The pre-Christian Greeks and Romans didn't have high views of feminine males/male effeminacy, either.
An oversimplification, and you're framing these through modern lenses. Namely through the use of "feminine" and "effeminacy". That was not the issue in Greek and Roman societies, and is not brought up in the negative. Rather it is being submissive,
which was seen as the behavior of slaves and non-military castes.
and one Roman emperor, Elagabalus, was assassinated partially because he so scandalized society with his effeminate behavior and breaking of religious and sexual taboos.
No, he was hated because of his submissive behavior, flippancy toward marriage (even to a vestal virgin), and irreverence to the Roman pantheon. It was mostly his foreign conduct and provocation of Roman culture and customs that garnered animosity from the Roman elite. He was assassinated when he ordered the execution of anyone who showed favor to his cousin, Alexander, who was placed as a consul designatus
next to Elagabalus, and who was in fact a favorite of the people.
A male Roman citizen could lose his citizenship by playing the role of a female in bed.
You're going to have to provide a source for that. The only ways I can find of a male losing
his citizenship is through defecting from the army, maiming himself on purpose to avoid military service, or avoiding censorship to be disregarded for tax collection. In relation to being submissive in same-sex intercourse (only among males, it should be noted), the only "threat" that came with this was the possibility of being regarded as a slave. It didn't make
one a slave, but it carried the connotation.
You're also wrong about what "ergi" means:
No, I am not. Did you notice that the examples and sources given discuss the Medieval period of Scandinavia? That's the years 1100 – 1600 CE, about 1-500 years after the Christianization of Scandinavia. Yes, that is relevant as the use of ergi
changed under a Christian culture. Yes, ergi
means "unmanly", yet to understand what that means in pre-Christian Scandinavian society, it must be understood just what "manliness" was. Here, as well, you are running into the flaw of viewing the gender roles through a modern lens.
I will say that being mentioned in the Kama Sutra perhaps doesn't mean what you think it does, as it's about sex and I did say that hijras are heavily involved with sex work...
Do you really think that's all the Kama Sutra
is? The name itself means "Principles of Love". "Attributed to Vātsyāyana, the
Kama Sutra is neither exclusively nor predominantly a sex manual on sex positions, but rather was written as a guide to the art of living well, the nature of love, finding a life partner, maintaining one's love life, and other aspects pertaining to pleasure-oriented faculties of human life."
And still yet, it is noted that mistreatment of hijra began after c
Also, having religious roles and representation in myth didn't mean they were celebrated and accepted by wider culture.
Yes, it does mean that. The myths and legends of a peoples reflect their culture; that which is shunned and that which is viewed as normal and accepted.