The Gay Delusion

[B_Hung Jon]

thickseven, delve deep into your psyche...and face it. you want cock....

Engorged, I think them may be fighting words for Mr. Thickseven! :smile:

 

[Smaccoms]

It's my understanding that Sodom's actual sin was one of a lack of hospitality and only later was the meaning of Sodomy to mean same-sex penetration (or, even more broadly, non-reproductive sex regardless of the genders of the participants).

Translations are a huge deal to anyone conversant in more than one language. I speak/read/write English and French fluently (and enough Spanish to get by) and understand how subtlety of meaning can easily get lost in translation. Then, of course, there are the cultural biases that the translator imposes on a text, inevitably and most especially with religious books.

Anyone who insists that sexual normatives were assigned in the 19th century has obviously never read the Marquis de Sade, where one encounters every sort of sexual act ever conceived by mankind :wink:. His works were obviously meant to provoke a serious response from society and they responded by jailing him for the majority of his adult life.

I've yet to read a Sadian character who was exclusively opposite-sex oriented, though if one exists it's probably in Justine, which I haven't read in a bit now and is hazy in my mind. Philosophy in the Bedroom, 120 Days and Juliette are virtual odes to unfettered bisexuality and anal penetration. One can only imagine what was destroyed either by Napoleon or Sade's own family once he died

I've frequently said that Sade is the best writer of unreadable books ever to have existed. Even now, in the 21st century there are things he wrote that remain completely, unspeakably unacceptable to civilization, yet I practically know them by heart. My own work pales in comparison, yet remains largely unpublishable; I've been chased off of/banned from different message boards merely for offering a link describing actual events conducted by consenting adults as I've chosen to describe them, usually in a Sadian voice.

There's also the work of John Rechy, which remains ghettoized and marginalized even today, though enormously influential to me, both as a man and as a writer. City of Night remains his masterpiece, but I'm currently rereading The Sexual Outlaw, which I found at a thrift store and am reading for the first time since the late 70s. Those two, along with Rushes and Numbers remain must-reads for anyone trying to understand how sexual orientation was perceived in the mid and latter parts of the 20th century. His entire bibliography is extraordinary.

Honestly, I'm not all that well-read. All the information I gave above came from a book I'm in the middle of called "Homosexuality and Civilization". Very interesting read (I've simply run out of time to read things like that currently). A lot of the texts your quoting sound interesting, you've given me leads to chase down when I get through a couple of the books I have already.

Honestly, I think a problem is trying to view ancient cultures through the eyes of a modern perspective. Different sexual lifestyles certainly existed outright during medieval Europe; often times sexuality is something which stays hidden in cultures due to peoples' sensitivity to the subject. It can be very easy to quote a few things and state "this means sexuality didn't exist". How pathetic it is.

 

[Bbucko]

Honestly, I'm not all that well-read. All the information I gave above came from a book I'm in the middle of called "Homosexuality and Civilization". Very interesting read (I've simply run out of time to read things like that currently). A lot of the texts your quoting sound interesting, you've given me leads to chase down when I get through a couple of the books I have already.

Well, just a small word to the wise: Sade runs long. Juliette runs to just under 1200 pages, much of it devoted to expounding philosophies running from pure fascism to total anarchy in (nearly) unreadable monologues that go on for pages; much of the rest discusses topics that are verboten here at LPSG, for one reason or another.

That's not to discourage you at all, just to say that biting into The Divine Marquis means quite a bit of chewing before you find anything worth swallowing. He also uses the extremely flowery language of ancien régime France, which even in translation is a bit much too much at times and takes some getting used to, especially when using pseudo-classical allusions. And, of course, there are all those horrors...

Rechy is much more accessible to contemporary readers, though he's not without his own literary tics and affectations, either. I read City of Night for the first time when I was 16, and read everything he'd published up until then by the time I graduated HS. His influence on how the pre-AIDS generations thought and lived cannot be underestimated.

Honestly, I think a problem is trying to view ancient cultures through the eyes of a modern perspective. Different sexual lifestyles certainly existed outright during medieval Europe; often times sexuality is something which stays hidden in cultures due to peoples' sensitivity to the subject. It can be very easy to quote a few things and state "this means sexuality didn't exist". How pathetic it is.

+1

 

[B_henry miller]

thickseven, delve deep into your psyche...and face it. you want cock....

engorged, delve deep into your psyche and admit it -- you want pussy!

(If you're going to try to convince this guy that he's got bisexual aspects, then face those aspects within yourself too! Guys who are 100% Gay are just as rare as guys who are 100% Straight!)

 

[Smaccoms]

Well, just a small word to the wise: Sade runs long. Juliette runs to just under 1200 pages, much of it devoted to expounding philosophies running from pure fascism to total anarchy in (nearly) unreadable monologues that go on for pages; much of the rest discusses topics that are verboten here at LPSG, for one reason or another.

That's not to discourage you at all, just to say that biting into The Divine Marquis means quite a bit of chewing before you find anything worth swallowing. He also uses the extremely flowery language of ancien régime France, which even in translation is a bit much too much at times and takes some getting used to, especially when using pseudo-classical allusions. And, of course, there are all those horrors...

Rechy is much more accessible to contemporary readers, though he's not without his own literary tics and affectations, either. I read City of Night for the first time when I was 16, and read everything he'd published up until then by the time I graduated HS. His influence on how the pre-AIDS generations thought and lived cannot be underestimated.



+1

:kiss:

 

[thickseven]

thickseven, delve deep into your psyche...and face it. you want cock....

yeah. . .that just isn't the case (though I suppose I couldn't convince you otherwise) and they aren't neccesarily fighting words jon but they just aren't true. Sure I'm more preoccupied with my dick than other guys probably are but that's becuase I get off on the idea of being the biggest a woman has had (or one of the biggest) and being appreciated for my size. I had joined lpsg more because thunder's place was full up on members earlier. I noticed here that the membership seems almost entirely comprised of gay men, hence the start of this thead questioning the "straight" guys.

 

[oddeyeblu]

I used to laugh at the absurdity of towel dancing, but I have been enlightened on the age of technology we live in. There are pervs out there with hidden cameras installed in their gym bag filming locker rooms and posting their quarry on websites like caught on camera.
Ciao

 

[redneckgymrat]

This is probably going to be somewhat inflammatory but would someone please explain all of the strange behavior by many of the homosexual members here (not that they are homosexual, that's a given)? What I'm referencing is the guys who say that they are straight and then looking for jerk off buddies or someone to blow and still maintaining that they are straight. WTF?
...
Another issue is the gay percentage system on LPSG but that's another matter entirely. . .

OK, let me try to explain this. Since I, too, am fairly new here, it may offer a fresh perspective.

I absolutely love asparagus and artichokes. Think they taste wonderful. Does that make me a vegetarian?

Obviously, the answer is no. It means that I enjoy eating those vegetables. But, believe me when I say that I absolutely REVEL in a good bloody steak. YUM!

Similarly, most men have, at some point in their lives, had at least a sexual thought about a man *flash* through their heads. Straight, gay, whatever...it doesn't matter. But a single, fleeting thought doesn't make them gay...it's an anomaly. But, to deny its existence would be dishonest.

As for the guys looking for J/O partners on skype, and that sort of thing, yes I do find that generally gay. Or, at least not fully "straight." But, I just don't go in those threads...I'm not looking for that, so who cares?

As for the gay percentage, it's been my experience that gay men are more sexually open than straight men, which might explain their greater willingness to discuss sex and sexual topics on an open forum such as this one.

Or, did you mean the straight-gay rating scale? THAT is admittedly limiting, but does at least give an indicator of how straight/how gay a member is. It's kind of insulting, though, as those aren't the only options, but hey...it's at least an attempt!

 

[sexplease]

humans are a sexual lot and some are in a degree of denial about or unable to justify what titillates them.
religious guilt and moral ambiguity come to mind.

 

[houtx48]

This is probably going to be somewhat inflammatory but would someone please explain all of the strange behavior by many of the homosexual members here (not that they are homosexual, that's a given)? What I'm referencing is the guys who say that they are straight and then looking for jerk off buddies or someone to blow and still maintaining that they are straight. WTF? There's nothing wrong with being gay, whatever floats your boat man, but what purpose does it serve to lie to yourself by saying that isn't homosexual behavior? Another thing that I find strange is the # of gay members implying that a lot of straight men are closeted gays or have gay tendencies. An example of which would be nudity in the locker room situations. I've been in a locker room where there was nudity, I didn't stare at the nude men and I didn't get naked in front of the other men. Reading some threads on here, it sounds like some people think that men who don't get naked are really just embarrassed about being gay, rather than not wanting to be seen naked out of modesty or (less understandably) not wanting to be ogled by gay guys. Another issue is the gay percentage system on LPSG but that's another matter entirely. . .

Oh that's the bunch that just hates labels..............

 

[davidjh7]

Not to feed this old argument excessively, but I wanted to point out there is a difference between being a homosexual, and having sex that is technically homosexual. One is who you are, another is what you do. If you are going to define every touching or pleasuring of a male anatomy as homosexual, then every guy who masturbates is a homosexual. If you are trying for true understanding, I applaud you. If you just want to claim your viewpoint is the onl valid one, then there is no point in discussing it because you have closed your mind. My two cents.

 

[thickseven]

Not to feed this old argument excessively, but I wanted to point out there is a difference between being a homosexual, and having sex that is technically homosexual. One is who you are, another is what you do. If you are going to define every touching or pleasuring of a male anatomy as homosexual, then every guy who masturbates is a homosexual. If you are trying for true understanding, I applaud you. If you just want to claim your viewpoint is the onl valid one, then there is no point in discussing it because you have closed your mind. My two cents.

Well I was looking for genuine understanding. I understand the differing views to the extent that I accept that others have them but I don't really think they're valid to be honest. Also touching your own body in a sexual way is in no way tantamount to being a homosexual, that argument is ridiculous, I'm arguing sexual contact with OTHER men is homosexual. Literally no one defines themselves as homosexual for masturbating

 

[B_Marius567]

I tired to go Bi to sleep with a man to have sex with his wife but i seem to have intrest in men. when I was in my 20's I was so lonly that I was willing to have gay sex but not any more.

 

[B_henry miller]

I tired to go Bi to sleep with a man to have sex with his wife but i seem to have intrest in men. when I was in my 20's I was so lonly that I was willing to have gay sex but not any more.

I think you meant to write you have "NO interest in men." Right? Otherwise, your sentence makes no sense.

 

[B_henry miller]

I have a hard time believing this; it does not sound as if this conclusion was drawn from the appropriate perspective. I'm going to have to read this book now so that I may extrapolate why the author(s) have come to such a useless conclusion.

Here's the direct quote from the book:

Certainly, for most Graeco-Romans, the idea of classifying people according to the gender of the person they have sex with would have seemed downright bizarre…. Moral preoccupations centered on sexual practices, not on the subject of desire. The ancients did not make sense of themselves in terms of sexual identities, whereas the policing of gender identity was of central importance to them, as we shall see…. Consider the contrast with the ways in which modern subjects make sense of their sexuality experiences. Categories such as heterosexual and homosexual are centeral sources upon which we draw in order to make sense of our own sexuality. It is in this sense that classical world has been described as a world ‘before sexuality’ by historians such as Michel Foucault, Paul Veyne, David Halperin, or John Winkler. The ways in which sex was conceptualized and the cultural meanings what were attached to it were racially different from today.
Amazon.com: Sexuality: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) (9780199298020): Veronique Mottier: Books

Even in today's age, the concept of "gay" doesn't exist in some areas. I have a friend who is a travel writer. He's done books on homosexuality in the Middle East, and he said that it's a difficult topic to write about over there because the concept of "gay" is a Western concept and doesn't exist in the Middle East. Certainly, gay sexual ACTS exist in the Middle East -- but they are seen as acts, and not as identities. (Muddying the investigation is the fact that in the Middle East, men are allowed affection with other men that only gay men are allowed in the West.)