[mburbank]

Oh my sweet jumping Jesus.

"I was interested in reading about the famed period of Greek homosexuality, a period which a lot of people try to use to justify the homosexuality as a normal and commonplace act, one that is merely suppressed by society."

This sentence is the product of a disordered mind. I'm not talking about it's content. It is so poorly written it prevents concideration of the content. If you can't put your thoughts into writing better than this, you are totally unready for any sort of debate. You are barely ready for conversation. You seem offended no one is taking you seriously. Why on earth would they?

It's not that I don't get what you're driving at. I do, but there's no reason to dignify the manner in which you present it with an answer. Your like a kid who after a year of violin instruction inists on playing Mozart and then gets huffy when no one wants to critique their performance.

Slow down. Stop over reaching. Try writing a cogent sentence with a subject and object. Than I'd be happy to get into why I think your actual ideas are stupid.

Lets look at your opening sentence . Three clauses. Until you can write single clause sentence that clearly expresses your meaning, skip orante construction. "I was interested in reading about the famed period of Greek homosexuality" First of all, this isn't your premiss. Lead with your premiss. Try to figure out what your premiss is. Then state it. There is no 'famed Period of Greek Homosexuality' One assumes that one degree or another of homosexuality has always been practiced in Greece. The 'time period' I imagine you are referencing is best known for philosiphy, theories of government, cultural achievments, architecture, etc. The acceptance of various social practices was a single aspect of that society.
Would you refer to to the American Civil War as 'The Famed Period of American Facial hair' and expect people would know what you were tlking about?

'a period which a lot of people try to use to justify the homosexuality as a normal and commonplace act,'

You used the word 'period' twice in the space of six words. Redundancy is clutter. So is redundancy. See?

You do not 'try to use to justify'. A justification may be incorrect or unsupported, but you make one or you don't.

There is no such thing as 'the homosexuality'. It's just 'homsexuality'. Perhaps you are thinking of 'the Batman'.

In the context you are using them, the words Normal and Commonplace are no different. If you mean there to be a distinction, and if that distinction is in any way important to your premise, make it clear. Otherwise, use one word. Also, 'homosexuality' is not an 'act'. would you describe Judaism, Red hair or membership in the Liberatraian party as 'a normal and commonplace act'?

'one that is merely suppressed by society.' Who's society? Greeks of the famed period of homosexuality? Can't be, your premiss is people think it was 'normal and commonplace'. Do you mean our society? Many modern societies? Which time period are you talking about?

If you actually want discussion and aren't just looking to validate your opininion of yourself as a bold straight shooter by having people mock you (Hello? I-Mockery? As in the name of this site?), pull your self together. (That's how you write multiple clause sentence). Before you spew some brine through your blowhole about how this is just a message board, try to keep in mind you're the one whining about not being taken seriously.