LGBT in Progressive Rock

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 Phideaux wrote:

Uhhh, no, Leonardo had no female lovers of record ever.  He had several close male apprentices, one of whom he bequeathed the Mona Lisa to upon his death.  He was also accused of practicing sodomy but the charges were dismissed (and some said it was because one of the corespondents' family exerted its influence.  Scholars are divided upon whether he was celibate or remained a practicing homosexual, but none have accused him of having female lovers.

I've red an article from an Italian scholar that dismissed the claims that he was gay, but I can't seem to find it now. I don't suppose you are just going to believe me out of the blue.  Still, him being celibate is still much more believable for me than him being a homosexual, these things were not seen as favorably or as naturally as they are today and I doubt that he would have lived until such a late age with such a secret, in Italy, no less, the heart of the Church!

 He probably lived like his bitter rival Michelangelo, a celibate man who wrote many homoerotic love poems, but was said to be probably celibate.

Those gays were probably too afraid to have at it in those days since it was the death penalty for such sexual play.

Yeah, Michelangelo I'm not so sure about as Leo; he was such a drama queen and painted women that looked way too much like men in my eyes. There are way more substance for Michelangelo's case IMO, but Leonardo is THE absolute man, a much more remarkable person for the gay movement. 

Also, we must stay on top of the research into pre-natal gayness.  This just in: Italian researchers have made a new discovery that solidifies the understand that homosexuality — at least in men — has a strong genetic component. Though this study does not identify a specific gay gene, which probably does not exist, it does demonstrate what role genetics play.

I don't know, so many of these researches seem to be a dead end. . . And I've never seen any of those "scientists" going through any competent interviewer as I've seen the others that claim that hormones and social background / experiences. i'm not ruling out the possibility, I'm just way more skeptical about genetic  "evidence" of gayness; after all, we've all been hearing that science is on the "brink of discovering" the genetic reason for homosexuality for the past 15 years or so and, besides, it does not explain why women are homosexual.