MARJORIE Il..OSENl3ERC
253
tio of boys to girls as nearly five
to
one. Evidence from ancient literary
sources, which admittedly might have taken notice principally of the chi l–
dren who mattered most - the boys - gives the impression of a prepon–
derance of male children among well-known Athenians, and the archaic
period shows a male-female population ratio of almost two to one in the
Agora burial plot. Again, this could be explained by speculating that more
men were honored by prestigious burials than women. But the popula–
tion pressure which caused the Athenians to colonize so energetically,
finding foreign wives where they took root, argues for the disposal of
greater numbers of unvalued female infants at home. At the same time,
the high ratio of males coincided with the prevalence of a male homo–
sexual culture.
The relative scarcity of female citizens was combined with a seclusion
which kept them in the women's quarters of their homes, seldom seen
even by male relatives, and chaperoned on their rare outings to religious
ceremonies or other restricted destinations. Young upper-class males were
thus effectively prevented from consorting with girls of their own class
prior to marriage. They were left with the alternatives of boys, prostitutes,
and slaves for the twelve or more years of maturity prior to marriage. For
some eight generations it became quite usual at Athens for young males to
choose boys as love objects :\J1d also as sexual partners. Boys, after all,
were much more likely to have a disinterested affection for a young man
than were slaves or paid partners. Marriage existed for the production of
an heir and for economic purposes. Moreover, a family-arranged alliance
with a totally uneducated girl, whose life had been spent among equally
ignorant female relatives and slaves, was not likely to be conducive to
enjoyable companionship and, in fact, husband and wife seldom met but
in bed.
An often-quoted fourth-century lawyer (Pseudo-Demosthenes, in
AgaiNst Neasera)
declared in open court, speaking as a matter of course,
the nature of male control over women:
We resort
to
courtesans for our pleasures, keep concubines to look
after our daily needs , and marry wives
to
give us legitimate children
and be f:lithful guardians of our domestic hearths.
Michel Foucault cautions against regarding this as evidence of a per–
vasive and rigid division of female roles but asserts that the few Greek
texts which enjoin male monogamy do so as an exhortation to self-mas–
tery, which was seen as a further justification for the husband's rule over
his wife, not as an approach to equality. Even so, homosexuality was
generally confined
to
the years before marriage and treated as an initiation
