>>12497035Now I'm curious, in what way does working in an exclusively male discipline give you any knowledge of historical
revisionism? Healthy male relationships exist, no one has ever argued against that. The point was that any gay relationships was rebranded as being "healthy male relationships" and the letters talking about wanting someone's dick ignored or destroyed. Even when the letters are kept people will use your stance right now to say that it's bullshit
There has been a much larger impetus on erasing gay people from history for a much longer time. There was even greater impetus for gay people to hide that they were gay or face getting killed or snipped like Turing.
Again, your experience having male coworkers isnt special. Most men have make friendships, gay or straight. What is unique is that you think having male friends gives you the preiscent knowledge to say that all historical figures were straight and that no historian ever recorded something different or argued against reality because famous historical icons needed to match heterosexual norms.
Not every historical person that might be gay is gay, but a damn lot of "straight" ones were just closeted oh threat of death or ostracization.
