I'm very disappointed in poem_for_your_sprog for almost understanding this point, and then immediately making the same mistake she was calling out
'I have to sort my books!' she cried,
With self-indulgent glee;
With senseless, ~~narcissistic~~ pride:
'I'm just so OCD!'
'How random, guys!' I smiled and said,
Then left without a peep -
And washed my hands until they bled,
And cried myself to sleep.
Could you elaborate on this please? The only thing I remember about Narcissus is that, when he was born, a seer or something made a prophecy that he would live forever so long as he never knew himself. He had a bunch of suitors, all of whom he spurned, until one day he saw his own reflection in a lake. Being unable to obtain the only thing he has ever loved (himself), he sat by the lake staring until he died.
You've nearly got the myth right, just missing one detail: he only fell in love with his reflection after he was cursed by the goddess Rhamnusia. She sentenced him to die of thirst because he wouldn't date anyone. He was only 16.
That's all from Ovid. Try to evaluate that story in a modern context, and you'll see it becomes pretty gross. I really like the story as an example of how horrible people can be to asexuals. But most people side with Ameinias' interpretation that not wanting to date anyone is an act of abuse and hubris worthy of execution and two thousand years of hate.
But there isn't one single myth, you're only citing Conon's version, which is the only one that fits the narrative you're trying to portray here. Why not Ovid's version? Why not Parthenius's version? Why not Pausanias's version?
Ovid! That's the name I couldn't remember. I looked it up and 'Echo and Narcissus' is definitely the version I remember reading in school.
Those versions support my interpretation too.
No they don't.
That's a bold claim to make, when I've explained the full myth and you haven't. Now, if you were to cite any particular example and build an argument from it, then I would take your objection in good faith and respond in kind. However, if I were to pick apart and examine each of those four examples, why that would waste perhaps an hour of my time, all in response to three words of yours. That would be holding myself to a hundred times the standard of evidence you've provided. And if you were to demand I do that before you believe me, well the word for that is sealioning. Which is why I have concluded your argument is not, at this moment, in good faith.
One of the greatest arguments ever constructed. Truly.
Fine, I'll analyse ONE of the alternatives to Conon you cited: Ovid.
There we are. Narcissus rejected someone and they prayed to the gods for revenge, and outlined very clear parameters for the curse they wanted Narcissus to suffer. They wanted him to be made to love and not have what he loves. So Rhamnusia made him fall in love with his reflection.
Now get off your lazy ass and do some research if you want to argue with me.
Literally nothing you have written ties any of this back to "queerphobia."
So you don't think a goddess agreeing to punish a guy for not wanting any fucc is aphobic?
Here's some more context: Narcissus was the son of Liriope, a nymph. Nymphs do not typically have any sexual interest. Liriope only got pregnant because she was raped by Cephisus. Narcissus inherited his mother's beauty, and it seems clear from his actions, her asexuality.
And here we have Ovid attributing asexual behaviour to pride, and not to just being ace.