By ARI MARCELO SOLON & JOHN MARCELO MOURA SIMÕES*
There is no point in saying that a society was heteronormative if the definition of straight, bi or homosexual, as a constituent substrate of the individual, is something recent.
1.
In the book The banquet, Plato narrates a symposium held at Agathon's house, which welcomes six other guests, including the main one, Socrates, for a celebration. There, the seven characters discuss love and its importance for human beings. It is interesting to note that Eryximachus reports on the balance that exists in the ontological view of love, given that there is a union between the healthy and the morbid.
Complementing the dual idea, Socrates explains completeness through lack, since the search for being, aiming at the concreteness of love, is nothing more than the attempt to find what is missing in one's own being. Now, the figure of Eros is then portrayed as a hybrid figure, given that this demigod is the son of Penia (lack/lack itself) and Poros (god of abundance). It can be seen from this narrative that Eros incessantly searches for what he does not have, since there is an absence to be filled, unlike the complete gods of Olympus.
Thus, this process is characterized by divine virtues, which are good and beauty, concepts explored by Plato in his works. Then, as a configuration of Eros, the essence of imputation of the change of stage from “not having” to “having” is noted, because there is not, but rather there must be. Not satisfied, the work also contemplates Pausanias' vision, having dual love interconnecting in itself the ethereal and carnal forms of love, emphasizing the dual aspect.
However, what draws the most attention in The banquet It is certainly Aristophanes' speech, after all the genesis of sexuality has symbolic explanations throughout the dissertation. Therefore, it is explained that in the beginning there were three types of human beings, these being the male, the female and the androgynous.
However, these creatures had a double physiognomy compared to current individuals, given that their constitution was two heads, four legs, four arms, two mouths, etc. Thus, these first beings ascended to the kingdom of the gods to confront and dethrone them, but lost the war. As punishment, Zeus ordered that their bodies be cut in half, giving rise to the physiognomic aspects of today. However, one of the consequences was the formation of two beings that started from one, so the male ended up becoming two men and, with the female, the same process occurred with the synthesis of two women. From the androgynous, a man and a woman were created.
In this way, for Aristophanes, the idea of complementing one's “other half” is created together with heteroaffective desires, since the man who has been separated from his female half seeks her incessantly, just as the female half seeks her male equal. Concomitantly, homoaffectivity is emphasized by the man's search for his male partner and the woman's search for her female half.
The story explains some philosophical and normative concepts, considering that it must be understood that the human essence is homoaffective and bisexual due to their respective complements as a unique original human being. Therefore, heteroaffectivity would be the deviation from the “natural” human, diverging from what is preached by the diverse contexts of humanity.
2.
However, Hans Kelsen does not make a value judgment on normative sexuality (Solon; Silva, 2024) because he is aligned with Freud in not pathologizing sexual relations in the present day, much less in Classical Antiquity. Furthermore, Hans Kelsen may be correct in analyzing that the authoritarian conduct of the dialogues, which reflect Plato's thinking, converges with the author's repression of homosexuality. However, the legal philosopher does not take into account the nomadic nature of affectionate relationships in Greece.
Now, Eros does not incarnate (using a Kardecist expression as a didactic means) as a way of immobilizing itself in a creature, but rather is in continuous movement until it reaches the sublimation of beauty, since it lacks it as an essence. Such flow is established in relationships from the moment in which there is a need for its own complement, with the relationship between Greek men being seen as a virtue of a pedagogical and complementary nature.
It is important to emphasize that the concept of heteronormativity governed by a dominant status, as well as homophobia portrayed in a discriminatory way, are recent terms in human history. It is assumed, according to Michel Foucault, that the term that defines the repulsion between the relationship of two individuals of the same sex dates back to the 14th century, considering that homosexuality has always existed, but not as a label that delimits an individual's personality. In other words, homosexual relationships occurred as a form of momentary or non-momentary action, but always with a verbal and non-substantial character of a person.
Therefore, there is no sense in saying that a society was heteronormative if the definition of heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, as a constituent substrate of the individual, is something recent. Once again, amorous nomadism is observed when portraying community relations.
It is clear that there is misinformation when portraying Athenian society as open to homosexual customs in and of itself. In fact, relationships were only seen as good in the pedagogy of the development of man as a being capable of exercising his politics. To this end, it was customary for an older and more experienced person (erastes) to form a union with a young person (eromenos). This mentoring union served as an aid in the upbringing and education of the young person, an upbringing that had certain specificities, such as sexual relations with their master (Andrade, 2018).
But what is not observed is that such a phenomenon is not synonymous with consensual penetration without moral and social restrictions, since the procedure of intercrural sex (between the thighs) is what occurred in an advisable manner. Thus, after the period of sponsorship and sexual initiation, the young man headed towards another stage of his life, including marriage with a woman aiming at reproduction to add to the social cohesion of the polis. In this way, an intrinsic thought of loving change is seen in the Greek citizen, since the permission for homosexual and heterosexual phases was explored in a satisfactory way according to the development itself.
However, Eros, which seeks to create beauty, develops in the relationship between men, since the complement between a man and a woman is limited to reproduction. In short, the source of inspiration for contemplating beauty would be among the body of citizens (men), without taking into consideration the female sex as a member of this horizon of events, since women were excluded from public life.
As a consequence, there is a tendency in the definition of beauty and goodness to formalize the movement of the metaphysical entity that passes through the body, but goes further when it reaches the soul and continues its journey to other stages. Thus, Plato brings together factors that can explain his aristocratic character that permeates to the present day when he explains the neoconservative concepts that encompass militaristic, nationalistic and antidemocratic ideals (Trevisan, 2008).
First, his family background, given that Plato was born into a wealthy environment. Second, since he was rich, he did not need to work, so he had time to practice philosophy during a period of enslavement as a labor force, thus having the desire for a sophocracy in his ideal city. Finally, Plato could well be homosexual and have this desire repressed, however it must be established that this is not the canonical character of an authoritarian paradigm, because even if the practice of homosexuality were interpreted with prejudice, Plato would have this opportunity to enjoy when analyzing the pedagogical purpose of young people.
Considering that the concept of complementarity is present in Freud's work, which highlights that the expression of love is limited to a certain drive, in addition to Lacan, who adds the thought attributing the complementary search as narcissistic, that is, we seek what we find within ourselves (Pires, 2019), it should be noted that psychoanalysis helps in understanding repression. For psychoanalytic science, repression would be this separation from the conscious to the unconscious, repressing ideas. Despite this, such ideas do not remain static, but seek expression through disturbances and behaviors in the repressive individual.
Perhaps, then, Plato was fostering his own repression by not understanding Eros as a continuous mythical figure. In fact, Platonic love is misunderstood by common sense when it establishes an ideal love that cannot be achieved, forgetting the process taken by love that encompasses body, soul and spirit until it finds the truth. Therefore, Plato aims for the sublime truth, but seems to forget the sensorial world by not facing the proposed reality, focusing only on ideas.
According to Freud's anthropological analysis, social limitation is a historical factor which is given the name of castration in psychoanalysis. Now, in Totem and Taboo, the author reflects on the genesis of what would be the institution of moral norms in a society. Firstly, it starts from the founding myth of a parricide that fosters the organizational structure.
In parts, it is observed that the first hordes had a male member who imposed force with the aim of dominating the other individuals. As a consequence, he had the privilege of taking all the females of the group for himself. However, such an action could cause an insurgency by another male or a group of the same gender who aimed for supreme power, resulting in a duel and the possible death of the leader.
Thus, a sacred symbol (totem) is placed in the place of the father, which would replace respect and local order. Furthermore, a limit must be established on acts so that there is no usurper of the honored image, so attitudes that aimed to possess any female they wanted were prohibited, in such a way that individuals of the same totem could not have sexual or conjugal relations.
For Freud, the myth is of utmost importance to understanding the issue of castration, given that the establishment of the totem reflects the limitation of desire. In other words, from the moment that only exogamy is permitted, barring the desire for initial incest, it is observed that the canonical object only exists to prohibit a natural opportunity, but one that can cause disturbances in the social cohesion of a group. Therefore, the totem synthesizes the taboo, a concept used to explain the formation of the fear of violating the prohibited norm. At this moment, the development of what would become known as Criminal Law is noted.
In association with Plato, the Greek totem is the homosexual relationship detached from morally accepted causality. However, according to men's desire to explore love through the trajectory of Eros, which is essentially through the homosexual relationship, a natural desire is created to extrapolate the recommended pedagogical sphere, since human nature has as its guiding principle inherent bisexuality and, also, the search for the same sex, according to Aristophanes' tale in The banquet.
In short, bisexual experiences are denied as an essential factor for life, that is, homosexual phobia influences Plato's stance, but bisexual normativity may be the main representative of psychic confusion in the philosopher's discourse. Now, could it be that Plato feared knowing that his intimate moment with a man would certainly end, and his positioning in relation to reality frightened him? Would this be a paradoxical case between the theory of Platonic love without Platonic understanding?
*Ari Marcelo Solon He is a professor at the Faculty of Law at USP. Author of, among others, books, Paths of philosophy and science of law: German connection in the future of justice (Prisma). [https://amzn.to/3Plq3jT]
*João Marcelo Moura Simões is a graduate of the Faculty of Law at Unesp-Franca.
References
ANDRADE, Tiago Souza Monteiro. Homoerotic relationships in Ancient Greece. 2018. Available at: https://seer.assis.unesp.br/index.php/facesdahistoria/article/view/271.
FREUD, Sigmund. Totem and Taboo. New York: Penguin-Company, 2013.
FUKS, Rebeca. Plato's Banquet: summary and interpretation of the work. Available at: https://www.culturagenial.com/livro-o-banquete/
PIRES, Maria Pompeia Gomes. What is love? 2019. Available at: https://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-73952019000100010
PLATO. The banquet. Sao Paulo: Edipro, 2017.
SOLON, Ari Marcelo; SILVA, Leonardo Passinato e. Hans Kelsen and Platonic Eros. 2024. Available at: https://dpp.cce.myftpupload.com/hans-kelsen-e-o-eros-platonico/
TREVISAN, Leonardo. How the philosopher Plato became the master of the neoconservatives. 2008. Available at: https://vermelho.org.br/2008/04/13/como-o-filosofo-platao-se-tornou-mestre-dos-neoconservadores/
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
