Do straight guys do circle jerks?

[554279]

Actually gay and bi men don't tend to do this, I'm yet to meet one in real life who has. I find it deeply insulting to suggest that an extremely mild form of homoeroticism such as a penis fetish, counts as "bisexual".

The circle jerk concept is massively overblown anyway, but I'm sure it happens, there are shitloads of anecdotal reports of it happening. And lots of young men masturbate together (some of which identify as straight), could you count that as experimentation? Yes. But it is a very mild form of homoeroticism.

Pretty much what I said...but damned you can write a book!

https://www.lpsg.com/threads/do-straight-guys-do-circle-jerks.483247/#post-6727020

 

[554279]

It's really not uncommon for two or more guys to mutally jerk off. For more about this topic:

lpsg.com/groups/athletic-jo-buddies.2114/group


For all men who enjoy the art of mutual masturbation only without the labels.

Rules:
masturbation only, strictly no oral, no anal

DO you ever NOT try to inject mutual masturbation, frot and the rest of your fetish collection into every god damned thread?

Start a thread in the Gay Porn or the Other Porn section

 

[englad]

Pretty much what I said...but damned you can write a book!

https://www.lpsg.com/threads/do-straight-guys-do-circle-jerks.483247/#post-6727020

Yeh basically man this mindfuck of a website has made me analyse quite a bit over the past few years. I honestly think there is a separate category of men, who are exclusively heteroromantic and frankly usually exclusively heterosexual in their offline sexual experiences (though with a few exceptions), who have a shallow/hyperfocussed form of homoeroticism which I personally refer to as "penis fetish". There are quite a lot of men on the site like that, from what I've personally experienced over the last 11 years.

It's problematic on a few levels to call this "bisexual" though, because the implicit inference is the suggestion that the male form's objective aesthetic value can be boiled down to solely the genitalia. I think this is a large factor in the general male "penis obsession" (ranging from insecurities about size to extremely focussed, shallow homoerotic desire, to a higher frequency of gay/bisexual male size queens), and I think it is personally tied in with a concept called "benevolent sexism". I think some men that do engage in the whole "circle jerk" thing, probably exhibit this hyperfocussed, shallow form of homoeroticism, because from the anecdotes I have heard about it is usually visually focussed not mutually interactive.

My view is basically that it demeans the male form's full aesthetic value (and thus men generally), demeans LGBT people generally (by lumping in a hyperfocussed version of homoeroticism within this community, but not needing to go through any of the tougher life experiences that LGBTs have to go through) and it also justifies the objectification of women (but only certain types of women). So basically, it is actually harmful to almost everyone. I go into more detail on it in the women's issues sub:

https://www.lpsg.com/threads/benevolent-sexism.504411/

 

[554279]

Yeh basically man this mindfuck of a website has made me analyse quite a bit over the past few years. I honestly think there is a separate category of men, who are exclusively heteroromantic and frankly usually exclusively heterosexual in their offline sexual experiences (though with a few exceptions), who have a shallow/hyperfocussed form of homoeroticism which I personally refer to as "penis fetish". There are quite a lot of men on the site like that, from what I've personally experienced over the last 11 years.

It's problematic on a few levels to call this "bisexual" though, because the implicit inference is the suggestion that the male form's objective aesthetic value can be boiled down to solely the genitalia. I think this is a large factor in the general male "penis obsession" (ranging from insecurities about size to extremely focussed, shallow homoerotic desire, to a higher frequency of gay/bisexual male size queens), and I think it is personally tied in with a concept called "benevolent sexism". I think some men that do engage in the whole "circle jerk" thing, probably exhibit this hyperfocussed, shallow form of homoeroticism, because from the anecdotes I have heard about it is usually visually focussed not mutually interactive.

My view is basically that it demeans the male form's full aesthetic value (and thus men generally), demeans LGBT people generally (by lumping in a hyperfocussed version of homoeroticism within this community, but not needing to go through any of the tougher life experiences that LGBTs have to go through) and it also justifies the objectification of women (but only certain types of women). So basically, it is actually harmful to almost everyone. I go into more detail on it in the women's issues sub:

https://www.lpsg.com/threads/benevolent-sexism.504411/

I think you articulated it much better than me calling them out and categorizing them as sophomoric dumb-asses.

I think Freud would be proud of you

 

[At.your.cervix]

Actually gay and bi men don't tend to do this, I'm yet to meet one in real life who has. I find it deeply insulting to suggest that an extremely mild form of homoeroticism such as a penis fetish, counts as "bisexual". Bi men and gay men are attracted to the ENTIRETY of the male form, not a single part of it (even if it is a valued part of it). If you are calling that "bisexual", you are participating in a form of "benevolent" sexism, which is implicitly used to justify the objectification of women (the concept that women are objectively more beautiful, therefore what you have is people focussing male aesthetic value on differences, i.e. the penis). By calling that "bisexual", you are even degrading yourself by suggesting that the aesthetic value of the male form can be whittled down to solely the genitalia. Gay and bi men DO NOT select partners purely based on that criterion, EVEN for random hook ups. It is ALWAYS a judgement call based on a combination of face, body and genitalia for hook ups. DO NOT try to talk about a group like that, that you clearly know extremely little about, despite being on a mainly LGBT male platform.

Your sexuality is not purer than mine is. Suggesting that gives me the impression that you feel that your privilege is under attack, and thus you're engaging in this bizarre form of self-policing, i.e. throwing individuals out of the group. A man with a penis fetish does not need to come out the closet. A man with a penis fetish does not engage in any romantic relationships with the same sex. A man with a penis fetish does not tend to do engage in any other forms of MM sex, the vast majority of them won't even indulge in this pursuit offline. A man with a penis fetish does not experience homophobia. Labelling that as "bisexual" is a complete insult to the entire LGBT community.

Relax, please. The problem isn't with any sense of "privilege" but rather with the ambiguity of the term "circle jerk." The linguistic precision commonly found in German doesn't often show up in English, due to both the wide range of language families which have formed the English language, but also in the multiple permutations found in its many dialects. In the U.S., the term "circle jerk" can mean a group of males masturbating in front of one another, as well as a group of males masturbating each another. I was taking the phrase to mean the later. I'm sure that you would agree with me that when fascination with penises crosses over to sexual interactions with other males, those actions start to put one into the bisexual-gay continuum. My guess is that the vast majority of males of every sexual orientation masturbate in the presence of other males at one time or another (I have in my younger days), and with such universality that act wouldn't be at all useful in describing any one's sexual orientation.

 

[Cum_is_Great]

My guess is that the vast majority of males of every sexual orientation masturbate in the presence of other males at one time or another (I have in my younger days), and with such universality that act wouldn't be at all useful in describing any one's sexual orientation.

But there are people who say that you must not be 100% straight now that you've done that. They insist you're at least 1% gay so therefore bisexual. Yes, that little benign act and many will now say you're in denial. That's the toxic masculinity thing and gatekeeping some men do of all orientations. It's ignorant and silly.

 

[englad]

Relax, please. The problem isn't with any sense of "privilege" but rather with the ambiguity of the term "circle jerk." The linguistic precision commonly found in German doesn't often show up in English, due to both the wide range of language families which have formed the English language, but also in the multiple permutations found in its many dialects. In the U.S., the term "circle jerk" can mean a group of males masturbating in front of one another, as well as a group of males masturbating each another. I was taking the phrase to mean the later. I'm sure that you would agree with me that when fascination with penises crosses over to sexual interactions with other males, those actions start to put one into the bisexual-gay continuum. My guess is that the vast majority of males of every sexual orientation masturbate in the presence of other males at one time or another (I have in my younger days), and with such universality that act wouldn't be at all useful in describing any one's sexual orientation.

I am relaxed, I was just making a point. By the way my first language is English, not German. Though I have never heard of this phrase in the UK at least, which is where I'm from.

True, it can certainly have linguistic ambiguities, and I believe the phenomenon is massively overblown. I have not personally heard of anyone offline saying they've done this. But in the anecdotes I have heard on the topic, it sounds much more likely to be the former, i.e. group masturbation without mutual sexual interaction. I think those specific interactions still depend on what level of attraction there is, i.e. is it purely penis focussed or does it include a greater level of appreciation for the male form. If it is the latter it certainly would be in the bisexual-gay continuum in my opinion, with the former, no I'd still just call that penis fetish. The thing is, it is much rarer for that group to start interacting in their sex lives offline. But I would still find it very problematic to label that as "bisexual" if it is an extremely shallow, hyperfocussed flavour of homoeroticism. If it is still solely penis focussed, there is still the issue of label that shallow a variety of homoeroticism as "bisexual", because you are still implying that male aesthetic value can be reduced to that base an extent, which just isn't the case with either straight/bi women or gay/bi men. There are a number of aesthetic features that areplaced on a far higher pedestal than the penis with those groups, right from v lines, to arms, to eyes, to chiselled faces, the list goes on. If you are uncomfortable with labelling that kind of penis fetish moving into real life interactions as "straight" (I would have no idea why, not every other straight man speaks for you, just as not every other gay man speaks for me), then it would be best to place that into an entirely new category.

Gay/bi/straight are fundamentally identity based levels describing behaviour, but not everyone's identity and behaviour matches all the time. The only LGBT group that sometimes get caught up with sexuality policing are some gay women, who place value in being "gold star", i.e. never having had sex with a man. Gay/bi men do not police themselves in that sort of way. I wouldn't even tell another man he isn't gay, even if he slept with a woman after coming out the closet (which i have heard of happening before, but it certainly is a lot rarer).

 

[bigbull29]

Yeh basically man this mindfuck of a website has made me analyse quite a bit over the past few years. I honestly think there is a separate category of men, who are exclusively heteroromantic and frankly usually exclusively heterosexual in their offline sexual experiences (though with a few exceptions), who have a shallow/hyperfocussed form of homoeroticism which I personally refer to as "penis fetish". There are quite a lot of men on the site like that, from what I've personally experienced over the last 11 years.

It's problematic on a few levels to call this "bisexual" though, because the implicit inference is the suggestion that the male form's objective aesthetic value can be boiled down to solely the genitalia. I think this is a large factor in the general male "penis obsession" (ranging from insecurities about size to extremely focussed, shallow homoerotic desire, to a higher frequency of gay/bisexual male size queens), and I think it is personally tied in with a concept called "benevolent sexism". I think some men that do engage in the whole "circle jerk" thing, probably exhibit this hyperfocussed, shallow form of homoeroticism, because from the anecdotes I have heard about it is usually visually focussed not mutually interactive.

My view is basically that it demeans the male form's full aesthetic value (and thus men generally), demeans LGBT people generally (by lumping in a hyperfocussed version of homoeroticism within this community, but not needing to go through any of the tougher life experiences that LGBTs have to go through) and it also justifies the objectification of women (but only certain types of women). So basically, it is actually harmful to almost everyone. I go into more detail on it in the women's issues sub:

https://www.lpsg.com/threads/benevolent-sexism.504411/

I agree 100%. You have to understand, friend, that people are unable to think as deeply as you do. Where you see clearly, the majority sees fog.

This site can play with your mind. Forced heterosexuality and Western civilization's sicknesses based on absurd religious ideas have hijacked our minds.

The taboo of male homosexuality is so downplayed on here. I laugh every time that it is assumed somehow that gay, bi and straight men are all on an equal level playing field. Nonsense. Homophobia is alive and well....and is still destroying lives all over the world.

 

[At.your.cervix]

But there are people who say that you must not be 100% straight now that you've done that. They insist you're at least 1% gay so therefore bisexual. Yes, that little benign act and many will now say you're in denial. That's the toxic masculinity thing and gatekeeping some men do of all orientations. It's ignorant and silly.

I used to state 99% straight on my profile, but I was getting so barraged by men PMing me with sexual propositions that I decided to try just saying 100% straight. It's annoying. Since then, the frequency of being hit on has decreased. I'd prefer being more accurate with that on my profile, but sometimes pragmatic realities need to be factored in.

 

[At.your.cervix]

I am relaxed, I was just making a point. By the way my first language is English, not German. Though I have never heard of this phrase in the UK at least, which is where I'm from.

True, it can certainly have linguistic ambiguities, and I believe the phenomenon is massively overblown. I have not personally heard of anyone offline saying they've done this.

I personally know several friends who have engaged in group mutual male/male masturbation.

 

[fratjoc8c]

I think a lot if men here are just so very uptight about labeling and branding someone for masturbating that it's resulting in personal identy conflicts, sexual insecurities, projecting homophobia, overt sexual fear, social paranoia, and deficits in anger management. Masturbation is neither heterosexual, or bi/homosexual, it's Auto-sexual—there's absolutely no oral, no penetration of any kind to formulate a sexual copulation act either in the straight or bi/homo sexual practice. It's simply self-stimulation, auto-erotisim, self-pleasure, touching, caressing your own sex organ. Whether you enjoy doing it personally alone, or recreationally with a mutually minded partner, either a member of the opposite, or even the same sex. It does'nt have to include touching your partner at all. Although, touching can be gratifying if you are open to expirmentation, but it a absolutely does not make you a queer! Receiving a hand job is masturbation too. It's no different than stimulating yourself, although it feels much better having a partner masturbate you who's game for it. Getting to know yourself better by masturbating, or mutally masturbating with a same sex member can actually improve your well being, improve your stanima, encrease your erection size duration by edging — not achieve cumming too fast, reduce sexual fustration, stress and tension. It can influence a healthier sex life overall, promote longer copulation duration so satisfying to your partner. All guys like to watch porn, and there's no better way to share what your watching than with someone who's on your same plateau — like-minded. Even just talking about it, sharing fantasies, coaching techniques, or just learning something new, can help you achieve your own greatest orgasms to an ultimate level you'd never really would know about unless mutually masturbating with a close buddy that you confide in, and trust during both if your most private moments. Just remember, you're no different, all adult men of all ages love to masturbate too, in fact, it's so much easier to engage in it with a buddy while your both watching some porn, it's just second nature!

 

[englad]

I personally know several friends who have engaged in group mutual male/male masturbation.

I understand, but I think the type (and level) of attraction is key, far more crucial to the labelling than the behaviour itself. Very mild forms of homoeroticism would not bring with them the extra challenges (even ones that culminate in some basic same sex sexual experiences) that life experiences LGBT men go through on a daily basis. That is my point.

 

[ronin001]

She was the OP I believe, so I think spanking would only be permitted if she desired said spanking

yupp, Ronin was 100% wrong

 

[554279]

yupp, Ronin was 100% wrong

It happens to us all. Just glad there wasn't a bet or some stock action on it. Too the good she may want the spanking

 

[opinionman]

I guess I'll be the first "yes". Team showers after games sometimes ended up in circle jerks. Lots of straight guys involved, in fact, mostly straight guys. It was really considered "gay" to do that back then. Just horny high school boys.

Wait it " was really considered 'gay'" or it WASN'T considered gay? The context would imply the latter.

 

[deleted892921]

I've been involved in a couple of circle jerks. For me, the best part of them was always being able to show off in front of my friends. Plus, I found it interesting to see their dicks, how they were different to mine. The different ways in which they played with them. We would often share our favourite ways of wanking. They're pretty fun.

 

[Brian S]

In my early 20's, I had a group of friends who occasionally masturbated together. I'm gay, and I was out at the time, but nobody cared. One of them was my lifelong childhood buddy, straight, and we had already done all the show and tell stuff years prior. We lived together and we used to go streaking a lot as well. I wouldn't say we "ran around our house naked" but the vibe was casual. Two other straight buddies got in on the act, as well as a guy that was questionable as far as his sexuality. It might be that they were all questioning, or curious, but to my knowledge never actually crossed that line. We were bored young people in a tiny-ass town. My group of friends - male and female - were kind of little hellions to be honest. We played some DIRTY Truth or Dare and generally got up to some mischief so I don't think the guys were all that worried about sexuality. I think it was just some dumb fun for them.

 

[mister_mo_jo]

If the answer is yes what is the turn on for you? Showing off? The possibility of exploring bisexuality? Safe fantasy?

I never have. I don't feel a desire to.

 

[Jaystone1]

Absolutely not

 

[The Little Boy]

Wait it " was really considered 'gay'" or it WASN'T considered gay? The context would imply the latter.

I would suggest it was just an oversight!