The Romans maintained that male penetration of another male was acceptable for the penetrating part, but that it was "unnatural" for free men to "let" themselves be penetrated by a social equal. Sexual relations between a citizen and a slave was more acceptable, as long as the citizen was on top and the slave bottom.
This, along with the Romans' habit of portraying defeated enemy nations as "captured women" (Example: Claudius conquers Britannia) seems to hint towards an equation between military and social dominance and sexual penetration. Did the roman legionnaires therefore ever take advantage of captured enemy men or even soldiers as a way of "dominating" them? Are there any records of this?
A similar question was answered by u/Hristoferos some two years ago. Quoting him:
"Boys born or sold into slavery, captured as spoils of war, or freeman (freed slaves) were often exploited and sexually preyed upon. It was actually considered socially acceptable to abuse young male slaves, in sordid acts of pederasty by the elite class of elder Roman men."
You ought to check it out as it goes deeper into the matter.
