has a good temperment, it doesn't mean I have vestiges of beastiality, because I am not at all aroused by the horse. Similarly, my belief that a sunset is beautiful, and the fact that I'm not hiding from it, doesn't mean that I want to have sex with the world, the universe, and the ether. In fact, though I may be attracted to men in general, my appreciation of one of my best friends and my belief that he is handsome and is a wonderful person has absolutely nothing to do with sexuality, as I am not attracted to him and the thought of a sexual encounter with him squicks me out. Appreciation of beauty -- whatever kind -- is not the defining factor of sexuality.

As for one of your more community-relevant notes: I think that one's belief in the Holy Grail as an actual historical artifact can be rooted in one of two things, either 1) a belief in Jesus as an actual historical figure, in which case there is likely at least a belief in a relic that is a vessel in which the blood of Jesus was caught during the crucifiction according to certain gospels, and which may or may not have special properties, and which may or may not have made it to the Celtic world -- or 2) a pre-christian relic, whose identity would have been subverted by the Church, especially when they really took the reigns of the dessiminated versions of the story somewhere around the 1300s.

Now -that- I can understand.

[mcbulldawg.livejournal.com]

gaidig...

Thank you for clearing that up. I agree with you. Appreciation and sexuality are indeed two different things.

-=McB=-

[midnytserenade.livejournal.com]

*sigh* great... yet one more philosophy crushed. And I do say I must agree with you on the attraction issue. I suppose, though, that it makes more sense in person. No worries, though. :D

wait.. what?!

[mcbulldawg.livejournal.com]

How does reading the classics make you realise something like that?!

I don't understand the logic.

-=McB=-

Re: wait.. what?!

[ladyshrew.livejournal.com]

Classics as in Classical studies as in ancient Greeks/Romans. Their concept of sexuality was not so much hetero/homo/bi--they just didn't have those distinctions. But some of them were what we might call "bi" today. Men and women were married, but they might also have a different relationship (within certain cultural bounds) with someone of the same gender in a mentoring relationship.

But anyway, the real point is that all Classicists are at least a little bit bi. Most of them aren't afraid to admit it either.

Well, that and you shouldn't take me too seriously... ;-) But really, all the Classicists I know... Call it a mentality, I suppose. ;-)

Re: wait.. what?!

[midnytserenade.livejournal.com]

hm people in my World History class were freaked out by that. Mr. C and I had no clue why. ((Or at least we pretended to))

[silver-spryte.livejournal.com]

i believe was an actual artifact....
o0

[midnytserenade.livejournal.com]

:D I do, too.

[midnytserenade.livejournal.com]

w00t! someone who realizes it's just entertainment! Thank you!

[summersdream.livejournal.com]

*laughing* I think someone should make a publicity campaign pointing out Constantine's paganness.

Ah, but -what- artifact do they believe the grail is? Is it a grail? Is it a cup? A cauldron? A slightly dented plate? A finger bowl?