Do Straight Men Let Another Man Give Them Blowjobs?
- Thread starter smooth923
- Start date
Smaccoms
Legendary Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Posts
- 2,779
- Media
- 7
- Likes
- 1,469
- Points
- 583
- Age
- 34
- Location
- Massachusetts (United States)
- Sexuality
- No Response
I've always wanted to have a bisexual threesome. You have a perfectly shaped cock for it too I think.
Smaccoms
Legendary Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Posts
- 2,779
- Media
- 7
- Likes
- 1,469
- Points
- 583
- Age
- 34
- Location
- Massachusetts (United States)
- Sexuality
- No Response
The way I see it, there is no shame in being confused. Sexual fluidity permits a person to be confused. The best part is that by the time that person isn't confused anymore, they might end up garnering a set of sexual behaviors that's unique to themselves. How great is that?
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2011
- Posts
- 972
- Media
- 60
- Likes
- 3,315
- Points
- 423
- Location
- Bangkok (Thailand)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
The question being "do straight men let other men blow them?" I'd have to say yes. Some do. Most don't. But some do.
Having sexual relations with a member of either sex doesn't determine if a person is gay or straight. Plenty of gay people have heterosexual sex because they're not comfortable with themselves. And plenty of straight people experiment with gay sex. You're only gay or straight if you have determined that for yourself. A blow job won't decide that for you.
Having sexual relations with a member of either sex doesn't determine if a person is gay or straight. Plenty of gay people have heterosexual sex because they're not comfortable with themselves. And plenty of straight people experiment with gay sex. You're only gay or straight if you have determined that for yourself. A blow job won't decide that for you.
Smaccoms
Legendary Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Posts
- 2,779
- Media
- 7
- Likes
- 1,469
- Points
- 583
- Age
- 34
- Location
- Massachusetts (United States)
- Sexuality
- No Response
temptotalk
Legendary Member
Not in my definition of the word either but try telling these guys that. And try telling them that by definition of getting rid of definitions they also get rid of the definitions of gay, lesbian and bisexual. Meaning laws built to end discrimination would no longer be valid. If these guys were in the majority that is. Meaning they would wipe clean every last advancement the gay, lesbian and bisexual community has made over it's very very long history. Splintering movements and making straight, gay and lesbian people into targets when they want to fight for their own right to define who they are.
Instead of defining themselves they'll choose to define everyone else. And couldn't care less how straight people feel about it. Seems very familiar to me. Like when churches told people they weren't gay and it was just this or that. Or that there were no such thing as god didn't create it. Making a judgement on a whole group of people based off of the words of men.
Smaccoms
Legendary Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Posts
- 2,779
- Media
- 7
- Likes
- 1,469
- Points
- 583
- Age
- 34
- Location
- Massachusetts (United States)
- Sexuality
- No Response
Temptotalk, when others fail to define "straight" in the same way as you, do you feel disrespected as a result? Why must your definition of straight be universal?? Is it somehow related to your ability to subsist? You are so focused on why & how others must be wrong, you forget to examine how & why others must be right. You seem to argue from a defeatist perspective.
I' m straight as I only do (and fantasize to) have sex with woman only, but I definitly let other guys also to suck my cock. I dont feel any physical attraction to them but I'm excited to the service they give to me.
temptotalk
Legendary Member
de·feat·ist
dəˈfēdəst/
noun
- 1.
a person who expects or is excessively ready to accept failure.
synonyms: pessimist, fatalist, cynic, prophet of doom, doomster; More
- 1.
demonstrating expectation or acceptance of failure.
"we have a duty not to be so defeatist"
synonyms: pessimistic, fatalistic, negative, cynical, despondent, despairing,hopeless, bleak, gloomy
"a defeatist outlook"
I know it seems like i'm being a dick or being confrontational but really you have no idea what that word means. Straight is what straight does and your attempt to redefine what it means is disrespectful no matter how many different ways you try to insult people.
It's like saying we need to redefine what the word gay is. No longer having it mean a male that has sex with males and instead having it mean a male that has sex with everyone and everything under the sun...rainbows included. I don't just feel like i'm right. I am. And no matter how you approach the subject straight will always mean no sex with other men and no sex with other women.
You and others will fail. It isn't pessimist, fatalistic or pushing an idea of doom. The second your movement encroached on the rights of others you lost all ability to say you are fighting for your own. Period. You aren't fighting for your right to be who you are. You're fighting for an ability to dictate who others are. And it's on par with the church telling gays they can just pray it away. But good luck telling the many many straight people on this planet that they just...don't know themselves like you know them. That'll go over real well when you're movement gets started.
Don't believe me? Start walking up to people on the street and tell them they aren't straight to their face. See how it goes. Then do the same for gay people and lesbians. Once again, tell them you know more about their sexuality then they do. Tell them that the definitions they choose to describe themselves with don't work for them because it doesn't work for you.
Of course it is a issue of definitions. If we are trying to hold a whole variation (of human sexual behaviours in this specific case but it could anything else) into two or three words, this it a good reason to suspect we probably need to change the use of the words used to describe it.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2008
- Posts
- 2,186
- Media
- 4
- Likes
- 2,805
- Points
- 593
- Location
- Dallas (Texas, United States)
- Sexuality
- No Response
- Gender
- Male
which is the philosophy of the couple of married guys I service. it's quick, easy, painless, no hassles, and I don't nag them to take the trash out or mow the lawn. its a stress release between their sales calls in the afternoons.
temptotalk
Legendary Member
I can fully understand what you're saying and what you're trying to say but do we really need to change the definition of cup when we know for a fact that there are things out there that word perfectly describes?
What about book. Should we change the definition of the word book just because someone created a book that isn't completely in line with that definition? The labels aren't the problem. The people that think the labels fit them aren't the problem. The problem is changing the labels for all variations because some of those variations don't feel it fits them.
Thats making a judgement on the lives of many many people because a few don't like something. And i might add while completely ignoring the feelings, experiences and respect of another group.
If people want to call themselves sexually fluid...fine. I don't agree but fine. When you want to call yourself straight yet you have sex with men well thats like dressing up as me and when i tell you you aren't me you tell me my opinion of myself doesn't matter. Theres levels of wrong there that mimic many other kinds. Such as, churches, homophobia and etc.
And just to be clear. The labels go as follows.
Straight = Only has sex with the opposite sex.
Gay = Only has sex with the same sex.
Bisexual = Does and can have sex with both.
I don't see how those three labels cannot define the sexual nature of most human beings.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2004
- Posts
- 6,206
- Media
- 15
- Likes
- 14,655
- Points
- 643
- Location
- Massachusetts (United States)
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
This is how I see it as well. Bisexuality covers those that are 99/1 percent all the way to 1/99 percent.
Very simple and straightforward
to me!
temptotalk
Legendary Member
This is how I see it as well. Bisexuality covers those that are 99/1 percent all the way to 1/99 percent.
Very simple and straightforward
Yeah i agree it's about the most open ended sexual description/label/identifier ever invented. The only other sexuality i can think of that it doesn't fit is asexuality. And thats because that's a lack of sexual attraction to anyone.
People have been answering this question for like...7 years?? Wow.
If you ask a straight guy we're going to tell you the answer is no 100% of the time. Why this is even debatable is beyond me. Some guys seem to get off on trying to undermine or negotiate around a man's heterosexuality, like they think they're looking for chinks in our armor or something. This is likely a defense mechanism on their part to compensate for them feeling perpetually emasculated by straight men in some way, and I'll concede that a faulty link between masculinity/heterosexuality is to blame and that it's society's fault. But trying to displace the boundaries of what's considered being 'heterosexual' isn't a solution to this, it's just a self-perpetuating toxic pathology. It's like trying to convince everyone the sky isn't blue just because YOU don't like the color blue and if you can get enough people to agree well then gosh darn it the sky must really not be blue.
I don't go around dissecting the sexual nature of gay men (or any men for that matter) or trying to make an inventory of their sexual lives. That's a form of being manipulative at best and a predator at worst. Any information received through this process doesn't matter; what matters is that being in need of that kind of information shines a big ass light on what you're lacking as a human being. Maybe work on that instead.
If you ask a straight guy we're going to tell you the answer is no 100% of the time. Why this is even debatable is beyond me. Some guys seem to get off on trying to undermine or negotiate around a man's heterosexuality, like they think they're looking for chinks in our armor or something. This is likely a defense mechanism on their part to compensate for them feeling perpetually emasculated by straight men in some way, and I'll concede that a faulty link between masculinity/heterosexuality is to blame and that it's society's fault. But trying to displace the boundaries of what's considered being 'heterosexual' isn't a solution to this, it's just a self-perpetuating toxic pathology. It's like trying to convince everyone the sky isn't blue just because YOU don't like the color blue and if you can get enough people to agree well then gosh darn it the sky must really not be blue.
I don't go around dissecting the sexual nature of gay men (or any men for that matter) or trying to make an inventory of their sexual lives. That's a form of being manipulative at best and a predator at worst. Any information received through this process doesn't matter; what matters is that being in need of that kind of information shines a big ass light on what you're lacking as a human being. Maybe work on that instead.
sorry, but if a man hs sex with a man, he's not 100% straight. the only 100 percent straigh people are those who only ever have sex ith women, think about women, or get hard from women... this may be un PC buti don't give a fuck....it's about a specturm.
Similar threads
