Str8 guys hooking up at the gym.

nineinchnail4u2c

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Posts
224
Media
3
Likes
14
Points
238
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
No, I dont care what you think about me, personally. I do care, though, that this kind of bullying be exposed for what it is.

And, as the gay community demands rightly not to forced to choose being judged or closeted, I would say the same for myself. You are saying to me closet yourself or be judged. That's not liberation.

Your attitude with regard to gay and bisexual men is degrading and homophobic. It is evident in the context of your posts, and you have all but admitted as much. Criticizing you for this hardly qualifies as bullying.

If you do not want to be criticized for your attitude with regard to your sexual partners, you can either stop reducing them to instruments of your pleasure, and assigning them the role of a fetish object; or be silent about the fact that you reduce them to instruments of your pleasure, and assign them the role of a fetish object. It is quite simple.
 

jacero10

Cherished Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Posts
101
Media
3
Likes
279
Points
318
Location
Lagrange (Indiana, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
I have never mistreated anyone that I have had sex with. On the contrary, I like to have a nice light hearted banter with guys I mess around with. I like them. In fact, some I have gotten together with on multiple occasions. You are basing you assumptions about me on the fact that I do not recip. If a guys wants to suck my dick. That's great. He is free to do so. But, there is nothing he can do to me or for me or with me that will make me owe him a blowjob. It's not my thing. Guys who are into gay relationships would not want to get involved with me, and they dont. No harm, no foul.

But if the same guy wants me to take him out for a beer, that would be cool. If he was fun to be with, I'd hang out with him. I have done that, too. I just am not going to suck him off. Is that really so bad?

Do you really have to impugn the character of a guy just because he wont give head? You are doing a lot of projecting here and making claims on scant evidence.

So, who do you want to win today, BC or ND? I'm all Fightin Irish, myself.
 

D_Rod Staffinbone

Account Disabled
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Posts
834
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
I have never mistreated anyone that I have had sex with. On the contrary, I like to have a nice light hearted banter with guys I mess around with. I like them. In fact, some I have gotten together with on multiple occasions. You are basing you assumptions about me on the fact that I do not recip. If a guys wants to suck my dick. That's great. He is free to do so. But, there is nothing he can do to me or for me or with me that will make me owe him a blowjob. It's not my thing. Guys who are into gay relationships would not want to get involved with me, and they dont. No harm, no foul.

But if the same guy wants me to take him out for a beer, that would be cool. If he was fun to be with, I'd hang out with him. I have done that, too. I just am not going to suck him off. Is that really so bad?

Do you really have to impugn the character of a guy just because he wont give head? You are doing a lot of projecting here and making claims on scant evidence.

So, who do you want to win today, BC or ND? I'm all Fightin Irish, myself.

really, this is my last post in this thread. and i do wish you the best.
you did your percentages (putting yourself into the bisexual range), which i do not question. but i will say this about refusing to cop to being in a "gay relationship". if you're seeing the same guys over and over, you ARE
in gay relationship(s), only without anal sex. there are many gay relationships where one guy is active and the other passive. many gay/bisexual men are only into hookups, i've met several gay/bisexual men opposed to gay marriage. the terms "gay/bisexual" covers a lot of ground and you're in there dude. if you like getting it on with your girlfriend just as much, then you are probably bisexual.

psychologists say "it's not what you are, it's what you think you are" and
that's the basis for treatment. so whatever you think you are, that's what you are. we can think what we want too. if i think i'm a flying tortilla, then
i'm a flying tortilla, and don't tell me i'm not.

as for the game, fightin' irish. no doubt.
 

amygdala

Experimental Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 18, 2006
Posts
356
Media
7
Likes
20
Points
263
Location
nyc
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
What I am saying is that there are a variety of ways of measuring orientation and that I do not look to the gay communities political standards or their social constructs to define me.
* * *
I resist these definitions in my case because they are untrue. They dont describe me at all. And I will not cow to them. Nor will I keep my dick in my pants for their convenience.

Your attitude with regard to gay and bisexual men is degrading and homophobic. It is evident in the context of your posts, and you have all but admitted as much. Criticizing you for this hardly qualifies as bullying.

If you do not want to be criticized for your attitude with regard to your sexual partners, you can either stop reducing them to instruments of your pleasure, and assigning them the role of a fetish object; or be silent about the fact that you reduce them to instruments of your pleasure, and assign them the role of a fetish object. It is quite simple.

I have never mistreated anyone that I have had sex with. On the contrary, I like to have a nice light hearted banter with guys I mess around with. I like them. In fact, some I have gotten together with on multiple occasions. You are basing you assumptions about me on the fact that I do not recip. If a guys wants to suck my dick. That's great. He is free to do so. But, there is nothing he can do to me or for me or with me that will make me owe him a blowjob. It's not my thing. Guys who are into gay relationships would not want to get involved with me, and they dont. No harm, no foul.

But if the same guy wants me to take him out for a beer, that would be cool. If he was fun to be with, I'd hang out with him. I have done that, too. I just am not going to suck him off. Is that really so bad?

Do you really have to impugn the character of a guy just because he wont give head? You are doing a lot of projecting here and making claims on scant evidence.

Since nobody's asked me for my opinion, I will thrust it upon all of you anyway :) I think there's a certain irony to an argument where the openly, proudly-labeled gay guy is trying to force someone to fit within his own definitions of sexuality. That's not what we, as a community, should aspire to do. While I tend to agree with about 99.997% of what Jacero has said in his very well-written, thoughtful postings, my problem with the other .003% is that I believe that he, too, is lending credence to the fallacy that all sexual behavior either can, or should be defined.

I shoplifted a pack of gum when I was 5. Am I to be forever labeled a thief? Or, worse yet, "post-thief?" I think it's fair to say that no label need be applied to define me by one simple act 29 years ago. The same can be said for Jacero. A few guys have sucked his dick. Big fucking deal! Why must he then forever wear a label that others want to affix to him? I don't think he should have to. If Jacero were to calculate the aggregate amount of time he's spent in his entire life with his dick in another guy's mouth, I would venture to guess that it would add up to *maybe* two or three hours. Why do those two or three hours have more importance in terms of defining who he is than the other 175,000 hours of his life? (rough estimates, btw).

Everyone is free to define themselves however they want. To those who see it as their duty to impose those definitions on others, I say: cut it the fuck out! :)
 

SCSea

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Posts
194
Media
0
Likes
63
Points
248
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
if you're seeing the same guys over and over, you ARE
in gay relationship(s), only without anal sex.


In my case, when I was seeing the same guys over and over again without anal sex, it was either the rugby team or my car club.

I fail to see how otherwise intelligent people with a displayed understanding of rhetoric and formal logic can't distinguish between guys who have sex with guys, and guys who are gay/bi.

Let's try this another way: you can engage in felonious behavior without being a convicted felon, in the same way that you can engage in homosexual activity without being a homosexual.

E
 

B_Nick8

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
11,402
Media
0
Likes
305
Points
208
Location
New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
If I have ever seen anyone more full of themselves or more textbook narcissistic than the OP, I cannot remember when. I can't imagine him enjoying anything more than the attention he's receiving from this pseudo-Spotlight thread.

Of course, my heart goes out to his future wife as I imagine it will be difficult for her, or any one person, to satisfy his insatiable need for validation, but then, frankly, (and I don't often say this kind of thing) I think he's a gay man waiting to happen.
 

D_Rod Staffinbone

Account Disabled
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Posts
834
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
Let's try this another way: you can engage in felonious behavior without being a convicted felon, in the same way that you can engage in homosexual activity without being a homosexual.

E

so that makes you a felon, not a convicted felon.

who really cares. the guy thinks he's straight. (i don't doubt his percentages.)
whatever. he's on a power trip for sure.
it's his fuckin' business. i wouldn't get near him with a ten foot pole, and i'm
sure he couldn't care less what i think. it's all about him.

btw - i DO think one can engage in homosexual activity without being a homosexual, for instance kids experimenting, curious adults.
how could anyone ever know unless they gave it a go at least once? (although there is a small percentage that is unable to even consider it.)

i'm really out of this thread now.
 
Last edited:
D

deleted213967

Guest
btw - i DO think one can engage in homosexual activity without being a homosexual, for instance kids experimenting, curious adults.
how could anyone ever know unless they gave it a go at least once? (although there is a small percentage that is unable to even consider it.)

i'm really out of this thread now.

I subscribe to the credo of the continuum of sexual attraction. I noted that the OP duly renegotiated his straight-gay ratio.

However I don't "get" the part about not knowing until you've tried it once.

I know I couldn't go down on a woman, no matter how otherwise hot and attractive to me.

We are bombarded by all kinds of sexual stimuli and we're all only a click away from all kinds of experimentation. It is utterly easy in 2008 to figure out what turns you on and what doesn't.
 

nudiedude10

1st Like
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Posts
21
Media
1
Likes
1
Points
88
Location
N. Cal.
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
J:

Isn't the term "post-gay" a bit bogus (and pretentious)?

We've had "gay", now you're positing a "post-gay", so obviously, a post-"post-gay" - that TRULY enlightened (or post-enlightened?) state of sexual being - must be waiting just around the corner.

----------

It seems to me you're whipping up a lot of "post-gay" blather because you primarily do not seem to want to admit that you engage in dick-sucking/getting blown homosex. After cruising the gym showers, while specifically in the act of receiving that stalked-out cruised-for blowjob, you are in fact engaging in an ordinary garden-variety homosexual act. Yet you seem to have the bisexual's standard fear and rejection of "labels".

By the way, I am sort of playing devil's advocate here, I hate labels myself. I hate politicizing sex, any sex, homo-sex. But the politicization of gay sex, creating an opressed underclass of "homosexuals" is probably necessary to change the laws.

----------

Here is somethiing interesting. I'm pulling this paragraph from somewhere off the web:


"Let's start with the word 'homosexual'. It looks like an ancient Greek expression, but word and concept are modern inventions: the expression was coined in 1869 by the Hungarian physician Karoly Maria Benkert (1824-1882). It took several decades for the word to become current. In ancient Greece, there never was a word to describe homosexual practices: they were simply part of aphrodisia, love, which included men and women alike."

----------

It blows my mind that ancient Greece, a culture that had a couple dozen words to describe a "vase" (pottery), and many words to describe a "slave" had no words differentiating "straight sex" from "gay sex"...this is a culture that apparently took for granted a variety of homo and hetero sexualities. It was so "normal" that no words need be coined to contrast the natural and commonplace (like inventing multiple words for "air"). The word "homosexual" was nonexistent. This class of people was not invented - labeled - until the mid-to-late 1800's and then politicized in the 1960's (I think this is correct -- I was born in the mid-'70's, have no first-hand knowledge, so I am trying to piece together the start of a political movement).

----------

I guess I'm ultimately having trouble with the "post-gay' label. It's still a label. It's still a word that de-naturalizes a sex act.
hmmmm...
 

D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Posts
1,511
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
123
A Note on the "Post-Gay" Experience..... and some highlights of this thread

Part 1

----------

I am quoting previous posters in good fun here. I hope nobody takes it the wrong way. No disrespect intended. But here are moments that caught my eye:


njqt466 writes, "I know it's just words and a matter of semantics, but straight guys do not hook up with other straight guys at the gym! What you and these other men are is bisexual or perhaps gay if you are completely off women."

jacero responds: "I think there is plenty missing from your idea of male sexuality. This isn't just a matter of linguistic definitions... Male sexuality can attach itself to just about anything. And it can unattach itself, too....So, let's dispense with this kind of simplistic thinking. Besides, your comment is off topic."



blooeyz writes, " Most gay guys will suck you off if you just smile and raise your eyebrows. It's like candy to them"


jacero tells his readers: "In the showers I can always tell the guys who are basically gay and those who are more straight. The guys looking to suck somebody off will be all focused on everybody's dicks. The guys looking to get blown will make quick eye contact but keep their focus on their own dicks. It's a kind of natural code."

----------

I wonder if this package-checking accompanied by furtive glancing in the showers is part of the "post-gay" experience. --- I'm sorry! In the post-gay world, dick watchers in the shower don't "furtively glance". They "focus".

----------

Jacero, clearly, is not comfortable with "labels" or numbers corresponding with representing the sexual experience. He tells us, "Myself as an example. If percentage of gay/straight were measured by time period of sexual activity, I would be 85% straight at least. If physical arousal at looking at men vs. women, I would be 90% straight. If it is by total partners I would be 80% gay. If it is by emotional investment I would be 100% straight. If it is by which sex feels better sucking my dick, I would be 50/50. If it is about who you like to fuck or have fucked, I would be 99% straight."


Jacero does seem to revel in the attention various posters lavish on him throughout the thread. bstexas writes, "by the way, i'd probably be one of the ones looking at ur cock in the gym (tho that's not a place I've ever hooked up). But I'd enjoy looking there. lol."


The erasing of sexual labels (a hallmark of this "post-gay" worldview) draws a lot of adherents to jacero's vision. Many are inspired to share their stories of "straight"-guy-in-gym cruising for no-recip gay sex , as nudiedude did:: "One day I went to the Rec here at Berkeley which has a HUGE open shower with maybe 40 shower heads on poles and the walls. You have to pass it to get to the pisser and I needed to piss really bad. It was around 8pm and there was just this one guy leaving the showers, very lanky with long blonde hair and a nice floppy long schlong. Made eye contact. Pissed, then went to pick a locker. I got one near his. I stripped and we kept making eye contact. So i got back dressed and followed him out. He took me to a classroom building, locked the door and covered the window with a flyer. In an instant he went down on me like the pro that he was. He got me off twice in no time and didn't want anything in return. He just jacked himself and we got dressed. I dont do this kind of thing often. Just chemistry that day, I guess."


Oh, to be a fly on that wall!


But all of this shower cruising (done without labeling, of course!) and no-recip one-way blowjobs have anything even remotely to do with OLD gay sex, traditional homosex, This is NEW. It's a "brave new world" as post-gay adherents like to repeat , or as jacero has said (respoding to nudiedude, above): "You know, nudie, people are always resistant to change and especially to new ways of thinking. People have resisted the gay movement, some still do. But that is nothing like the resistance within the gay community to the post gay phenom. I dont expect people to like the fact that their cherished orthodoxies are dying, but they are. Check out my post on this subject: Post Gay: It's a Brave New World."



In a day or two, I'd like to follow up on these comments.

Will


 

surferboy

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Posts
2,976
Media
17
Likes
108
Points
193
Location
Sunrise, Florida
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
i never understood how a guy could hook up with a buddy, but still consider himself "straight"

one of my original posts here back in the day is that i believe everyone is at least secretly bisexual, but few have the balls (or ovaries) to actually admit it.
 

nineinchnail4u2c

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Posts
224
Media
3
Likes
14
Points
238
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
I have never mistreated anyone that I have had sex with. On the contrary, I like to have a nice light hearted banter with guys I mess around with. I like them. In fact, some I have gotten together with on multiple occasions. You are basing you assumptions about me on the fact that I do not recip. If a guys wants to suck my dick. That's great. He is free to do so. But, there is nothing he can do to me or for me or with me that will make me owe him a blowjob. It's not my thing. Guys who are into gay relationships would not want to get involved with me, and they dont. No harm, no foul.

But if the same guy wants me to take him out for a beer, that would be cool. If he was fun to be with, I'd hang out with him. I have done that, too. I just am not going to suck him off. Is that really so bad?

Do you really have to impugn the character of a guy just because he wont give head? You are doing a lot of projecting here and making claims on scant evidence.

So, who do you want to win today, BC or ND? I'm all Fightin Irish, myself.

I have not addressed your sexual identity, only your attitude with regard to your sexual partners:

I am in a position to judge you based on your own statements.

You do reduce gay and bisexual men to instruments of your pleasure: "I don't need to be attracted to [a man] for him to get me off . . . I'm horny, who's gonna suck my dick?"

You do assign gay and bisexual men to the status of a fetish object: "The 'naughtiness' factor [with a man] is also pretty high, which turns me on."

Shall I go on? This thread is littered with equally degrading statements.

Make no mistake; that you are sexually intimate with men does not preclude your attitude with regard to gay and bisexual men from being homophobic.

One does not reduce those he respects to instruments of his pleasure, or assign them to the status of fetish object.
 

Kyle232

Just Browsing
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Posts
12
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
86
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
My personal opinion is that there's no such thing as "gay/straight %". If you have sexual experiences, or romantic emotions, or simple arousal toward guys then you are gay. If you have those things toward guys and girls you are bi. Or if just toward girls you are straight.

Getting some action with other dudes is proof enough about someone's homosexuality, and it can't be considered straight or whatsoever.

However, I'm really shocked about all these shower room's experiences. I go to the gym/ pool really often, I usually shower naked with other guys. And I've never experienced any action in those situations, nor I've seen other people doing it. But after reading this post I'm so waiting for me to have such an experience, even if it means having that "bad feeling" for a week or so!
 
D

deleted87637

Guest
Next time I go to the gym, I'm going to tell all the hot guys in the place that I'm 70% straight, but I'd really love to suck their cocks!
 

BigDallasDick8x6

Admired Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Posts
3,881
Media
6
Likes
863
Points
333
Location
Dallas TX (North Oak Cliff)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
My personal opinion is that there's no such thing as "gay/straight %". If you have sexual experiences, or romantic emotions, or simple arousal toward guys then you are gay. If you have those things toward guys and girls you are bi. Or if just toward girls you are straight.

I sort of agree, but isn't the percentage there to say "how bi" someone is? For example, two bi dudes, one who says he's 70% straight, 30% gay mostly prefers (or historically has had more sex with) women. And the guy who says 70% gay, 30% straight is saying he mostly prefers (or historically has had more sex with) men.

I think there is some value in giving the breakdown. You might be kewl with a bi partner, but maybe you'd want that partner's desires to be at least 50% directed to your gender. So if you're a straight woman, you "might" be ok with a relationship with a guy who's 70% straight, but not a guy who's 30% straight. Just an example.

Maybe I'm off base, but I always thought that's where the %'s came in.
 

ledroit

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Posts
809
Media
1
Likes
59
Points
248
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I think it's a bit harsh to attack jace as "narcissistic" or dishonest, or any of that. What I do like about this thread and topic is that it subverts the identity politics built around men having any kind of sexual contact with each other.

Jace simply says it's not behavior that needs to be politicized. That's the claim, and I think it's a pretty interesting one.

It exposes something we forget about "identity," namely that it's not a fixed, solid, hard thing like a piece of metal. Identity and difference always go together. In some ways I am like you, in other ways I am not. In some ways I'm the same person I've always been, in other ways I've changed. Identity is the former, difference is the latter.

This is why it's possible to say I identify 99%, or 70% or 50% with straights, gays, or bi's.

It doesn't mean that 10% of my body is straight. It means I can (and do) identify with straights, but I identify with gays more easily.

I have no problem whatsoever with straight guys getting blowjobs from men, while refusing to turn that pleasure into some kind of political identity. Jace does this, and so do a lot of guys in other parts of the world who have sex with other guys before they marry, and think nothing of it.

Who you marry and fall in love with, and who you respond to sexually, does involve sexual orientation, and it is very important to know yourself well, and know what turns you on, and will keep turning you on until you die, before you marry. Otherwise you can't commit, or be faithful to your commitments.

A good blow job is sometimes nothing more than a good jerk off session with an upgrade. That is what jace is saying. Every guy on this site knows it's true. I think that for men more than women, sex can be compartmentalized easily. It's just a great, hot, horny itch. It doesn't change the world, it doesn't change your relationships, it doesn't turn you from one thing into another, and it doesn't make you gay or straight.

What does make you gay, straight, or bi- is who you identify with, and why. What makes you a man is whether you tell the truth, to yourself, and other people, about the people you love and identify with most easily. You are not going to be able to sustain a decent, solid, deep relationship with a woman if it's not fairly easy to be attracted to her emotionally and sexually. If you can't sustain a relationship with integrity, and at some point tell yourself the truth about it, the question is not whether you are gay or straight. The question at that point is, Are you going to grow up and be a man? Or what?
 
Last edited:

jacero10

Cherished Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Posts
101
Media
3
Likes
279
Points
318
Location
Lagrange (Indiana, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Straight men that have sex with men is really a complex phenomena. I think everyone in this thread will find the following website very interesting.

StraightGuise | It's not a gay thing, it's a guy thing!

Also, the following is the article through which I found the Straightguise website.

Gay Guise: When Straight Men Have Sex With Other Men | Psychology Today Blogs

By Joe Kort on October 15, 2008 in Gay's Anatomy

There is a lot of talk about Bromances these days. The urban dictionary definition of a bromance is described as "complicated love and affection shared by two straight males." But what if the two men decide to have sex? Does that make them gay or bisexual?

When girls do this in Girls Gone Wild they are not accused of being latent lesbians or bisexuals. Their sexual orientation is not speculated about at all as it turns out. But this is different for me.

Understanding Straight Men Who Have Sex with Men

There's growing evidence that many men who have sex with men aren't all gay or bisexual. According to the Centers for Disease Control, more than 3 million men who self-identify as straight secretly have sex with other men-putting their wives or girlfriends at risk for HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases.

A recent New York City survey that appeared in the September 19, 2006, issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine found that nearly 1 in 10 men say they're straight and have occasional sex with men. In addition, 70 percent of these men are heterosexually married. In fact, 10 percent of all married men in this survey reported engaging in same-sex behavior during the previous year.

To best understand these men, therapists and clients need to be able to differentiate four terms that are often confused: sexual identity and orientation; sexual preferences; sexual fantasies; and sexual behavior. Contrary to common usage, they aren't always in alignment.

Sexual identity and orientation encompasses one's sexual and romantic identity, in which thoughts, fantasies, and behaviors work together in concert. It's the alignment of affectional, romantic, psychological, spiritual, and sexual feelings and desires for those of the same or opposite gender. Sexual orientation doesn't change over time. One's sexual behaviors and preferences might change, but like one's temperament, one's orientation remains mostly stable. The term also refers to how someone self-identifies, not how others may categorize him or her. Some people self-identify as straight, while others self-identify as gay or lesbian, bisexual, or questioning. It's important as therapists to ask your clients how they self-identify, regardless of with whom they have sex.

Sexual preferences refer to sexual acts, positions, and erotic scenarios that someone prefers to have while engaging in sexual activity. The term takes into account what individuals like to do and get into sexually, not necessarily with whom they like to do it. Preferences and erotic interests can change over time, as one becomes more open or closed to certain thoughts and behaviors.

Sexual fantasies are any thoughts that one finds arousing. They can encompass anything-sexual positions, romantic encounters, body parts, clothing and shoe fetishes, even rape. Sexual fantasies aren't necessarily acted out. In fact, in many cases, they aren't.

Sexual behavior is any behavior intended to pleasure oneself and/or one's sexual partner. It doesn't necessarily reflect one's orientation. For example, men who are imprisoned engage in sexual behaviors with other men, but do so out of sexual necessity, not because of erotic interest in another man. They desire the behavior and the sexual release it achieves, and the gender of the partner is secondary.

For straight men who have sex with men, same-sex encounters aren't about romance or sexual attraction and desire, but about sexual and physiological arousal-"getting off" with another who's male and accessible. They don't sexually desire or get aroused by looking at other men, only by the sexual act. But if they don't actively desire other men, how do they get to the point of having sex with them? These men typically want to bond with and get affection from other men. Their behavior may reflect a desire to experiment, to engage in something that's taboo, or to express inner psychological conflicts involving their sexual feelings and desires that have nothing to do with having a gay or bisexual identity.

Straight men who have sex with men do so for a variety of reasons. Some have been sexually abused and are compulsively reenacting childhood sexual trauma by male perpetrators; some find sexual release with another man more accessible; some have sex with men because it's easier and requires fewer social skills than those required to have sex with women; some are "gay for pay" and get financial rewards; some like the attention they receive from other men; some like anal sex, which they're otherwise too ashamed to talk about or engage in with their female partners.

When I learn that a straight client is having sex with men, I ask a series of questions: What is your interest in men? Do you prefer one type over another? Do you feel drawn and compelled to satisfy your sexual urges with men? Do you care about the physical appearance of the man? Do women play any role in the fantasy? Is it different for you if they aren't? I also try to listen for the themes running through their sexual interests and fantasies, which often decode aspects of their personal identity and histories.

For more information go to www.StraightGuise.com.

K, guys, here is the most important post in this thread. It's important not because it validates my position, which it does, but because it is the only independent source on this thread not based on mere opinion, including my own.

Post gay is part of post modernism. Old labels dont mean what they used to.
 

D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Posts
1,511
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
123
ledriot: "Jace simply says it's not behavior that needs to be politicized. That's the claim, and I think it's a pretty interesting one."

and: "I have no problem whatsoever with straight guys getting blowjobs from men, but refusing to turn that pleasure into some kind of political identity."

----------

Fair enough.

But I've noticed something interesting about sexual politics: once it's started, you can't unthread the needle.

Jacero likes to say that the gay movement (1970's and before) wasn't "political". That is was mainly about "liberation". Jacero likes the 1970's gay credo of multiple sex partners, no-strings sex, do-your-own-thing "liberated" fucking.

But of course it was political. It was political in the most basic, grassroots sense: Early gay activists (from the '50's & '60's) worked against a hostile society to CHANGE DISCRIMINATORY LAWS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. Every gay poster on this site (all the way up to those liberated straight guys who that claim a 99%-1% identity ratio) better thank their friggin ass that we had these gay political activists in the 1950's before us paving the way - starting magazines (and gay magazines the equivalent of "The Advocate" were lillegal in the '50's - mailing gay literature through the U.S. postal system was a felony and was done at great risk), organizing at each others houses, nascent attempts at legislation.

The homosexual in the mid-20th century was FORCED to become "political", and forced to more strongly adopt an "identity" out of necessity, forced to organize into a "movement". Again, man-to-man sexual contact WAS ILLEGAL in practically every state. Participants in homosexual behavior were routinely sent to mental hospitals via the enlightened court system at the time. The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its diagnostic list of mental disorders in 1973, despite substantial protest. Before 1973, you were publicly in the closet, the police were able to bust into your house and arrest you (that's why all the furtive clandestine sex in public bathrooms and public parks and all the YMCA sex... the YMCA was cruising-the-gym sex before it became "political"), many gays committed suicide.​

Sex IS politics now.

And the irony is: hetero-sex is becoming politicized, too, as a result ("marriage is between one man and one woman"). I feel like I'm in some weird alternative universe when free-love posters naively say we should drop sexual identity politics. You can't "drop" a sexual identity when you're still in the midst of a battle to get those fucking anti-gay laws off the books. Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court FINALLY decriminalized homo-sex in 2003 in "Lawrence v. Texas", in a 6-3 ruling, by striking down a Texas sodomy law --- but there is an organized christian evangelical (and now mormon) political movement afoot that seeks to reinstate these laws. The same evangelical christians and mormons working so hard to ban s-s marriage, prevent the passage of hate crime legislation, outlaw gay adoptions. Forging a "sexual identity" was necessary - is still necessary - in overturning and combatting these laws.


Yeah, all I want is a label-free sex world too. I think liberating gay/bisexual/straight sex - and every permutation in between - is awesome. I'm all in favor of do-your-own-thing let it all hang out LIBERATION sex! I've started listening to peace-and-love psychedelic Beatles music for crying out loud ("All You Need Is Love" --- I saw the Beatles' "Love" Cirque du Soleil show recently). Unfortunately, label-free sex is still a utopian idea in 2008. It cannot exist because we live in a society that will not permit it to exist - a society still enacting discriminatory laws.
 

D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Posts
1,511
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
123
Ok. One last!

Jacero quotes redheadbubblebutt: "For straight men who have sex with men, same-sex encounters aren't about romance or sexual attraction and desire, but about sexual and physiological arousal -"getting off" with another who's male and accessible. They don't sexually desire or get aroused by looking at other men, only by the sexual act."

----------

Brian Kinney in "Queer as Folk" loved exactly this "getting off" with anyone who's male & accessible sex. And he did it ALL too: suck, fuck, give it, take it, take-some-ecstacy and fuck till dawn sex. ALWAYS a different sexual partner. No strings attached. And, most definately, NO ROMANCE! (at least until Justin came along).

If Brian had a girlfriend while going through all these years of free-fuck freestyle homo-sex - and never met Justin - he would have perfectly qualified for jacero's "straight" post-gay sex partner.