ok you cant decide "achillean" is pedophilic and still use "sapphic". because sappho was historically was definitely someone whom was supposedly in relationships with her younger *pupils*. where is the line drawn?

conceptualizing ancient and classical terms in a modern contexts isn't easy, and it isn't 1 for 1. Erastes and eromenos are power dynamics that are not necessarily simple in modern language. And we cannot pretend they're gender exclusive.

It is wild to me to see people trying to shit on terms for mlm and yet they do not have the same critical eye for wlw terms. Trying to force *ancient* figures into modern pretexts isn't simple and maybe you have to be malleable. Especially when you haven't studied the source.

as an ancient/classical historian: achillean & sapphic are terms I feel work and I enjoy using them (especially as a bigender bisexual). your hypercritical critique looks weird when you don't know what you're talking about, tbh, especially with ANCIENT FIGURES.

ACHILLES WAS A MYTHICAL FIGURE AND SAPPHO WAS A REAL AUTHOR LIKE COME ON NOWWW

it is so ok to not use terms for yourself, but to so highly police queer people without reason is an inherently homophobic complex that we need to unlearn.