A mouth is just a mouth question for guys?

[Chase1600]

FLM, should you return to this thread, I want you to know, early on, the discussion ceased to be about you. I think you were treated rather unfairly.
The thread began:

I've looked at various comments about oral sex on this site and have heard the old saying from some guys "a mouth is just a mouth" when you're receiving oral sex. Do the guys here think this is really true?

A Fair enough question: “A mouth is just a mouth” sounds like something a guy might say. I can’t say I actually ever heard a guy say it. Eight guys responded prior to FLM’s first post. Basically they said the girl or guy would have to be attractive. FLM addressed the subject from his perspective, that of “the mouth.” In his post, FLM posted a complex sentence describing how a guy with a big dick might filter a partner, followed by his writing “ … and the mouth … is nothing other than ‘just a mouth.’ If the guy (or girl) is “hot”, the quality of the blowjob doesn’t really seem to matter.”

I interpreted his words meaning a hot guy will pick a hot guy based on personal filters not because of “the mouth” which after all is “just a mouth.” I interpret FLM as saying what I believe, the quality of a blowjob won’t matter as much as the “sexiness” of the person giving it.

Others seemed to interpret FLM literally, without the context I read, saying a mouth is just a mouth.

Hung Jon begged to disagree while seeming to agree with my interpretation by saying:

I disagree. When I'm with a person who I think is attractive, it's not about a "good blowjob". It has nothing to do with how the person uses his or her mouth.

Jon followed up introducing the reaction to FLM screen name which became such an issue.

I followed, seeing it pretty much as I thought FLM did, asserting I needed to be “into” the guy if only on flimsy evidence. Seaside expressed pleasure reading how many guys needed some connection. Hud01 and maxcok weighed in on behalf of good technique. In the context of this thread, I interpret “good technique” as closer to “a mouth is just a mouth.” Not everyone did.

Meanwhile, in his second post in the thread, FLM said his screen name was meant to serve as an accessible description.

My screen name is simply meant to serve as an accessible description, just to give an indication of the sensation, and has nothing to do with presumed objectification or lack of connection. And just for argument's sake, how is this any different from having the word "Hung" in one's screen name or posting pictures of one's feet or six-pack abs? Nothing wrong with it at all, mind you, but not necessarily indicative of nobler intent.

Subsequently he posted:

Or does the BJ simply become GREAT if the person giving it has the necessary requirements for the receiver to make that connection or become attracted?

Objectivity or universal qualities become unreliable or even unnecessary when the mind decides otherwise... so I guess Sheryl Crow was right after all: "If it makes you happy, it can't be that bad"

NEWREBA posted:

Hmmm? Fleshlightmouth, I think you do protest too much. I just checked out your links and I would say that you are definitely contradicting yourself. Why would you have so many videos of you sucking so many people? Are these guys your lovers or boyfriends? Pardon me, but you seem a tad bit compulsive to me. Is this part of your lifestyle or what? Below is your ad, and I quote.

Huge Cocks would choose FleshlightMouth!
Coming soon to an area near you

Skilled deepthroater for extra long and thick cocks, and HUGE shooters!
Nice guy with very talented throat, looking for XXL hung guys who love to get sucked and make new deepthroat videos with me.
Thanks for all your comments and friend requests!


Sorry but I couldn't bring myself to actually watch any of your videos. Scary stuff.


http://www.lpsg.org/blogs/fleshlightmouth/

FleshlightMouth's Videos

FLM responded:

Definitely not making them for you.... And why does this discussion have to veer into personal attacks?

Subsequently worshipyourcock, who describes himself as 100% gay, challenged NEWREBA asking why she was judging people. She responded by observing that she thought the behavior FLM described and advertised was abnormal, emotionally destructive, and de-humanizing.

Tardis 69, who does not identify his sexuality, objected to this as a personal attack. Jon observed that FLM’s profile and links are gross and used the words macabre and bizarre in description. Self described 99% gay, hilaire objected to NEWREBA’s conclusions. There were some back and forth posts by the same people. 60% gay trav objected to Jon’s use of the word macabre. 99% straight female asked who are we to judge. 100% gay worshipyourcock weighed back in with a critical – under the circumstances - observation of NEWREBA’s photo. 100% gay Cunning Stunt agreed with a post defending FLM against personal debate.

At this point, OP, NEWREBA posted the following:

Wow! People certainly have strong feelings about this topic, or maybe I should say, certain people's ideas or feelings about it. I have noticed one obvious thing and that is this: self-identified gay guys are extremely defensive about my reactions to posts. I'm wondering if my reactions are perceived as homophobic or especially critical concerning gay guy's sexual practices? I've noticed that it's practically all gay guys who have supported FleshlightMouth's attitudes and practices. I have also noticed that most "straight" guys have less of, what I'd call, a sexist view which is an interesting surprise to me. I have to say that I'm somewhat of a novice when it comes to gay or bi men's sexual practices so I have been really surprised by what I've seen and heard here. I've never seen a profile like FleshlightMouth's before, so I have to say that I was really shocked by it. I guess I'd also say that I'm no prude. I'm not moralistic or religious. For me the "mouth is just a mouth" idea is comparable to" a pussy is just a pussy", where the woman is relegated to some sub-human position. For me it's more about human dignity and worth.

Prior to NEWREBA’s observation that FLM protested too much, gay and straight men, alike, tilted heavily to the idea that a mouth is not just a mouth. I interpreted FLM saying the same. It was subsequent to an assertion of his alleged defensiveness that four gay males, one straight female, and one male, who does not self identify, objected to critical words used to describe FLM, while a single poster, who is primarily straight, largely shared NEWREBA’s observations about FLM. These do not lead to NEWREBA’s conclusions. I don’t think raising objections to the description of a fellow member as abnormal, emotionally destructive, de-humanizing, macabre or bizarre, is being extremely defensive. I did not find a gay vs. straight gestalt – or whatever – with respect to objectification of “mouth” relegating anyone to sub-human position. People who objected were mostly gay men, not entirely, while only one person shared NEWREBA’s argument.

Were someone religious they might well object to many posts at LPSG. Were someone prudish, they might.

I expect a poster at LPSG would get some grief claiming a pussy is just a pussy. Asking straight posters if they saw women that way, we would hope their responses would be much as straight and gay members have responded about a “mouth.”

The OP raised the question. I think she selectively gleaned responses to find an answer. NEWREBA, since you raised the odd issue of this odd wording “a mouth is just a mouth” and found something peculiar in you interpretation of the responses, are you sure you did not arrive with an agenda?

 

[maxcok]

She doesn't have to be enlightened. She's hot. :tongue:

I think there is more than a little truth behind your jest, which exposes your personal bias in defense of the OP, and in interpreting the thread, and in your challenges to other posters.

The OP raised the question. I think she selectively gleaned responses to find an answer. NEWREBA, since you raised the odd issue of this odd wording “a mouth is just a mouth” and found something peculiar in you interpretation of the responses, are you sure you did not arrive with an agenda?

I believe she did. In other words:

I think there are ulterior motives behind your disingenuous words. I think you are here to criticize and condemn.

But hey, I'm just "expressing an opinion". :smile:

FLM, should you return to this thread, I want you to know, early on, the discussion ceased to be about you. I think you were treated rather unfairly.

He was treated in an extremely insulting and judgemental manner, particularly given the environment of the site and better intentions of this community. Fortunately, this unwarranted character assassination was executed by only the OP and one other poster, while many others came to his defense, so we can be glad of that. The relative merits of your detailed summation and personal analysis aside (your interpretation of my personal point of view on the topic is off the mark, btw) I wouldn't expect FLM to return, and wisely so. Why should he?

 

[Daisy]

FLM, should you return to this thread, I want you to know, early on, the discussion ceased to be about you. I think you were treated rather unfairly.
The thread began:


A Fair enough question: “A mouth is just a mouth” sounds like something a guy might say. I can’t say I actually ever heard a guy say it. Eight guys responded prior to FLM’s first post. Basically they said the girl or guy would have to be attractive. FLM addressed the subject from his perspective, that of “the mouth.” In his post, FLM posted a complex sentence describing how a guy with a big dick might filter a partner, followed by his writing “ … and the mouth … is nothing other than ‘just a mouth.’ If the guy (or girl) is “hot”, the quality of the blowjob doesn’t really seem to matter.”

I interpreted his words meaning a hot guy will pick a hot guy based on personal filters not because of “the mouth” which after all is “just a mouth.” I interpret FLM as saying what I believe, the quality of a blowjob won’t matter as much as the “sexiness” of the person giving it.

Others seemed to interpret FLM literally, without the context I read, saying a mouth is just a mouth.

Hung Jon begged to disagree while seeming to agree with my interpretation by saying:



Jon followed up introducing the reaction to FLM screen name which became such an issue.

I followed, seeing it pretty much as I thought FLM did, asserting I needed to be “into” the guy if only on flimsy evidence. Seaside expressed pleasure reading how many guys needed some connection. Hud01 and maxcok weighed in on behalf of good technique. In the context of this thread, I interpret “good technique” as closer to “a mouth is just a mouth.” Not everyone did.

Meanwhile, in his second post in the thread, FLM said his screen name was meant to serve as an accessible description.



Subsequently he posted:



NEWREBA posted:




FLM responded:




Subsequently worshipyourcock, who describes himself as 100% gay, challenged NEWREBA asking why she was judging people. She responded by observing that she thought the behavior FLM described and advertised was abnormal, emotionally destructive, and de-humanizing.

Tardis 69, who does not identify his sexuality, objected to this as a personal attack. Jon observed that FLM’s profile and links are gross and used the words macabre and bizarre in description. Self described 99% gay, hilaire objected to NEWREBA’s conclusions. There were some back and forth posts by the same people. 60% gay trav objected to Jon’s use of the word macabre. 99% straight female asked who are we to judge. 100% gay worshipyourcock weighed back in with a critical – under the circumstances - observation of NEWREBA’s photo. 100% gay Cunning Stunt agreed with a post defending FLM against personal debate.

At this point, OP, NEWREBA posted the following:





Prior to NEWREBA’s observation that FLM protested too much, gay and straight men, alike, tilted heavily to the idea that a mouth is not just a mouth. I interpreted FLM saying the same. It was subsequent to an assertion of his alleged defensiveness that four gay males, one straight female, and one male, who does not self identify, objected to critical words used to describe FLM, while a single poster, who is primarily straight, largely shared NEWREBA’s observations about FLM. These do not lead to NEWREBA’s conclusions. I don’t think raising objections to the description of a fellow member as abnormal, emotionally destructive, de-humanizing, macabre or bizarre, is being extremely defensive. I did not find a gay vs. straight gestalt – or whatever – with respect to objectification of “mouth” relegating anyone to sub-human position. People who objected were mostly gay men, not entirely, while only one person shared NEWREBA’s argument.

Were someone religious they might well object to many posts at LPSG. Were someone prudish, they might.

I expect a poster at LPSG would get some grief claiming a pussy is just a pussy. Asking straight posters if they saw women that way, we would hope their responses would be much as straight and gay members have responded about a “mouth.”

The OP raised the question. I think she selectively gleaned responses to find an answer. NEWREBA, since you raised the odd issue of this odd wording “a mouth is just a mouth” and found something peculiar in you interpretation of the responses, are you sure you did not arrive with an agenda?

good grief you went to all that detail and all you got out of my contribution is that I liked that men wanted a connection. HELLO...I was the first person to stand up for FLM when nobody else was. Sorry that just bugs me. Its like if youre blonde and female you must be some empty headed bimbo with nothing intelligent to contribute.

 

[B_subgirrl]

good grief you went to all that detail and all you got out of my contribution is that I liked that men wanted a connection. HELLO...I was the first person to stand up for FLM when nobody else was. Sorry that just bugs me. Its like if youre blonde and female you must be some empty headed bimbo with nothing intelligent to contribute.

Don't worry, I'm just a 99% straight female. I don't even have a name!!!!

Although I recognise the effort Chase put in, I would appreciate it if ALL contributors could be correctly summarised and acknowledged.

 

[NEWREBA]

FLM, should you return to this thread, I want you to know, early on, the discussion ceased to be about you. I think you were treated rather unfairly.
The thread began:


A Fair enough question: “A mouth is just a mouth” sounds like something a guy might say. I can’t say I actually ever heard a guy say it. Eight guys responded prior to FLM’s first post. Basically they said the girl or guy would have to be attractive. FLM addressed the subject from his perspective, that of “the mouth.” In his post, FLM posted a complex sentence describing how a guy with a big dick might filter a partner, followed by his writing “ … and the mouth … is nothing other than ‘just a mouth.’ If the guy (or girl) is “hot”, the quality of the blowjob doesn’t really seem to matter.”

I interpreted his words meaning a hot guy will pick a hot guy based on personal filters not because of “the mouth” which after all is “just a mouth.” I interpret FLM as saying what I believe, the quality of a blowjob won’t matter as much as the “sexiness” of the person giving it.

Others seemed to interpret FLM literally, without the context I read, saying a mouth is just a mouth.

Hung Jon begged to disagree while seeming to agree with my interpretation by saying:



Jon followed up introducing the reaction to FLM screen name which became such an issue.

I followed, seeing it pretty much as I thought FLM did, asserting I needed to be “into” the guy if only on flimsy evidence. Seaside expressed pleasure reading how many guys needed some connection. Hud01 and maxcok weighed in on behalf of good technique. In the context of this thread, I interpret “good technique” as closer to “a mouth is just a mouth.” Not everyone did.

Meanwhile, in his second post in the thread, FLM said his screen name was meant to serve as an accessible description.



Subsequently he posted:



NEWREBA posted:




FLM responded:




Subsequently worshipyourcock, who describes himself as 100% gay, challenged NEWREBA asking why she was judging people. She responded by observing that she thought the behavior FLM described and advertised was abnormal, emotionally destructive, and de-humanizing.

Tardis 69, who does not identify his sexuality, objected to this as a personal attack. Jon observed that FLM’s profile and links are gross and used the words macabre and bizarre in description. Self described 99% gay, hilaire objected to NEWREBA’s conclusions. There were some back and forth posts by the same people. 60% gay trav objected to Jon’s use of the word macabre. 99% straight female asked who are we to judge. 100% gay worshipyourcock weighed back in with a critical – under the circumstances - observation of NEWREBA’s photo. 100% gay Cunning Stunt agreed with a post defending FLM against personal debate.

At this point, OP, NEWREBA posted the following:





Prior to NEWREBA’s observation that FLM protested too much, gay and straight men, alike, tilted heavily to the idea that a mouth is not just a mouth. I interpreted FLM saying the same. It was subsequent to an assertion of his alleged defensiveness that four gay males, one straight female, and one male, who does not self identify, objected to critical words used to describe FLM, while a single poster, who is primarily straight, largely shared NEWREBA’s observations about FLM. These do not lead to NEWREBA’s conclusions. I don’t think raising objections to the description of a fellow member as abnormal, emotionally destructive, de-humanizing, macabre or bizarre, is being extremely defensive. I did not find a gay vs. straight gestalt – or whatever – with respect to objectification of “mouth” relegating anyone to sub-human position. People who objected were mostly gay men, not entirely, while only one person shared NEWREBA’s argument.

Were someone religious they might well object to many posts at LPSG. Were someone prudish, they might.

I expect a poster at LPSG would get some grief claiming a pussy is just a pussy. Asking straight posters if they saw women that way, we would hope their responses would be much as straight and gay members have responded about a “mouth.”

The OP raised the question. I think she selectively gleaned responses to find an answer. NEWREBA, since you raised the odd issue of this odd wording “a mouth is just a mouth” and found something peculiar in you interpretation of the responses, are you sure you did not arrive with an agenda?

Wow, I hardly know what to say, Chase 1600! What a mad crazy response! Talk about an agenda!

 

[maxcok]

good grief you went to all that detail and all you got out of my contribution is that I liked that men wanted a connection. HELLO...I was the first person to stand up for FLM when nobody else was.

Well, to give full credit where credit's due, there were a few others who got there before you, notably worshipyourcock, Tardis, and Hilaire. Not to diminish your effort in the least; you have certainly been a champion for tolerance and fairness.

Sorry that just bugs me. Its like if youre blonde and female you must be some empty headed bimbo with nothing intelligent to contribute.

Oh honey, if men are too foolish to recognize your good judgement and obvious intelligence (and I certainly do) at least you can always fall back on being pretty and blonde. :biggrin2:

 

[Daisy]

Well, to give full credit where credit's due, there were a few others who got there before you, notably worshipyourcock, Tardis, and Hilaire. Not to diminish your effort in the least; you have certainly been a champion for tolerance and fairness.

Oh honey, if men are too foolish to recognize your good judgement and obvious intelligence (and I certainly do) at least you can always fall back on being pretty and blonde. :biggrin2:

LOL..OK Max I stand corrected, maybe my recollection is that I was the first one to emphatically or persistently defend FLM. In either case I thought it was rather odd that Chase summarized my contribution to something as inane as "liking that guys needed a connection". Maybe I'm being overly sensitive.

PS. getting the Maxcock stamp of approval..priceless ..LOL..thanks :smile:

 

[dylz]

well this thread has been an interesting read

 

[B_Hung Jon]

well this thread has been an interesting read

You can say that again! :biggrin1: I've actually enjoyed it quite a bit. It re-enforces who my friends are.

 

[maxcok]

Don't worry, I'm just a 99% straight female. I don't even have a name!!!!

I feel for you, SG. Now I think it's time you got yourself an avatar, girrl.

Although I recognise the effort Chase put in, I would appreciate it if ALL contributors could be correctly summarised and acknowledged.

Oh hun, don't take it personally. He totally ignored my challenges to the OP and my substantial defense of FLM in lengthy point by point rebuttuls. Hell, I wasn't even listed as one of the objectors, but reduced to a passing mention paired with Hud: "Hud01 and maxcok weighed in on behalf of good technique." Even CunningStunt's one measly post got more print than I did, and Chase didn't even bother to speculate on my sexual orientation.

So don't feel bad, I don't. FLM's promised me blowjobs for life, so I'm thrilled actually. :biggrin2:

LOL..OK Max I stand corrected, maybe my recollection is that I was the first one to emphatically or persistently defend FLM. In either case I thought it was rather odd that Chase summarized my contribution to something as inane as "liking that guys needed a connection". Maybe I'm being overly sensitive.

See above. :wink:

PS. getting the Maxcock stamp of approval..priceless ..LOL..thanks :smile:

Well sure, for whatever that's worth. Come on, everybody. :grouphug:

 

[B_subgirrl]

I feel for you, SG. Now I think it's time you got yourself an avatar, girrl.

I agree. I can't remain the invisible woman forever.

Oh hun, don't take it personally. He totally ignored my challenges to the OP and my substantial defense of FLM in lengthy point by point rebuttuls. Hell, I wasn't even listed as one of the objectors, but reduced to a passing mention paired with Hud: "Hud01 and maxcok weighed in on behalf of good technique." Even CunningStunt's one measly post got more print than I did, and Chase didn't even bother to speculate on my sexual orientation.

:biggrin1: I'm thinking we all got a little screwed over :biggrin1:

So don't feel bad, I don't. FLM's promised me blowjobs for life, so I'm thrilled actually. :biggrin2:

I thought you were gonna say you got the consolation prize, but that's no consolation prize!!!! I won't even try to claim mine would be better - FLM's got me well and truly beat! :tongue:

Well sure, for whatever that's worth. Come on, everybody. :grouphug:

I'm as flattered as Seaside if I get to get in on a Maxcok group hug :smile::smile::smile:

 

[B_Hung Jon]

I think there is more than a little truth behind your jest, which exposes your personal bias in defense of the OP, and in interpreting the thread, and in your challenges to other posters.

I believe she did. In other words:


He was treated in an extremely insulting and judgemental manner, particularly given the environment of the site and better intentions of this community. Fortunately, this unwarranted character assassination was executed by only the OP and one other poster, while many others came to his defense, so we can be glad of that. The relative merits of your detailed summation and personal analysis aside (your interpretation of my personal point of view on the topic is off the mark, btw) I wouldn't expect FLM to return, and wisely so. Why should he?

Well then what can I or anyone else say about people's behavior or style on this site? Am I required to agree that Fleshlightmouth is an upstanding citizen, that he loves his mother and that he sucks dick like a trooper? If I feel his behavior and life-style advertisement is unattractive to me, can I say it openly or is that considered "judgmental"? On many threads I'm allowed to say which dicks I like and which I don't like. Can I not also say what sexual behaviors I like or do not like as well, or does that somehow diminish the person? I have seen literally hundreds of threads that either condemn or are critical of other people's behavior or practices. Just like at this forum for example. I think being critical of what sexual activities people take part in should not be regarded as a personal thing. Instead it's matter of opinion. I don't happen to like or appreciate many things people say on this site, but I don't try to censor them. People feel what they feel whether I like it or not. Also I don't think the OP came with an agenda directed at FLM. He actually inserted himself into the conversation, and she responded to his posts. So she doesn't like his profile...big deal. She has the right not to like it and express the reasons why.

 

[simbablk]

No. I've got to feel something for her. Whether is simply just pure sexual attraction, I've got to have something going for the process to occur. I don't let just anyone near my bait tackle. You might catch the wrong fish.

Simba

 

[BiMaleHungWV]

Mixed feelings on this one. When I was single (or approved play within the rules of my and my husband's relationship) let unattractive people (men and women) suck me off. Factor's to consider" how horny I am, my husband's wiliness to participate, My husband's approval, play partner's wiliness to follow rules (SAFETY is #1 - No love, no sex), hygiene, overall physical attraction, potential play partner's reputation and skill (If can deep throat girth BONUS points), persoanlity to an extent, risk of emotional feelings (sex is sex loemaking is lovemaking. Another of our rules - Play is just play if the play partner can't accept that or shows crush / "love" then everything stops), if they are top/bottom/vers, discretion, wiliness of everyone for more if it involves beyond oral, ...

Bottom line (pun intended)

A Mouth isn't just a Mouth (or ass or vagina - or "hole is a hole") there are other factors to consider but Unattractive (to me) doesn't = No action.

 

[Chase1600]

(your interpretation of my personal point of view on the topic is off the mark, btw)

I’m sure. You posted much. I briefly referenced you, along with Hud01, as having weighed in on behalf of technique. If I insult, please accept my apology. I didn’t mean to describe you but had only set out to tally the evidence of posts with respect to some interpretation of “mouth is a just mouth” which, incidentally, we proved to be more interpretive than one might expect.

good grief you went to all that detail and all you got out of my contribution is that I liked that men wanted a connection. HELLO...I was the first person to stand up for FLM when nobody else was. Sorry that just bugs me. Its like if youre blonde and female you must be some empty headed bimbo with nothing intelligent to contribute.

Oh seaside, I do apologize. I didn’t set out to encapsulate your opinions in total, but only address the issue of FLM’s alleged defensiveness and the alleged divide between our gay members rallying in support of him vs. straight members. I attempted something of an empirical review of posts limited to this one thread.

The question is a fair question. Like you, I interpret the prevailing tilt of responses to be that men want a connection. I.e., at that early point in the discussion, I interpret this one post as your accurate encapsulation.

I felt the posts were there. No one needed to read my quoting them all or all of those I quoted.

Don't worry, I'm just a 99% straight female. I don't even have a name!!!!

Although I recognise the effort Chase put in, I would appreciate it if ALL contributors could be correctly summarised and acknowledged.

Again, subgirrl, I apologize to you. I did fail to name you in a paragraph in which I named males. Perhaps it reveals something. I hope not. I set out to tally the record in response to the stated: “self identified gay men are extremely defensive.” A tally indicated it was not only gay men who defended FLM and one predominantly straight female joined in the criticism.

The criticisms of FLM were personal. In the series of posts leading to NEWREBA’s observation about gay men, the defenses were not extreme or exaggerated by any measure, not by my values. They were far from the ballistic, irate, nutty things one might read on the internet. Indeed, they were characteristic of LPSG posts.

Yours, subgrrl, was one of those, among those of gay men.

 

[Chase1600]

Wow, I hardly know what to say, Chase 1600! What a mad crazy response! Talk about an agenda!

NEWREBA, I weighed my decision. It was a long encapsulation of our posts in response to your question and your interpretation to our answers. The original question certainly is within the norm of LPSG posts. We ask such things all the time. You were getting good answers. You reached a conclusion. Aside from the personal treatment of FLM – not initiated by you – I wondered, were you on to something? If you were, it was a surprise to me, what you found. I tallied. It wasn’t there.

Male objectification of body parts is a worthy subject. The consistency of male behavior in this regard, straight or gay, is a worthy subject. Consistent, that is by my opinion, in that heterosexual and homosexual respond similarly to opposite genders. Typically we think of the objectification of breasts, thighs, booty, or cock. It presumes a varied gestalt from the idea a “pussy is just a pussy’” a “mouth is just a mouth.” If males objectify partners, you raised a worthy question, do we most likely objectify the body part in to which we insert ourselves, or do we mostly likely objectify other body parts.

For my part, I perceive our responses tilted towards the notion that while so many males certainly do objectify sexually attracting body parts, we still need to perceive some fleshed out idea of the person. The parts we objectify are not typically those in to which we might insert our penises. I absolutely failed to find any insight to gay sexuality in the defenses of FLM to perceived personal insults to him. It would have been interesting were it there. It would not have been interesting or insightful to disdain it, which has not been the LPSG way, but if it were something for us to understand about ourselves it might have been an opportunity.

As best I can tell, LPSG members revealed some characteristic respect for the underdog and not much else.

LPSG provides an inviting and encouraging forum for discussion. Members are free to reveal much about themselves and their psychology. We may well be flawed, complicated, compulsive, or obsessed. It is part of the human condition. Since this place is about penises, it is about the sexuality of males and those who respond sexually to males, as well as male hygiene. We can test and compare our experiences and concerns with similarly open, non-judgmental persons. It has not been our way to diagnose as aberrant the things most of us reveal. We have limits. We do not ameliorate with respect to illegal behavior such as sex with minors or abusive behavior.

As a result, LPSG provides an amazing window in to what really goes on in the minds of sexually active people.

 

[B_subgirrl]

Again, subgirrl, I apologize to you. I did fail to name you in a paragraph in which I named males. Perhaps it reveals something. I hope not. I set out to tally the record in response to the stated: “self identified gay men are extremely defensive.” A tally indicated it was not only gay men who defended FLM and one predominantly straight female joined in the criticism.

The criticisms of FLM were personal. In the series of posts leading to NEWREBA’s observation about gay men, the defenses were not extreme or exaggerated by any measure, not by my values. They were far from the ballistic, irate, nutty things one might read on the internet. Indeed, they were characteristic of LPSG posts.

Yours, subgrrl, was one of those, among those of gay men.

We're good :smile:. I really do appreciate the apology :smile:.

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

Well then what can I or anyone else say about people's behavior or style on this site? Am I required to agree that Fleshlightmouth is an upstanding citizen, that he loves his mother and that he sucks dick like a trooper? If I feel his behavior and life-style advertisement is unattractive to me, can I say it openly or is that considered "judgmental"? On many threads I'm allowed to say which dicks I like and which I don't like. Can I not also say what sexual behaviors I like or do not like as well, or does that somehow diminish the person? I have seen literally hundreds of threads that either condemn or are critical of other people's behavior or practices. Just like at this forum for example. I think being critical of what sexual activities people take part in should not be regarded as a personal thing. Instead it's matter of opinion. I don't happen to like or appreciate many things people say on this site, but I don't try to censor them. People feel what they feel whether I like it or not. Also I don't think the OP came with an agenda directed at FLM. He actually inserted himself into the conversation, and she responded to his posts. So she doesn't like his profile...big deal. She has the right not to like it and express the reasons why.

Can you point to a single post in which anyone who has taken a differing opinion to NEWREBA's has actually said she has no right to express her opinion on LPSG?


She absolutely does have that right, and just as she has the right to express her opinion so too do other members have the right to express their own opinions and their opinions of her opinion.

To paraphrase you, so they don't like what she has to say...big deal. They have the right not to like it and express reasons why.

 

[B_antoanvegas]

As some guys says "a mouth is a mouth".
I love receiving oral so much. Sometimes even prefer it than traditional contact.
But as you consider, will not put my 9 inch tool in every meet mouth.

 

[Daisy]

Hung Jon..you keep defending your right to disagree with FLM's lifestyle and do you see why thats not the point at all?

Let me ask you a question..if I start a new thread and I call it "HungJon: upstanding citizen or sexual deviant?" and then what if that thread went on to discuss your sexuality, your lifestyle, your photos.." Would you be comfortable with that? Would you feel unfairly judged? Would you say "hey wait a minute why is everyone focusing on me"?

You are perfectly allowed to disagree with FLM and what he does with his free time. But it's not ok when a thread turns into a personal attack against ONE person.

REBA asked" What I mean is this: would you accept oral sex from just anyone? unattractive person? another guy you don't know? whoever? Or is this idea just a fantasy that people have who want to entrap a guy?"

That was a general question. The question was not "Do you think FLM is a sexual deviant? Lets all weigh in!"

Apples and oranges. Do you see the difference?