How to trick a straight man??

[Keleios]

In the situation you describe, the guy tricked you by putting you into a vulnerable situation. He didn't trick you into having sex, he tricked you into a situation where he could rape you. Of course I don't condone that. He physically assaulted you. Of course you have a right to defend yourself. Kick him in the balls, worse if you have to. That's very different than someone creating a situation that might be conducive to you "messing around", as the OP put it. I also drew a distinction in a previous post between the physical vulnerability of women in these situations, versus two men.

Sex without consent - rape.
Use of alcohol as method of obtaining sex - possibly leading to sexual assault & grounds for charges or rape. 100% true and genuine consent just isn't possible when there's alcohol involved.

If both people drink, alcohol will affect both people. Yes, it can soothe situations, loosen the inhibitions but it can also push people into making assumptions, testing or flat ignoring boundaries and if that happens, the person who reacts isn't fully in control either.

Your language towards me is understanding and sympathetic, you're being nice and holding back on the sarcasm, at least til the end. You're treating me and that situation differently because of that distinction between how vulnerable a woman is and how vulnerable a man is. You condone my use of violence and encourage harsher for self defense but you find it abhorrent for a man to do the same, I don't and I don't distinguish what is and what isn't rape by gender.
Whether male or female, if your intent is to use any method of trickery, deceit, manipulation, force, alcohol or the like to get someone to sleep with you because there's very high chance they'd say no otherwise, you're heading for a whole shitload of trouble.

Straight guys are taking this topic to heart because they can put themselves in the position of the OP's friend and imagine how that would feel, to be used like that and valued on the same level as meat. Literally.
Trust is such a big part of a friendship, it shouldn't be so casually treated and the OP's cavalier attitude towards that has really riled people up, myself included.

A lot of people argue with what isn't there, especially when things aren't clear and there's more to be considered than the present moment in time.
Intent, probability, possible outcome, statistical likelihood...
Better that people argue about this right here and right now, making the possible consequences of ill conceived notions apparent so that others may learn a really valuable lesson and hopefully not put themselves or their friends in a position or situation that's so incredibly wrong on so many levels and which could turn extremely nasty.

 

[maxcok]

which is why you replied to my post in the first place.

Because, as I said, I agreed and sympathized. Despite the abuse you've heaped on me, I'm a big enough man to set aside differences and extend an olive branch. Too bad you have to spit on it. Charming as ever, I see.

 

[D_Harry_Crax]

That Baitbus routine is so unethical/immoral. I'm far from being uptight about sex, but that's just wrong.

I wouldn't feel sorry for the operators if they got the shit kicked out of them.

I think it's what they USED TO DO on Baitbus. My understanding is that they got sued for breach of (oral) contract (completely understandable, since they would offer, on camera, these guys thousands of dollars to have gay sex, the guys would have gay sex, and then not get paid, all on camera. It's an open and shut case. So apparently Baitbus has changed to porn "models" pretending to be gullible straight guys.

 

[maxcok]

A general response here, as I cannot be bothered to deconstruct the arguments of posters who are being either incredibly dense or deliberately disingenuous:

I do not condone sexual conquests that are anything less than mutually consensual. I do not distinguish between genders and sexual orientations in this regard, the exception being that women are generally, though not always, in a more vulnerable position physically. I do not condone unwelcome groping, touching, physical violations of any sort. I do not condone physical violence as an appropriate response to non-physical advances. If violence is required to repel an assault, I do not condone that it be far in excess of what is required to free one from the physical threat. Those last two make up the point that several of you seem to be missing or deliberately spinning. In the case of Keleois it renders the (non-existent) distinctions you allege between how I view the M/M and M/F situations both specious and irrelevant - as in the former no touching occurred and in the latter there was an assault. That's the distinction. That's why a violent response/defense is appropriate in the latter case but not in the first. Got it?

p.s. Remind me the next time I want to buy a stranger a drink in a bar to first get a signed consent form agreeing to engage in as yet unspecified sexual relations should it go that far. That should go over well. Or maybe we'll just have to wait till we're 100% sober before crossing that bridge.

 

[maxcok]

I think it's what they USED TO DO on Baitbus. My understanding is that they got sued for breach of (oral) contract . . . .

No pun intended, I'm sure.

 

[Snakebyte]

You're right, I don't know you. I only know you by what you said. Frankly, I don't see how anyone can be "tricked" into having sex, so let's just call it a sneaky attempt to seduce you. So again I will ask, because a guy is sneaky and/or persistent in his advances, trying to "trick" you, does it justify you beating him up and putting him in the hospital? What is the threat exactly? Is it because he doesn't "respect [you] for being straight"? And what do you mean when you refer to "real straight men"?

Your post below:

As long as he doesn't touch me I'm fine. He can be as persistent as he wants as long as it's only words. But yes, if he touches me it's justified because he enters my private zone uninvitedly. Of course there is a difference between hand on my shoulder and hand on my upper leg etc. Actually what he does is called sexual harassment then.
As not only one woman has written here, it is the same for straight men and women.
We are talking about totally different levels of sexual approach I think.

"Real" straight men are obviously those who are not bi (or gay).

 

[maxcok]

As long as he doesn't touch me I'm fine. He can be as persistent as he wants as long as it's only words. But yes, if he touches me it's justified because he enters my private zone uninvitedly. Of course there is a difference between hand on my shoulder and hand on my upper leg etc. Actually what he does is called sexual harassment then.
As not only one woman has written here, it is the same for straight men and women.
We are talking about totally different levels of sexual approach I think.

"Real" straight men are obviously those who are not bi (or gay).

You will understand, I think, when I say that sounds like a revision from what you said before, where you did not mention being touched at all:

. . . .
If a gay man makes an offer to me, I'm OK with it. I can say no and he will leave me alone. But if he wouldn't respect me being straight and try to trick me into something... I swear he would find himself in hospital afterwards.

 

[L_egit]

That would be called coercion, and again, not what the OP was going for.

BTW, if anybody has missed this, I DON'T CONDONE THE OP's INTENT! GOT IT?

Nor do I condone unwelcome groping or other physical violatons. Nor do I condone getting all whup-ass on somebody just because they are too persistent or too sneaky trying to get in your pants. There are better, more evolved and mature ways to handle that.

I hope you realize that in your first sentence you attempt to vouch for the intent of the OP. You immediately follow this up by saying you don't condone his intent.

Either you're cool with him attempting to seduce people, as per your rewrite of his statements, or you aren't. Up until this post you have unequivocally been supportive of the OP, so why the immediate 180 degree turn?

Put another way, are you admitting that its quite probable that the OP's intentions weren't that of a seduction?

p.s. Remind me the next time I want to buy a stranger a drink in a bar to first get a signed consent form agreeing to engage in as yet unspecified sexual relations should it go that far. That should go over well. Or maybe we'll just have to wait till we're 100% sober before crossing that bridge.

A signed consent form won't help you on the level of finding that a sexual assault occurred. Consent occurs at the time of the action and its the responsibility of the person engaging in the activity to secure consent beforehand. Additionally, consent can be revoked at any time and doesn't have to be communicated with the other party. [Note: consent for certain other activities, such as signing a waiver to prevent liability for bungee jumping for instance, works on the basis of contractual consent, which is not the same as consent in the context of sexual assault. Its easy to get these two mixed up because there are some similar features, but not all of them are the same. The instant and non-communicative revocation ability is one such difference.]

You can defend against that by establishing a defense of honest mistaken belief regarding the consent, but you can't do that unless you actually take steps towards determining whether there's consent or not. Sit your partner down and ask them if they're feeling alright. If no, full stop. If yes, ask if they want to keep going. If no, full stop. If yes, keep going. If they say no during the act or otherwise act as if they don't want it to continue, full stop once more. If they're obviously sloshed, 100% full stop regardless of what they say.

Note how the 'proper' way to do things is the exact opposite of 'tricking' someone. Its making sure your partner is on the same page as you and that the experience is a happy one for both parties. That basic level of respect shouldn't be drawing sarcastic jeers.

As for being dense or disingenuous, the exact same claim could be lobbed straight at you, especially after that 'I don't condone the OP's intent' after pages of vigorous defense of that very intent. I'll apologize right here and now if things have gotten too heated. I'd prefer the discussion stay civil even if we have irreconcilable differences of opinion.

 

[D_Aston Asstonne]

Status? I thought straight dudes didn't fuck around with other guys because they were straight.

What's this about status? What if it could be kept a secret, would that make a difference?

Very good point.:wink:

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Huh?? WTF. Must be the drugs you're on.

When has calling someone an addict an insult? :smile:

 

[D_Aston Asstonne]

If he's truly straight there's notta chance in hell.

 

[Snakebyte]

You will understand, I think, when I say that sounds like a revision from what you said before, where you did not mention being touched at all:

I may have not put my thoughts in proper words, you're right about that.
Not respecting my sexual preferences starts for me in physical contact, words don't hurt me. Should have said that I guess.

 

[dolfette]

Because, as I said, I agreed and sympathized. Despite the abuse you've heaped on me, I'm a big enough man to set aside differences and extend an olive branch. Too bad you have to spit on it. Charming as ever, I see.

abuse heaped on you?

i'll take your word for it, because i can't recall you at all,
or any of your other posts.
but then there are a lot of posters here.

 

[wild_boy]

Wow, you surely caused headache to the poor original poster of this thread!

I'm pretty sure he never meant to try anything like touching his friend without permission, he just asked for tips how to discover if that friend is interested in such touching.

Anyway, original poster put aside, this became interesting thread on delicate topic.. I've already posted my opinions and would gladly elaborate if someone wants.

 

[B_RedDude]

Thanks for the update, Swede.

My strong impression from the few clips that I watched several months ago was that the guys didn't know that they were in for sexual encounters with another guy. If what you're saying is true I wouldn't have been so condemnatory (at least if I didn't know that they weren't going to get paid the money promised).

I think it's what they USED TO DO on Baitbus. My understanding is that they got sued for breach of (oral) contract (completely understandable, since they would offer, on camera, these guys thousands of dollars to have gay sex, the guys would have gay sex, and then not get paid, all on camera. It's an open and shut case. So apparently Baitbus has changed to porn "models" pretending to be gullible straight guys.

 

[AZNEWGUY]

I have a straight friend of 15 years coming in tomorrow for my birthday. He knows I'm bi and even knows I think he's hot. He lets me give him massages all the time. He also knows I will never break that barrier. I will never take a chance of messing things up

 

[maxcok]

I may have not put my thoughts in proper words, you're right about that.
Not respecting my sexual preferences starts for me in physical contact, words don't hurt me. Should have said that I guess.

It sounds to me like you are revising and backpedalling, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Still, even accepting that . . . I described in a previous post my extreme aversion to unwelcome physical advances, in my case a stranger repeatedly groping my crotch in public, and how I responded by firmly pushing the perp away when he would not stop. That was enough to put an end to it, and in most cases I think that would be enough. Beating the shit out of somebody for touching your thigh and putting them "in hospital" strikes me as completely Neanderthal and way over the top. To even suggest that is appropriate implies that there are other issues involved, imo.

 

[maxcok]

abuse heaped on you?

i'll take your word for it, because i can't recall you at all,
or any of your other posts.
but then there are a lot of posters here.

If you say so, Sunshine.

 

[dolfette]

ok, if it makes you feel better...

of course i know who you are! i remember every word you say and follow every move you make!! of all the thousands of guys on this site, you stand out above all others. my nemesis!!!

 

[maxcok]

Wow, you surely caused headache to the poor original poster of this thread!

I'm pretty sure he never meant to try anything like touching his friend without permission, he just asked for tips how to discover if that friend is interested in such touching.

Anyway, original poster put aside, this became interesting thread on delicate topic.. I've already posted my opinions and would gladly elaborate if someone wants.

Wow. Wildboy, you have simply and succinctly summed it all up. I don't think any elaboration is necessary. Kudos.

If only folks could stop and read what's there instead of jumping to conclusions and going off on tangents -
just maybe they would stop spinning every which way to serve their own agendas.

If only . . .