circle jerk
- Thread starter hammer
- Start date
Alley Blue
Sexy Member
This experience seems..........metaphysical.
[post=354458]Quoted post[/post]
[/b][/quote]like an "out of body experience"......heavy.....
- Donk,
Do you mean by this that you didn't know about his size before the circle jerk invitation and that if you suddenly saw that he was so much bigger than you it would have been too much to handle?
If so, I find it interesting because the only regret I have about never participating in a circle jerk is that I am curious about how the other guys would have reacted to my size. Not that I would ever want to make my friends feel bad about themselves, but I confess I always got an ego boost from comments by my college friends who saw my dick in the dorm showers (usually good-natured ribbing about the short (in height) guy who was bigger than all the basketball players).
- jonb,
Some gay men aren't into anal either, Skinny.
I think most of us have had these unintended homoerotic moments. Circle jerks, watching porn together (Come to think of it, the whole concept of the money shot is probably homoerotic.), threesomes with a guy and a girl, or when you're in college and anyone can see you jerk off and/or screw a girl. Most Americans are just ashamed to admit it, and the secretly-gay ones won't even undress in front of another guy. And of course, we all talk about sex at points. (FACT: First time I asked a girl out, I spent hours practicing with my best friend. Then I fudged it when I actually asked her and looked like a dumbass because I got so nervous. In the decade since, my comfort level around the opposite sex has improved.)
I think most of us have had these unintended homoerotic moments. Circle jerks, watching porn together (Come to think of it, the whole concept of the money shot is probably homoerotic.), threesomes with a guy and a girl, or when you're in college and anyone can see you jerk off and/or screw a girl. Most Americans are just ashamed to admit it, and the secretly-gay ones won't even undress in front of another guy. And of course, we all talk about sex at points. (FACT: First time I asked a girl out, I spent hours practicing with my best friend. Then I fudged it when I actually asked her and looked like a dumbass because I got so nervous. In the decade since, my comfort level around the opposite sex has improved.)
What I mean is that for straight guys this whole circle jerk thing is a heavy issue. While I myself prefer to think of it as a "male bonding" experience, there is no denying that at some level it is a little gay. For straight men it is a little difficult to admit that we have a little gay-ness in us. I am glad that my best friend and I never masturbated together (I had suggested we do it while watching porn, straight porn that is) because that would've probably made us both unable to look each other in the eye later because we'd be afraid that maybe at some level we were gay for one another. Of course, at some level he and I are gay for one another (as I've mentioned on other threads, I'm heavily into psychology; and it's a Freudian/Jungian theory that everyone is bisexual at some level), but, being self-identified straight men, this is tough for us to handle. In fact, this very thing makes us straight guys go crazy! It's very hard for us to handle. (Usually. I don't know. Maybe some straight guys are okay with their gay potentials.)
Do you mean by this that you didn't know about his size before the circle jerk invitation and that if you suddenly saw that he was so much bigger than you it would have been too much to handle?
If so, I find it interesting because the only regret I have about never participating in a circle jerk is that I am curious about how the other guys would have reacted to my size. Not that I would ever want to make my friends feel bad about themselves, but I confess I always got an ego boost from comments by my college friends who saw my dick in the dorm showers (usually good-natured ribbing about the short (in height) guy who was bigger than all the basketball players).
Do you mean by this that you didn't know about his size before the circle jerk invitation and that if you suddenly saw that he was so much bigger than you it would have been too much to handle?
If so, I find it interesting because the only regret I have about never participating in a circle jerk is that I am curious about how the other guys would have reacted to my size. Not that I would ever want to make my friends feel bad about themselves, but I confess I always got an ego boost from comments by my college friends who saw my dick in the dorm showers (usually good-natured ribbing about the short (in height) guy who was bigger than all the basketball players).
[post=354826]Quoted post[/post]
[/b][/quote]On that other thread I mentioned the books on male psychology. One of those books says that in order for a man -- a straight man -- to be healthy, he actually needs to allow himself to be homoerotic with other men. It says that it helps men feel comfortable in their own bodies and helps them feel less competitive and afraid of other men. So, yes, we straight guys have our moments of homoeroticism -- and they're actually very beautiful, though paradoxically also very difficult for us sometimes. By the way, if you want homoeroticism, all you have to do is watch professional sports; all the patting on the butt, all the hugging, even kissing, all very homoerotic.
The way we justify it to ourselves, though, is to laugh it off and act like it was just a joke.
About the money shot being a little homoerotic, I've always thought this myself. In fact, I've always thought that a straight guy watching straight porn by himself is actually homoerotic -- because he is ultimately watching another man have sex! Sure, the man is ultimately a stand-in for the straight male viewer, but he is not literally the straight male viewer. Bottom line, the straight male porn industry (which is a multi-billion-dollar industry) is testimony to the fact that straight men are homoerotic, because we like to see other straight men get off with women. Add to this the fact that most male porn stars are very well endowed, and you find that most straight men like looking at big penises ... at least when they are engaged with a woman.
Oh, this is all so beautiful to talk about! I think I'm gonna go jack off now. (Seriously. Got a boner now!
:evilgrin:
The way we justify it to ourselves, though, is to laugh it off and act like it was just a joke.
About the money shot being a little homoerotic, I've always thought this myself. In fact, I've always thought that a straight guy watching straight porn by himself is actually homoerotic -- because he is ultimately watching another man have sex! Sure, the man is ultimately a stand-in for the straight male viewer, but he is not literally the straight male viewer. Bottom line, the straight male porn industry (which is a multi-billion-dollar industry) is testimony to the fact that straight men are homoerotic, because we like to see other straight men get off with women. Add to this the fact that most male porn stars are very well endowed, and you find that most straight men like looking at big penises ... at least when they are engaged with a woman.
Oh, this is all so beautiful to talk about! I think I'm gonna go jack off now. (Seriously. Got a boner now!
:evilgrin: Queens never get "that straight guy" but masculine gay guys do. What the fuck does that mean? Implicit in this ridiculous statement is the notion that gay men are trying to "get" straight guys -- even when they're not actively looking to hook up with them.
Jeeeez.
Really? So it was technically a "legitimate" aspect of being in the fraternity? I suppose this is where the whole thing started from, then. I once talked to a guy who was in a fraternity (a straight guy; not that it matters, just clarifying), and I asked him, kind of jokingly (kind of seriously), if they had circle jerks in his fraternity. He laughed, and said no, but that he got asked that all the time. So, I think that for a lot of us we think of circle jerks as being a part of fraternities. Ever since I talked to this guy, I doubted that they had ever really happened in fraternities.
I participated in a few in the 80s when i was a teen. so the idea that it was only before Playboy doesn't hold up. We watched videos together and pretended we didn't look at each other's cocks, but we all did. I know i heard from a friend that wasn't there how one of the guys had told him I was hung.
Re: fraternity stuff...we didn't have circle jerks as part of hazing, but similar stuff. pledges had to come into a room of actives one at a time and "drop their drawers". Thing was, when the guy manning the door sent you in, he gave you a bag and said "this is for underwear". the gag was that there was a pair of boxers in the bad you were supposed to drop on the floor and not your pants when they had you stand up front, but well..you're pledging, so most of the guys pulled off their pants.
During pledge week we had to shave each others pubes for one initiation. We also were supposed to find the guy in the pledge class with the biggest cock and have him streak across some part of campus. we didn't all pull out cocks to figure it out, but a couple guys volunteered and they compared with each each other and then one was picked and he showed us all his cock. We heard from the older guys that the guy with the biggest cock was chosen as the pledge class president. But our year they had substituted the streak across campus and I assume since then. One of the guys that was a former pledge president was hung huge and had a special rhyme we had to address him by during pledge week.
Ours was a national that had lost its charter due to drinking problems, but it was definitely the straight party frat of the ones on campus.
Re: fraternity stuff...we didn't have circle jerks as part of hazing, but similar stuff. pledges had to come into a room of actives one at a time and "drop their drawers". Thing was, when the guy manning the door sent you in, he gave you a bag and said "this is for underwear". the gag was that there was a pair of boxers in the bad you were supposed to drop on the floor and not your pants when they had you stand up front, but well..you're pledging, so most of the guys pulled off their pants.
During pledge week we had to shave each others pubes for one initiation. We also were supposed to find the guy in the pledge class with the biggest cock and have him streak across some part of campus. we didn't all pull out cocks to figure it out, but a couple guys volunteered and they compared with each each other and then one was picked and he showed us all his cock. We heard from the older guys that the guy with the biggest cock was chosen as the pledge class president. But our year they had substituted the streak across campus and I assume since then. One of the guys that was a former pledge president was hung huge and had a special rhyme we had to address him by during pledge week.
Ours was a national that had lost its charter due to drinking problems, but it was definitely the straight party frat of the ones on campus.
Frat boys sure have stupid pranks and their antics are dumb and annoying, but I sure love 'em. They've got this sort of charming zest for life that is infectious.
About circle jerks, the book I mentioned didn't say they "only" happened during the 50s and before Playboy -- but that they were more common back then, back before Playboy was around and back before boys had a general concept of what "gay" meant.
The book said that back before Playboy, back before guys knew what "gay" really was (back when "gay" simply meant "cheerful"), it was more common for young males to get together, tell each other dirty stories, pull their pants off, and jack off together.
In today's world where just about every other talk show is about gay people (where we have gay talk show hosts and mainstream sitcoms with gay characters), where any pre-teen boy can get a ton of porn on the net and jack off by himself in his room, we have a situation where circle jerks will be less common.
On this forum, some of the "old timers" have mentioned that nudity was mandatory at the YMCA and in many pools. Back then, people were more open about their bodies, apparently. This only made circle jerks more likely.
Thinking this over, I realize that for straight guys the emphasis in a circle jerk might not really be the "erotic" and "sensual" aspect, as it may be for gay guys, but the "utilitarian" aspect. Straight guys sort of make a sport out of it, and infuse it with competition.
When I was a pre-teen and my friend and I used to jack off together (and, by "together," I mean that he was on a cot about four feet from mine, and we stared at the ceiling while we jacked off, just sort of casually conversing about whatever was on our minds), it really wasn't "sensual." Hell, it didn't even really feel sexual. It was more like a sport.
Later, when I did this with the two brothers, the goal was the goal of a regular circle jerk: to see who could come first.
Of course, at some level this is disingenuous of me to say, of course, because you can't get much more sexual than beating off. But there's something different about the emphasis of it for straight guys.
About circle jerks, the book I mentioned didn't say they "only" happened during the 50s and before Playboy -- but that they were more common back then, back before Playboy was around and back before boys had a general concept of what "gay" meant.
The book said that back before Playboy, back before guys knew what "gay" really was (back when "gay" simply meant "cheerful"), it was more common for young males to get together, tell each other dirty stories, pull their pants off, and jack off together.
In today's world where just about every other talk show is about gay people (where we have gay talk show hosts and mainstream sitcoms with gay characters), where any pre-teen boy can get a ton of porn on the net and jack off by himself in his room, we have a situation where circle jerks will be less common.
On this forum, some of the "old timers" have mentioned that nudity was mandatory at the YMCA and in many pools. Back then, people were more open about their bodies, apparently. This only made circle jerks more likely.
Thinking this over, I realize that for straight guys the emphasis in a circle jerk might not really be the "erotic" and "sensual" aspect, as it may be for gay guys, but the "utilitarian" aspect. Straight guys sort of make a sport out of it, and infuse it with competition.
When I was a pre-teen and my friend and I used to jack off together (and, by "together," I mean that he was on a cot about four feet from mine, and we stared at the ceiling while we jacked off, just sort of casually conversing about whatever was on our minds), it really wasn't "sensual." Hell, it didn't even really feel sexual. It was more like a sport.
Later, when I did this with the two brothers, the goal was the goal of a regular circle jerk: to see who could come first.
Of course, at some level this is disingenuous of me to say, of course, because you can't get much more sexual than beating off. But there's something different about the emphasis of it for straight guys.
Originally posted by Skinny Guinea+Oct 25 2005, 02:48 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Skinny Guinea @ Oct 25 2005, 02:48 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>On that other thread I mentioned the books on male psychology. One of those books says that in order for a man -- a straight man -- to be healthy, he actually needs to allow himself to be homoerotic with other men. It says that it helps men feel comfortable in their own bodies and helps them feel less competitive and afraid of other men. So, yes, we straight guys have our moments of homoeroticism -- and they're actually very beautiful, though paradoxically also very difficult for us sometimes. By the way, if you want homoeroticism, all you have to do is watch professional sports; all the patting on the butt, all the hugging, even kissing, all very homoerotic.
The way we justify it to ourselves, though, is to laugh it off and act like it was just a joke.
About the money shot being a little homoerotic, I've always thought this myself. In fact, I've always thought that a straight guy watching straight porn by himself is actually homoerotic -- because he is ultimately watching another man have sex! Sure, the man is ultimately a stand-in for the straight male viewer, but he is not literally the straight male viewer. Bottom line, the straight male porn industry (which is a multi-billion-dollar industry) is testimony to the fact that straight men are homoerotic, because we like to see other straight men get off with women. Add to this the fact that most male porn stars are very well endowed, and you find that most straight men like looking at big penises ... at least when they are engaged with a woman.
Oh, this is all so beautiful to talk about! I think I'm gonna go jack off now. (Seriously. Got a boner now!
<!--QuoteBegin-jonb@Oct 24 2005, 08:32 PM
Some gay men aren't into anal either, Skinny.
I think most of us have had these unintended homoerotic moments. Circle jerks, watching porn together (Come to think of it, the whole concept of the money shot is probably homoerotic.), threesomes with a guy and a girl, or when you're in college and anyone can see you jerk off and/or screw a girl. Most Americans are just ashamed to admit it, and the secretly-gay ones won't even undress in front of another guy. And of course, we all talk about sex at points. (FACT: First time I asked a girl out, I spent hours practicing with my best friend. Then I fudged it when I actually asked her and looked like a dumbass because I got so nervous. In the decade since, my comfort level around the opposite sex has improved.)
[post=355056]Quoted post[/post]
[post=355103]Quoted post[/post]
[/b][/quote]I see so many ideas in this thread. I've been in circle jerks with my friends when I was a teenager (or maybe I'd call them "watching porn" jerks). We weren't in a circle but rather we're looking at vidoes. There was a competitive aspect to it too. They weren't situations that were planned but rather just happened. One of the things I liked about them was a certain feeling of brotherly connection. Hard to explain. Maybe a male bonding thing. Since I've been on this site & have been more public about my exhibitionistic tendencies, I've been enjoying my body a lot more. I've discussed my tendencies with other guys (and women), and don't feel it's necessarily a straight or gay thing. It's a "sexual" thing. So I'm feeling that anything people want to do together & that's not coercive is cool with me.
The circle jerk that my fraternity banned before I got there was replaced by something called I-and-L -- Ice and Lights. Pledges were rousted out of bed in the wee hours and made to disrobe and sit on a block of ice while active members taunted them about their dicks, etc. After that I was sure I'd never sire a child, but I did. Twice.
That's exactly it: "One of the things I liked about them was a certain feeling of brotherly connection." I was never in a "circle" either, and the most I did this with was two other guys. And it didn't feel sexual per se.
I suppose what we're really talking about is "subject/object." In other words, while we were indeed doing something that was sexual, neither participant was an object of the sexual activity. I mean, it's quite different to stand in front of a naked woman and jack off while you look at her naked body, and just stand or sit beside another guy and jerk off. In the situation with the circle jerk, the other guys are not the "object." The "object," as it were, is each man's own penis, or sperm (since the object is to see who can ejaculate first).
There's more here to this that I'm not quite grasping and not explaining. But I have a feeling this thread will probably continue for a while, so I'll probably get to it later.
Oh, a question: did you feel awkward after you ejaculated? In the situation with my friend, he and I were both pre-pubescent and weren't even ejaculating yet. In the situaiton with the two brothers, I did indeed ejaculate eventually -- and I felt very awkward afterwards, and never really saw the guys again (and can't say I regret that, either). If I ever saw them again, I would not talk to them about this, and I would hope they don't even remember it.
In other words, I only have one experience of ejaculating in the context of a "circle jerk," and that one experience was awkward enough to make me never want to do it again. I can't imagine what it must be like to be in a room full of other guys and have that happen. In the heat of the momment, I got so caught up in ejaculating (and "winning") that I lost sight of how awkward I'd feel afterwards. I can't imagine what it must be like for a room full of guys like that, who do it on a regular basis. It might fuck with their heads. Then again, if they do it often enough, maybe they're just a lot more comfortable with it (and their bodies) than I am.
Thanks for listening. This is such an interesting, and unusual, topic.
Skinny Guinea
I suppose what we're really talking about is "subject/object." In other words, while we were indeed doing something that was sexual, neither participant was an object of the sexual activity. I mean, it's quite different to stand in front of a naked woman and jack off while you look at her naked body, and just stand or sit beside another guy and jerk off. In the situation with the circle jerk, the other guys are not the "object." The "object," as it were, is each man's own penis, or sperm (since the object is to see who can ejaculate first).
There's more here to this that I'm not quite grasping and not explaining. But I have a feeling this thread will probably continue for a while, so I'll probably get to it later.
Oh, a question: did you feel awkward after you ejaculated? In the situation with my friend, he and I were both pre-pubescent and weren't even ejaculating yet. In the situaiton with the two brothers, I did indeed ejaculate eventually -- and I felt very awkward afterwards, and never really saw the guys again (and can't say I regret that, either). If I ever saw them again, I would not talk to them about this, and I would hope they don't even remember it.
In other words, I only have one experience of ejaculating in the context of a "circle jerk," and that one experience was awkward enough to make me never want to do it again. I can't imagine what it must be like to be in a room full of other guys and have that happen. In the heat of the momment, I got so caught up in ejaculating (and "winning") that I lost sight of how awkward I'd feel afterwards. I can't imagine what it must be like for a room full of guys like that, who do it on a regular basis. It might fuck with their heads. Then again, if they do it often enough, maybe they're just a lot more comfortable with it (and their bodies) than I am.
Thanks for listening. This is such an interesting, and unusual, topic.
Skinny Guinea
This is all bringing some interesting things to mind. I'm just going to throw out some ideas, and then maybe later they'll fall into place and make sense.
I remember watching a show about sexual harrassment several years ago. On this show, they profiled three men who worked on an oil rig out in the ocean and who ended up on the same ship for several weeks at a time.
During the time on the ship, two guys continually sexually harrassed the skinny guy. The skinny guy (not me, despite my username ) later claimed that the two other guys continually sexually harassed him, even doing things like going into the shower when he was showering, and taking a bar of soap and sticking it near his ass and saying things like, "We're going to shove something else up your ass eventually!"
Okay, all very disturbing, I know. But what I'm getting at here, what is important for me, is what a psychologist said about this. The psychologist said that in cases like this it is not really "sexual" per se. As with rape, sexual harassment like this is about power and violence, and degradation.
I mean, on one level it's easy to think that maybe these guys were gay and they really just wanted to have sex with the skinny guy. But the psychologist said that what was at issue was domination and degrading the guy and humiliating him; it was about violence and not sex.
In a way, I see a parallel between this example of the three guys and what you have described about the frat house with the block of ice and the penis waving. I mean, if you ask me, what the fuck is "gayer" than waving your dick in another man's face? Reasoning would say that the guys doing the dick waving were actually quite gay; how on earth did they think they were degrading the guy, making him "gay," or whatever, by making him sit on a block of ice while they waved their dicks at him? I mean, they're the ones who chose this activity!
But I think the issue here is power. The object is to objectify the other guy and humiliate him (even if in a joking way), with a sexual context involved.
It was a sexual "form," but not a sexual "content." The real "content" was degradation and humiliation.
The way this relates to circle jerks is this: the "form" of a circle jerk is sexual; but maybe the "content" isn't. Maybe what circle jerks ultimately mean is something like, "We are all sexual beings who have dicks and produce sperm. We can co-exist." Maybe, at some level, what circle jerks are really about is abolishing the degrading tendency of heterosexual male relationships -- particularly when it comes to sexuality. It's kind of like, "Our sexuality can co-exist. You are not the object of this. My own dick is. And it's fine with me that you have a dick and are jacking off and shooting sperm too."
Then again, circle jerks do fall into the category of male competition. But I gotta tell, my brothers, that in itself may really just be a smoke screen. At some level, we probably all just liked having a context where we could "abolish the degrading tendency of heterosexual male relationships -- particularly when it comes to sexuality." I mean, what is the real incentive in a circle jerk? To win ... but, uh, what exactly do you win? I didn't get a trophy or anything when I won. All I got was to laugh and say, "Ha-ha, I won!"
I remember watching a show about sexual harrassment several years ago. On this show, they profiled three men who worked on an oil rig out in the ocean and who ended up on the same ship for several weeks at a time.
During the time on the ship, two guys continually sexually harrassed the skinny guy. The skinny guy (not me, despite my username
) later claimed that the two other guys continually sexually harassed him, even doing things like going into the shower when he was showering, and taking a bar of soap and sticking it near his ass and saying things like, "We're going to shove something else up your ass eventually!" Okay, all very disturbing, I know. But what I'm getting at here, what is important for me, is what a psychologist said about this. The psychologist said that in cases like this it is not really "sexual" per se. As with rape, sexual harassment like this is about power and violence, and degradation.
I mean, on one level it's easy to think that maybe these guys were gay and they really just wanted to have sex with the skinny guy. But the psychologist said that what was at issue was domination and degrading the guy and humiliating him; it was about violence and not sex.
In a way, I see a parallel between this example of the three guys and what you have described about the frat house with the block of ice and the penis waving. I mean, if you ask me, what the fuck is "gayer" than waving your dick in another man's face? Reasoning would say that the guys doing the dick waving were actually quite gay; how on earth did they think they were degrading the guy, making him "gay," or whatever, by making him sit on a block of ice while they waved their dicks at him? I mean, they're the ones who chose this activity!
But I think the issue here is power. The object is to objectify the other guy and humiliate him (even if in a joking way), with a sexual context involved.
It was a sexual "form," but not a sexual "content." The real "content" was degradation and humiliation.
The way this relates to circle jerks is this: the "form" of a circle jerk is sexual; but maybe the "content" isn't. Maybe what circle jerks ultimately mean is something like, "We are all sexual beings who have dicks and produce sperm. We can co-exist." Maybe, at some level, what circle jerks are really about is abolishing the degrading tendency of heterosexual male relationships -- particularly when it comes to sexuality. It's kind of like, "Our sexuality can co-exist. You are not the object of this. My own dick is. And it's fine with me that you have a dick and are jacking off and shooting sperm too."
Then again, circle jerks do fall into the category of male competition. But I gotta tell, my brothers, that in itself may really just be a smoke screen. At some level, we probably all just liked having a context where we could "abolish the degrading tendency of heterosexual male relationships -- particularly when it comes to sexuality." I mean, what is the real incentive in a circle jerk? To win ... but, uh, what exactly do you win? I didn't get a trophy or anything when I won. All I got was to laugh and say, "Ha-ha, I won!"
