(Newser) – The first known "gay caveman" has been unearthed in a dig outside Prague, researchers believe. Archaeological team members based their conclusion on the fact that the male body was interred in a ritualistic way reserved for females. "We know people from this period took funeral rites very seriously so it is highly unlikely that this positioning was a mistake," said the lead archaeologist. "Far more likely is that he was a man with a different sexual orientation—homosexual or transsexual," she added.
The body dates to as long ago as 2900 BC, reports the Telegraph, and was buried with the head pointing east and surrounded by domestic jugs. Men at the time were buried facing west and surrounded by weapons and tools. "What we see here doesn't add up to traditional Corded Ware cultural norms," said the team leader. Another researcher classified it as "one of the earliest cases of what could be described as a 'transsexual' or 'third gender' grave."
I love that it FINALLY lends credence to being born with an orientation. Back then population growth would have been crucial so 'choosing' to be gay would make even less sense than it does now.
Answer by SleepingBeautee at 11:11 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
Answer by SuperChicken at 11:14 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
Answer by KateShesGreat3 at 11:12 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
Answer by Alexias30 at 11:24 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
Answer by UpSheRises at 11:24 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
What do you think of the fact that archaeologists have found a gay caveman?
I am supportive of Gay Rights as a state issue. This article doesn't change that... But OP~ By this quote alone, "Far more likely is that he was a man with a different sexual orientation—homosexual or transsexual,"~ I don't see where you are getting that archeologists have facts... I can see~ If anything, these findings points to probability, likelihood.. But I do find it interesting that he, "surrounded by domestic jugs, rituals only previously seen in female graves." Could this mean, if he was gay, then they stereotyped him as a domesticate and not a warrior? Warriors couldn't be gay even back then?
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 11:24 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
First of all, as already mentioned it is not a fact. It is a supposition based on circumstantial evidence. The caveman COULD be gay, or maybe there was some other logical explanation that we don't know about. Regardless of that fact, I've always supported gay rights and whether they were "born that way" or chose that way doesn't matter. And if the caveman was gay, whose to say he didn't choose to be gay also? Perhaps there were limited females in his tribe.
Answer by SalemWitchChild at 11:32 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
Answer by mustbeGRACE at 11:35 AM on Apr. 15, 2011
Answer by Lucky209 at 11:21 AM on Apr. 15, 2011