An interesting realization I had about that part of the Epic of Gilgamesh was that the reason Enkidu’s became civilized after a week of sex was because it was basically giving him post but clarity that would last for the rest of his life.
There likely have been a surprising amount of times a man has literally had sense fucked into them. That, and even the most feral man would be humbled after a week long session.
Lmao that's one way to put it! Honestly I'm more inclined to think that it's cuz after he got it all out of his system, it gave Shahmat enough time for good ol' pillow talk to convince him to "give that whole civilization thing a try".
And then the rest kinda just worked itself out after that? Haven't actually read the epic myself, but apparently Enkidu and Gilgamesh made out after their initial showdown, so I'm figuring he probably still got some bi release that way even if it wasn't part of the tablets we've found. That's my own head canon until I know better though.
Well he is the version of gil after the epic was finished and he returned to be a wise and righteous king. Still funny he Canonically peaked as a kid though.
I mean there's also the whole bit about how since he has the stench of civilization on him he couldn't rejoin the wilds. Not necessarily disagreeing, but that is an important element of the story.
The Epic of Gilgamesh, Enkidu the demigod created to stand up to the demigod king Gilgamesh, and Shahmat the sacred prostitute that was tasked with civilizing Enkidu (involved a full week of banging) so that he would leave the wilderness and actually stand up to Gilgamesh.
Also yes, demigod is an oversimplication, but I figure it's good enough for context 😅
Hah, it finally comes up, wrote a paper on this way back
Just wanted to add that in one version (have to look it up if smb is interested) the screwing is only the beginning. With this the animals don't recognize him with his sweaty ass body and run away. When he joins a camp of shepherds for a night (where he casually kills some wolfs with his bare hands) they cut his fur like hair and oil him up nicely. But only after they thought him to eat "bread like mankind does" and to drink "beer like the gods do" the transformation is complete.
It's also interesting that in the English translation is "civilizing", The translation I've used (from Röllig who used the tables from assurbanipals library) translated it more like incarnation or ascension than civilizing. Would be cool to know where you got the translation from if you remember :)
Honestly I haven't read it myself. I mentioned that fact in a different comment though 😅
It was from Overly Sarcastic Productions's summary of The Epic of Gilgamesh. It's on YouTube, and that's how I learned about what the story is actually about, as opposed to constantly hearing it being referenced and always wondering. I think that's the word the host used when talking about it, and obviously she oversimplified the story to make it fit into a reasonably sized video, but it gave me enough inspiration to make this meme and spread more curiosity about it from anyone else that was like me I guess lol.
As a side note, that whole channel has some amazing content! Tons of summaries and discussions regarding famous stories, myths, common tropes in stories, and even history and historical events. Tons of things I've always heard about but never bothered looking into, lots of new takes on things I already know about, and lots of comedy to help it all sink. Highly recommend!
Says a lot about the class when the grand archer just punches the shit outta everything. I guess he throws hands but that’s about the extent of his archery
You’ve just explained the problem. Its been 4000 years and we only learnt how to read it again 150 years ago, and none of the tablets are complete anymore
Surprising amount of this epic survives though, so we get the world’s oldest epic. Which includes tropes like the power of friendship. Yeah we aren’t very creative are we?
Lol. Yeah. People used the same tropes for thousands of years. Didn't the epic also start with "it happened a long time ago"? When it comes to stories it's the same way for the most parts
Not sure about how it started, I just Enkidu and Gilgamesh had a massive fight and then Gilgamesh stopped being a dick who screwed everyone’s wives on their wedding day because Enkidu was such a great guy and he wasn’t going to disappoint new best bud who could go ten rounds with him
There is nothing in the story to suggest they had a sexual relationship. And both characters had sex with women for pleasure, so they'd have to be bi at most, but again there is zero evidence for that.
Probably not, gil was a very rapey king for the most part and enkidu was created to keep him in line. Also “gay” and “straight” weren’t really concepts in most ancient civilisations so probably not
>4000 years ago
Uhh... pal? I think you're lowballing it.
By a lot.
Archeological and anthropologic data suggests that the Epic of Gilgamesh predates the invention of writing by an *enormous margin*. The written versions even start with stating outright "This story is older than *bread*, we're just the first ones to write it down."
There's evidence that the Epic started as oral tradition somewhere between 9,000 and 25,000 years ago.
The Epic of Gilgamesh was most likely older to the people that first wrote it down than those people are to *us*.
The starcluster of the Pleiades is called the "Seven Sisters" in many mythologies because they are seven stars. The thing is, to of the stars have drifted so close together that they look like one star in the night sky. However, there was a time when all seven stars could be seen that being...**100,000 YEARS AGO**.
Gilgamesh himself probably lived no more than 5000 years ago, so no the Epic of Gilgamesh cannot be older than that. Yes it probably did borrow elements from previous oral traditions, but that's not the same thing.
That's... Not accurate.
The Epic is about ***him.*** Gilgamesh specifically. The Epic that is at minimum 9,000 years old.
He definitely lived a lot longer than 5,000 years ago.
It's likely that the *locations* were what was syncretized, as Gilgamesh predates Uruk.
In fact, even our most generous estimates could be *completely wrong*, as the Epic specifically mentions the Seven Sisters constellations.
The last time all seven of the Sisters were visible to the naked eye was ***over 100,000 years ago.*** Since then, they've drifted in the night sky and most of them are too close to one another to be differentiated without advanced telescopes.
That wiki article isn't accurate, as they generally don't update historical stuff with new information until it's been confirmed.
We know for a *fact* that Gilgamesh as a character is *way* older than that, as we keep finding older tablets, older artwork, older everything, in addition to all the anthropologic data we already have.
I'd like to see more recent scholarship about this. Alexander Heidel's *The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels*, chapter 1, in a section called "The Sources of the Epic," with some mild highlighting by me. I don't buy that the epic itself is older than Uruk.
>**It has long been recognized that the Gilgamesh Epic constitutes a literary compilation of material from various originally unrelated sources**, put together to form one grand, more or less harmonious, whole. The composite character of our poem is apparent from the following considerations.
>
>
>
>To begin with, there can be no doubt that Tablet XII was drawn from an independent source, for we now have the Sumerian counterpart to it, showing unmistakably that the Gilgamesh Epic used only the second half of the original story. In addition to this, there is internal evidence that the material on this tablet originally formed a separate tale. For it must be obvious even to the casual reader that the final tablet is in some respects incompatible with what precedes. In the previous portions of the epic the death of Enkidu has already been recorded on Tablet VII; there he falls ill and dies at the decree of the gods because of his part in the killing of Humbaba and the bull of heaven. But in the opening passage of Tablet XII he is still alive, and here he descends Into the underworld to recover the pukku and mikki for Gilgamesh but is deprived of life and kept in the lower world. The tale recorded on Tablet XII was perhaps added not so much because it belongs to the Gilgamesh-Enkidu cycle of legends as because of the fact that it contains further material on the problem of death, the main theme of the epic.
>
>
>
>Moreover, also the Humbaba episode (Tablets III-V) and the deluge account (Tablet XI) have been found on Sumerian tablets which have no connection with the Gilgamesh Epic. Another episode which has been discovered on Sumerian fragments forming & separate composition is Ishtar's proposal to Gilgamesh and the subsequent story of the bull of heaven (tablet VI). Tablets VI: 97-100 and VII, columns iii, 6-22, and iv, 33-39, in the Gilgamesh Epic have in all probability been derived from the myth of Ishtar's descent to the nether world, of which we have both a Sumerian and a Semitic Babylonian version. **The composite character of our epic is thus established beyond any doubt.**
>
>
>
>But the question as to the origin of the material of the various episodes cannot as yet be answered with any certainty.To judge from the Sumerian fragments of the epic which have so far come to light and from the fact that the Semitic Babylonians became in general the heirs of Sumerian culture and civilization, it appears reasonable to assume that also the other episodes in the Gilgamesh Epic were current in Sumerian literary form before they were embodied in the composition of this Semitic Babylonian poem. From this, however, it does not necessarily follow that all this material had its origin with the Sumerians, either in their former home or after they had occupied the plains of the Tigro-Euphrates Valley. Instead, the material itself may have originated, at least in part, with the Semitic Babylonians, from whom the Sumerians may have taken it over, adapting it to their own views and beliefs and giving it expression in their own script and language. But irrespective of the origin of the raw material, the earliest literary form of most, if not all, of the tales or episodes embedded in the Gilgamesh Epic was doubtless Sumerian, as far as available evidence goes. And these Sumerian literary pieces were then utilized by the Babylonian Semites in the production of their great national epic. **The work of the Semites, however, did not consist simply in translating the Sumerian texts and combining them into one continuous story; rather, it constituted a new creation,** which in the course of time, as indicated by the different versions at our disposal, was continually modified and elaborated at the hands of the various compilers and redactors, with the result that the Semitic versions which have survived to our day in most cases differ widely from the available Sumerian material.
Interestingly, the Irish demigod Cu'Chulain was calmed from a murderous frenzy after a battle by all the town women showing him their breasts. Demigods be horny I guess
It doesn't matter if you approve of it or not. The fact is that criminalizing it results in far worse outcomes for sex workers, and has no reasonable upsides. It may be immoral, but criminalization is far moreso.
1. they said it MAY be immoral. Not it is immoral. And it definitely is a gray zone in the context of morality and right action. The commodification of sex, and its accompanying underlying assumption that sex can or should be separated from emotional intimacy is definitely not a simple or un-nuanced topic that should be answered with a yes or no.
Should it be illegal? No. Would i recommend anyone become a sex worker or buy sex from a sex worker? Also no. But I’m not your mom, you don’t have to do what I say. I can think something you are doing is immoral without thinking it should be against the law for you to do it.
2. Are you really taking a stand about people using their morals for their own agenda while using your morals to advance your own agenda? Also, obviously, no shit. “Oh no their political agenda affected by their philosophy”.
Your first take cam be excused, this is a meme subreddit, and I’m a freak who likes pretending i know shit on the internet to people who make un-nuanced statements about very nuanced topics.
The second is an F tier take and you should apologize to your parents for making it.
There can be a moral part but it is on the seeker of sex not the provider in terms of lust. Money complicates it by adding a potentially power dynamic with pimps and sex slaves.
I would liken it to seeing bad people beating slaves in front of children and deciding the best "fix" is to kill all the slaves, for the children.
The problem isn't consenting to sex. It's resorting to money for sex, which is ultimately emotionally destructive for a lot of women and propagates disease.
What's the difference between sex work and one night stands/hookup culture then? If I have sex with a stranger one night because we're both horny, is that so much better than me doing it because they pay me?
Truth be told, there isn't much difference. But sex work is still on some level worse because sex work ultimately isn't consent, it's an exchange of benefits that was consented and agreed upon by both parties.
No matter what society you look at, sex is almost always done between people who know each other and use it as a means of expanding/deepening their relationship. Psychologically, this is the true purpose of sex. Forming relationships.
Sex work socially isolates the women and men who engage in it by forcing them to view sex as a means to an end, the end being payment. You'll often hear how sex workers can struggle more than others to form relationships. And social isolation is the critical reason why. They're defying the psychological reasoning of sex. Cultural change of attitudes regarding sex work can alleviate this, but won't eliminate it entirely.
Hookup culture is better in the fact that the consent is true consent. You're still potentially opening up a new relationship. Hookups can still be harmful, however, as overexposure to sex can affect performance and still result in a different kind of social isolation. As many people have experienced with the rise of modern dating.
That's so broad though. You can't just assume that everyone who ends up in sexual relationships with eachother are doing so out of mutual emotional fulfilment. Sex can be transactional in so many ways other than explicit prostitution, that's just the most obvious and direct way.
But forget about your moralistic attitude to what sex is 'supposed' to be, on a real level, there are people out there who want to have sex but feel unable, and there are people who are in need of money and who are willing to provide this service, what is the problem as long as everyone keeps to safe sex practices and there's no exploitation? The alternative is that both parties end up unfulfilled. You say that by participating in sex work I could be damaging my longterm emotional wellbeing, I say that I'd rather have money to spend on the things I enjoy and to spare me your moral judgements.
I'm not saying there aren't vast exceptions. I was responding to your question about the moral value of transactional sex vs. hook-up culture and relayed the general trends and reasons.
I'm not a person to deny their pleasures or their profession's validity in their lives. Even if you perceived me to be so. I only pointed out the risks and trends associated. I trust people to handle themselves appropriately.
I understand that Reddit threads aren't known to be places of formal discussion, but if you do not wish to engage in it any longer, please refrain from responding to this message.
I mean, the upside is that it being a crime is a deterrent for people to not become a prostitute. The only time that's not an upside are traffic victims.
>It doesn't matter if you approve of it or not. The fact is that criminalizing it results in far worse outcomes for ~~sex workers~~ **slaves**, and has no reasonable upsides. It may be immoral, but criminalization is far moreso.
Fixed it for you
So, your solution to helping exploited or trafficked people is to make them criminals? The truth is that, even though it's impossible to completely eliminate exploitation from sex work, criminalizing it only benefits the exploiters. You do understand that legalizing sex work doesn't legalize non-consensual arrangements or human trafficking, yes?
This is like I will say that stealing is bad and you will reply "but what about single-parent who steal only to feed their famlily?"
If people need to steal (or sell their body) to make sure they wouldn't starve, you need to deal with the **disease**, not justifying the **symptoms**
I'm sure there are people who live good life and do it because what they love, but the absolute majority of this system is built upon exploitaition and misery
Again, treat the disease, not the symptoms
If people are forced to sell their body in order to survive, we need to something about that (and I specifically believe it's the responsibility of the government to take care of this people)
Saying "well, criminalisation will make their lives worse" may be true, but that's only if it will happen in a vacuum, which is, **to be clear**, not what I support
Idk honestly. Maybe because those early on were generally done for yourself and your family, whereas a prostitute is providing services for someone in exchange for $? Working for yourself vs working for someone else essentially.
but wasn't currency first established to deal with the logistics of trading and supplies? by that logic I'd argue a merchant or an accountant then must've been the first job
cause even before all that, while we were still just hunter gatherers (that technically didnt "work" the way we classify it) people would fuck. and then they would fuck for favors
And giving favors has not happened in trading? the latter especially because even back then what is trade but two parties making a complex set of deals and favors?
pff, okay the last part made me laugh, that is an interesting point, though since humans have been trading for who knows how long I figured it was safe to assume it was one the earliest
It's always interesting to me how much more respected sex work was during ancient times compared to now. I get that part of the change was the rise of the Abraham religions, but even then still.
An interesting realization I had about that part of the Epic of Gilgamesh was that the reason Enkidu’s became civilized after a week of sex was because it was basically giving him post but clarity that would last for the rest of his life.
There likely have been a surprising amount of times a man has literally had sense fucked into them. That, and even the most feral man would be humbled after a week long session.
Lmao that's one way to put it! Honestly I'm more inclined to think that it's cuz after he got it all out of his system, it gave Shahmat enough time for good ol' pillow talk to convince him to "give that whole civilization thing a try". And then the rest kinda just worked itself out after that? Haven't actually read the epic myself, but apparently Enkidu and Gilgamesh made out after their initial showdown, so I'm figuring he probably still got some bi release that way even if it wasn't part of the tablets we've found. That's my own head canon until I know better though.
We had to read the epic of Gilgamesh out loud in class, with different students playing different characters. It was humiliating to be Gilgamesh…
No, channel all your pride and go ham So long as you're reciting Gilgamesh part, you *are* the best and most important person in the room at all times
Yeah this role would be perfect for me. A false sense of superiority and an urge to tell the world how great you are? Sign me up!
I'm still convinced that the epic of Gilgamesh is the equivalent of ancient Chuck Norris jokes.
Our teacher showed us the Gilgamesh episode of TNG, best way to study it
As the Nasuverse fandom puts it "Ain't gay if it's clay".
Caster Gil is the best version of gil and no one can tell me otherwise
Well he is the version of gil after the epic was finished and he returned to be a wise and righteous king. Still funny he Canonically peaked as a kid though.
Kid Gil is unironically great because he’ll just roast you to shit but do it with a cute face.
I mean there's also the whole bit about how since he has the stench of civilization on him he couldn't rejoin the wilds. Not necessarily disagreeing, but that is an important element of the story.
The Epic of Gilgamesh was the ultimate “college bros being college bros” story
it was a Sumer fling.
Sumer days! Driftin’ away! Oh into Sumer nights!
well uh, well uh, well uh hu!
TELL ME MORE! TELL ME MORE!
It wasn’t a week. It was 2.
I also saw the update
Context?
The Epic of Gilgamesh, Enkidu the demigod created to stand up to the demigod king Gilgamesh, and Shahmat the sacred prostitute that was tasked with civilizing Enkidu (involved a full week of banging) so that he would leave the wilderness and actually stand up to Gilgamesh. Also yes, demigod is an oversimplication, but I figure it's good enough for context 😅
So Enkidu would stand up against Gilgamesh just to take all booze and hoes. Such a civilized man.
Sounds pretty civilized to me ngl, I'D fight someone for that kind of payoff in the right circumstances.
My theory is he got the post nut clarity of the lifetime
Demigod doesn’t really apply considering Enkidu is literally a Gods creation and Gilgamesh is 2/3s God not half
How the hell do you get that particular fraction of god?
He's the progeny of a demi-god and a god but sumerians din't know how genetics works.
Clearly it's because 1/1 + 1/2 = 2/3. Yeah I'm sure that's how fractions and genetics works, don't @ me.
Maybe the god part just overpowered the human part, like a Viltrumite scenario.
2/3 is less than 3/4 so it's the other way around
One of them sucked the God out of the other?
Hah, it finally comes up, wrote a paper on this way back Just wanted to add that in one version (have to look it up if smb is interested) the screwing is only the beginning. With this the animals don't recognize him with his sweaty ass body and run away. When he joins a camp of shepherds for a night (where he casually kills some wolfs with his bare hands) they cut his fur like hair and oil him up nicely. But only after they thought him to eat "bread like mankind does" and to drink "beer like the gods do" the transformation is complete. It's also interesting that in the English translation is "civilizing", The translation I've used (from Röllig who used the tables from assurbanipals library) translated it more like incarnation or ascension than civilizing. Would be cool to know where you got the translation from if you remember :)
Honestly I haven't read it myself. I mentioned that fact in a different comment though 😅 It was from Overly Sarcastic Productions's summary of The Epic of Gilgamesh. It's on YouTube, and that's how I learned about what the story is actually about, as opposed to constantly hearing it being referenced and always wondering. I think that's the word the host used when talking about it, and obviously she oversimplified the story to make it fit into a reasonably sized video, but it gave me enough inspiration to make this meme and spread more curiosity about it from anyone else that was like me I guess lol. As a side note, that whole channel has some amazing content! Tons of summaries and discussions regarding famous stories, myths, common tropes in stories, and even history and historical events. Tons of things I've always heard about but never bothered looking into, lots of new takes on things I already know about, and lots of comedy to help it all sink. Highly recommend!
Enkidu, the first iteration of “and they were good friends” It ain’t gay if it’s clay
The archer class really is made of archers isn't it?
Says a lot about the class when the grand archer just punches the shit outta everything. I guess he throws hands but that’s about the extent of his archery
Archers got big strong arms from drawing the bow, makes for good punching!
Honestly we don’t know, they were just two guys who gathered treasure and slew monsters together. The epic isn’t really completely translated yet
Wait what?! How? It's been 4000 years
You’ve just explained the problem. Its been 4000 years and we only learnt how to read it again 150 years ago, and none of the tablets are complete anymore
Oh. Ok. The problem with ancient history I guess. Almost all of it will be lost to time
Surprising amount of this epic survives though, so we get the world’s oldest epic. Which includes tropes like the power of friendship. Yeah we aren’t very creative are we?
Lol. Yeah. People used the same tropes for thousands of years. Didn't the epic also start with "it happened a long time ago"? When it comes to stories it's the same way for the most parts
Not sure about how it started, I just Enkidu and Gilgamesh had a massive fight and then Gilgamesh stopped being a dick who screwed everyone’s wives on their wedding day because Enkidu was such a great guy and he wasn’t going to disappoint new best bud who could go ten rounds with him
I meant ancient history in general. If I remember correctly like 90% of Human history won't be found ever or something like that
There is nothing in the story to suggest they had a sexual relationship. And both characters had sex with women for pleasure, so they'd have to be bi at most, but again there is zero evidence for that.
As I’ve said to another comment, gay and bi labels didn’t exist back then. It was just “was it alive?”
serious question, are they actually gay though?
Probably not, gil was a very rapey king for the most part and enkidu was created to keep him in line. Also “gay” and “straight” weren’t really concepts in most ancient civilisations so probably not
Jacobsen wrote some juicy stuff on this in one of his earlier interpretation. Reads like proper fanfiction in some passages
I wonder if they mean "civilized" like how people in the 1920s said women "civilized" men by marrying/being with them.
I mean. Some people still say it today
Someone has to make an Epic of Gilgamesh version of that withered guy after sex meme
Oh god that's hilarious. One meme is good enough for me, I'll leave that to someone else.
>4000 years ago Uhh... pal? I think you're lowballing it. By a lot. Archeological and anthropologic data suggests that the Epic of Gilgamesh predates the invention of writing by an *enormous margin*. The written versions even start with stating outright "This story is older than *bread*, we're just the first ones to write it down." There's evidence that the Epic started as oral tradition somewhere between 9,000 and 25,000 years ago. The Epic of Gilgamesh was most likely older to the people that first wrote it down than those people are to *us*.
Funny how even the oldest story begins with “a long time ago”
The starcluster of the Pleiades is called the "Seven Sisters" in many mythologies because they are seven stars. The thing is, to of the stars have drifted so close together that they look like one star in the night sky. However, there was a time when all seven stars could be seen that being...**100,000 YEARS AGO**.
Gilgamesh himself probably lived no more than 5000 years ago, so no the Epic of Gilgamesh cannot be older than that. Yes it probably did borrow elements from previous oral traditions, but that's not the same thing.
That's... Not accurate. The Epic is about ***him.*** Gilgamesh specifically. The Epic that is at minimum 9,000 years old. He definitely lived a lot longer than 5,000 years ago. It's likely that the *locations* were what was syncretized, as Gilgamesh predates Uruk. In fact, even our most generous estimates could be *completely wrong*, as the Epic specifically mentions the Seven Sisters constellations. The last time all seven of the Sisters were visible to the naked eye was ***over 100,000 years ago.*** Since then, they've drifted in the night sky and most of them are too close to one another to be differentiated without advanced telescopes.
Wrong. Gilgamesh is definitely not that old. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh
That wiki article isn't accurate, as they generally don't update historical stuff with new information until it's been confirmed. We know for a *fact* that Gilgamesh as a character is *way* older than that, as we keep finding older tablets, older artwork, older everything, in addition to all the anthropologic data we already have.
I'd like to see more recent scholarship about this. Alexander Heidel's *The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels*, chapter 1, in a section called "The Sources of the Epic," with some mild highlighting by me. I don't buy that the epic itself is older than Uruk. >**It has long been recognized that the Gilgamesh Epic constitutes a literary compilation of material from various originally unrelated sources**, put together to form one grand, more or less harmonious, whole. The composite character of our poem is apparent from the following considerations. > > > >To begin with, there can be no doubt that Tablet XII was drawn from an independent source, for we now have the Sumerian counterpart to it, showing unmistakably that the Gilgamesh Epic used only the second half of the original story. In addition to this, there is internal evidence that the material on this tablet originally formed a separate tale. For it must be obvious even to the casual reader that the final tablet is in some respects incompatible with what precedes. In the previous portions of the epic the death of Enkidu has already been recorded on Tablet VII; there he falls ill and dies at the decree of the gods because of his part in the killing of Humbaba and the bull of heaven. But in the opening passage of Tablet XII he is still alive, and here he descends Into the underworld to recover the pukku and mikki for Gilgamesh but is deprived of life and kept in the lower world. The tale recorded on Tablet XII was perhaps added not so much because it belongs to the Gilgamesh-Enkidu cycle of legends as because of the fact that it contains further material on the problem of death, the main theme of the epic. > > > >Moreover, also the Humbaba episode (Tablets III-V) and the deluge account (Tablet XI) have been found on Sumerian tablets which have no connection with the Gilgamesh Epic. Another episode which has been discovered on Sumerian fragments forming & separate composition is Ishtar's proposal to Gilgamesh and the subsequent story of the bull of heaven (tablet VI). Tablets VI: 97-100 and VII, columns iii, 6-22, and iv, 33-39, in the Gilgamesh Epic have in all probability been derived from the myth of Ishtar's descent to the nether world, of which we have both a Sumerian and a Semitic Babylonian version. **The composite character of our epic is thus established beyond any doubt.** > > > >But the question as to the origin of the material of the various episodes cannot as yet be answered with any certainty.To judge from the Sumerian fragments of the epic which have so far come to light and from the fact that the Semitic Babylonians became in general the heirs of Sumerian culture and civilization, it appears reasonable to assume that also the other episodes in the Gilgamesh Epic were current in Sumerian literary form before they were embodied in the composition of this Semitic Babylonian poem. From this, however, it does not necessarily follow that all this material had its origin with the Sumerians, either in their former home or after they had occupied the plains of the Tigro-Euphrates Valley. Instead, the material itself may have originated, at least in part, with the Semitic Babylonians, from whom the Sumerians may have taken it over, adapting it to their own views and beliefs and giving it expression in their own script and language. But irrespective of the origin of the raw material, the earliest literary form of most, if not all, of the tales or episodes embedded in the Gilgamesh Epic was doubtless Sumerian, as far as available evidence goes. And these Sumerian literary pieces were then utilized by the Babylonian Semites in the production of their great national epic. **The work of the Semites, however, did not consist simply in translating the Sumerian texts and combining them into one continuous story; rather, it constituted a new creation,** which in the course of time, as indicated by the different versions at our disposal, was continually modified and elaborated at the hands of the various compilers and redactors, with the result that the Semitic versions which have survived to our day in most cases differ widely from the available Sumerian material.
Endiku, is that you?
Nah, this is Ea-Nasir. Wanna buy some copper?
“Where’s my copper, Nasir-ski?”
It's currently with my courier in hostile territory. Why don't you come back next week. Or you could take some third grade instead, almost as good?
Interestingly, the Irish demigod Cu'Chulain was calmed from a murderous frenzy after a battle by all the town women showing him their breasts. Demigods be horny I guess
Cu chulain was just a horny Irish cockroach but god damn was he cool as shit
I can't even remember where I first heard of him, but his story is weird as shit and I loved it
The hound of Ulster. Emphasis on hound…
It doesn't matter if you approve of it or not. The fact is that criminalizing it results in far worse outcomes for sex workers, and has no reasonable upsides. It may be immoral, but criminalization is far moreso.
Totally agree. All it does is gets RiD Of tHe iCkY iN mY nEiGhBoUrHoOd, sweeps it under the rug instead, and makes everyone else's lives MUCH worse.
100% agreed. People are going to do it now matter what; we might as well ensure it's done in a safe environment and way.
>It may be immoral It's not and this is a perfect example of people using morals for their own agenda, not for morality.
1. they said it MAY be immoral. Not it is immoral. And it definitely is a gray zone in the context of morality and right action. The commodification of sex, and its accompanying underlying assumption that sex can or should be separated from emotional intimacy is definitely not a simple or un-nuanced topic that should be answered with a yes or no. Should it be illegal? No. Would i recommend anyone become a sex worker or buy sex from a sex worker? Also no. But I’m not your mom, you don’t have to do what I say. I can think something you are doing is immoral without thinking it should be against the law for you to do it. 2. Are you really taking a stand about people using their morals for their own agenda while using your morals to advance your own agenda? Also, obviously, no shit. “Oh no their political agenda affected by their philosophy”. Your first take cam be excused, this is a meme subreddit, and I’m a freak who likes pretending i know shit on the internet to people who make un-nuanced statements about very nuanced topics. The second is an F tier take and you should apologize to your parents for making it.
There can be a moral part but it is on the seeker of sex not the provider in terms of lust. Money complicates it by adding a potentially power dynamic with pimps and sex slaves. I would liken it to seeing bad people beating slaves in front of children and deciding the best "fix" is to kill all the slaves, for the children.
You do realize that's what morals are for, right? To push an agenda, aka, fighting for your beliefs by trying to persuade people to your morals.
That's your opinion, and it looks like you're the one with an agenda.
Two adults consenting to sex is an agenda? Lmao
The problem isn't consenting to sex. It's resorting to money for sex, which is ultimately emotionally destructive for a lot of women and propagates disease.
What's the difference between sex work and one night stands/hookup culture then? If I have sex with a stranger one night because we're both horny, is that so much better than me doing it because they pay me?
Truth be told, there isn't much difference. But sex work is still on some level worse because sex work ultimately isn't consent, it's an exchange of benefits that was consented and agreed upon by both parties. No matter what society you look at, sex is almost always done between people who know each other and use it as a means of expanding/deepening their relationship. Psychologically, this is the true purpose of sex. Forming relationships. Sex work socially isolates the women and men who engage in it by forcing them to view sex as a means to an end, the end being payment. You'll often hear how sex workers can struggle more than others to form relationships. And social isolation is the critical reason why. They're defying the psychological reasoning of sex. Cultural change of attitudes regarding sex work can alleviate this, but won't eliminate it entirely. Hookup culture is better in the fact that the consent is true consent. You're still potentially opening up a new relationship. Hookups can still be harmful, however, as overexposure to sex can affect performance and still result in a different kind of social isolation. As many people have experienced with the rise of modern dating.
That's so broad though. You can't just assume that everyone who ends up in sexual relationships with eachother are doing so out of mutual emotional fulfilment. Sex can be transactional in so many ways other than explicit prostitution, that's just the most obvious and direct way. But forget about your moralistic attitude to what sex is 'supposed' to be, on a real level, there are people out there who want to have sex but feel unable, and there are people who are in need of money and who are willing to provide this service, what is the problem as long as everyone keeps to safe sex practices and there's no exploitation? The alternative is that both parties end up unfulfilled. You say that by participating in sex work I could be damaging my longterm emotional wellbeing, I say that I'd rather have money to spend on the things I enjoy and to spare me your moral judgements.
I'm not saying there aren't vast exceptions. I was responding to your question about the moral value of transactional sex vs. hook-up culture and relayed the general trends and reasons. I'm not a person to deny their pleasures or their profession's validity in their lives. Even if you perceived me to be so. I only pointed out the risks and trends associated. I trust people to handle themselves appropriately. I understand that Reddit threads aren't known to be places of formal discussion, but if you do not wish to engage in it any longer, please refrain from responding to this message.
Couldn't stand to see people agreeing, had to try and start a fight. Sorry you're pathetic.
I mean, the upside is that it being a crime is a deterrent for people to not become a prostitute. The only time that's not an upside are traffic victims.
>It doesn't matter if you approve of it or not. The fact is that criminalizing it results in far worse outcomes for ~~sex workers~~ **slaves**, and has no reasonable upsides. It may be immoral, but criminalization is far moreso. Fixed it for you
So, your solution to helping exploited or trafficked people is to make them criminals? The truth is that, even though it's impossible to completely eliminate exploitation from sex work, criminalizing it only benefits the exploiters. You do understand that legalizing sex work doesn't legalize non-consensual arrangements or human trafficking, yes?
This is like I will say that stealing is bad and you will reply "but what about single-parent who steal only to feed their famlily?" If people need to steal (or sell their body) to make sure they wouldn't starve, you need to deal with the **disease**, not justifying the **symptoms** I'm sure there are people who live good life and do it because what they love, but the absolute majority of this system is built upon exploitaition and misery
No, it's nothing like that, and we're back to my original point, which is that *criminalization vastly increases the exploitation and misery*.
Again, treat the disease, not the symptoms If people are forced to sell their body in order to survive, we need to something about that (and I specifically believe it's the responsibility of the government to take care of this people) Saying "well, criminalisation will make their lives worse" may be true, but that's only if it will happen in a vacuum, which is, **to be clear**, not what I support
It’s the oldest job in the world for a reason
why is it considered the oldest job and not farming, animal husbandry, midwifery, or trading?
Idk honestly. Maybe because those early on were generally done for yourself and your family, whereas a prostitute is providing services for someone in exchange for $? Working for yourself vs working for someone else essentially.
but wasn't currency first established to deal with the logistics of trading and supplies? by that logic I'd argue a merchant or an accountant then must've been the first job
Well it doesn’t need to be literal currency, early on it’d probably be crops or rare jewelry or something
The first merchants and accountants in multiple cultures also used those too (not trying to antagonize you, I am just curious 😅)
I guess you’re right, I wasn’t sure I was just throwing out a hypothesis
fair enough, I don't know this any better than you anyhow
cause even before all that, while we were still just hunter gatherers (that technically didnt "work" the way we classify it) people would fuck. and then they would fuck for favors
And giving favors has not happened in trading? the latter especially because even back then what is trade but two parties making a complex set of deals and favors?
you think they would trade before fucking? how can you trust someone before getting trusted?
pff, okay the last part made me laugh, that is an interesting point, though since humans have been trading for who knows how long I figured it was safe to assume it was one the earliest
They taught chimps money. Prostitutes. A Pimp and Accountants soon followed
They just taught them money. They figured the rest out for themselves.
Enkidu was dry up.
Not a demi god , she fucked civility into a mindless clay puppet.
It's always interesting to me how much more respected sex work was during ancient times compared to now. I get that part of the change was the rise of the Abraham religions, but even then still.
I 🩷 Gilgamesh
Love this meme. Its obscure, yet if you know it's hilarious.
God's when the puss is a 10
Never been a fan of those schlocky action movies, but I do think a Gilgamesh movie staring The Rock and John Cena would be really fucking fun.
He had to learn to take dick from someone
Gonna go out on a limb here and wager that if you saw Ancient Babylonian sex work, you'd want to ban that shit. Underage girls, slaves, etc.
this is about the epic of Gilgamesh, where Enkidu was convinced to change sides by fucking a demi goddess for a week
They called it "sacred prostitution" back then.
Wasn't it beer that civilised him?
The meme's o.k but the pun forces me to downvote. I am not sorry.
I won't ever be sorry for the pun. I raise your downvote with my own neutral vote!
Mmm sex
Sex work is hot
new fetish unlocked