Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Married Men - A Gay Lads View - Have you ever had an experience?

Options
1235721

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,126 ✭✭✭Packrat


    I'm on agreement with Wibbs and Chinese Whospers here on that for a significant cohort of us who identify as straight males, there is NO level of drunk, high, bored, horny or sex deprived which would lead to us getting jiggy with another male.

    I'd go so far as to say that without doubt I'd go the rest of eternity without sex if only males were available.

    Yet I'd regard myself as a horn dog in general who'd like to shag at least 50% of all the women I meet - at least once! (Now for obvious reasons like believing in monogamy, wanting to be around my children, lack of attraction on the womens side, I don't actually cheat on my wife)

    I don't necessarily agree with putting us all in boxes, but if these straight identifying lads who occasionally sleep with men aren't bi-sexual but indeed straight, - then what does that make me? 'Extreme straight'? Homophobic maybe - I doubt it.

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Well then we get back to the question I originally answers from a user who wondered why we bother having definitions for words at all. If we want to ignore the actually definition and go for what we feel the "spirit" of the word is - that is perfectly ok! But we should just be clear that this is what is happening when and where it happens.

    That said though I Think you would have to ask someone who is "afraid" to use the word for their opinion on why they do not use it. In fact one such person has already made a lengthy post on this thread about their experiences identifying as bisexual. Since I have no fear or words or using them - I am the wrong person to ask :)

    I find language and sexuality interesting. So there the two overlap I get disproportionately interested. I thought my reply might serve to somewhat address The Dunnes concerns.

    But as already said - language should be descriptive not prescriptive. I tend to use the word that I think most accurately represents a person place or thing and - more importantly - gives the person I am talking to the most realistic and closest as possible to accurate expectations going forward from that conversation.

    So if I am in a conversation with someone. And in that conversation I describe some else as "bisexual" who in fact only every had one relationship with a member of the same sex and had zero interest in any before - during - or after that. The person I am talking to will leave that conversation with unrealistic impressions and expectations. And that would be my failing not theirs or the third party.

    A random example which I used on a previous thread about this very topic. Imagine you asked me what you should get "Simon" for Christmas. Now I know Simon does not like nearly every wine on the planet. However I know he once found one single wine he likes. Despite hating all other wines he ever had- he found this single one exception he actually liked.

    If based on that exception I answered your question with "Well Simon is a wine drinker" would you feel well served by my answer? Or would it be a bit awkward when he unwraps your Christmas gift assuming you did not get incredibly lucky and just happen to pick that single right one?

    How much more awkward would it be were you sexually interested in Simon and based on a single exception I identified him as Bisexual - so you approach him only to be told by him that he really has no interest in men? :)

    Language is mighty but fluid. It has no firm hard lines much of the time. There are nearly always exceptions to test every rule you might try to force on it. But that fluidity does not mean there is not a whole contiuum of meaning a long country walk from the lines that we might put there. Certainly - as I said - if the actual definition of sexuality requires enduring patterns of typical behaviour then I am not going to feel compelled to force the label of homosexuality or bisexuality on someone who munched on some willy once or twice in their life or even was in a 10 year relationship with a single partner of the same gender.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I can't see it. Although, I'd not refer to the clergy and hold them up as an example of possibly going a lifetime without sex.

    Can you see yourself ever being sexually excited/attracted to a woman?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's a bit like that line from As Good as it Gets when Jack Nicholson says, ' I tell you, buddy... I'd be the luckiest guy alive if that did it for me.' 😂



  • Registered Users Posts: 54,619 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Can I see myself ever being sexually attracted to a woman?

    I hope so. I married one......



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    ^ Strangely homosexual sex is contextual for me. If I was single there is also no level of horniness that I suspect will make me go to other men for sexual activity or relief. I simple have no interest in men that way sexually and would even have a strong "ick" factor to it.

    However if I was having sex with a woman and another male is present there would be a certain number of things I would do sexually with/to that man in that context. And a certain number of things I certainly and absolutely wouldn't.

    What is the difference? Well I guess contextually in one situation I would be having sex with a man - and in the other I would be having sex with a woman in which the man was another toy/tool in the scenario. Which I guess is somewhat dehumanizing and objectifying that other man. But in that context I would have no issue in the same way as I wouldn't reaching for a phallic sex toy or similar.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    its always the ones who insist they are so super straight that are just hiding something



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,289 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    I identify as non-human.

    Don't just assume I'm human, give me a label, or put me in a box.

    Sometimes I do human like things if the mood takes me but I still don't identify as human.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Not ick factor enough 😀

    I can't imagine any scenario where I'd be interested in engaging with a man in a threesome (at any level - possibly a high five.. fúck, maybe I am gay 😁). BTW, I'm of the opinion males are fugly full stop and can't get my head around why women bother with us sexually. If I was a woman... yeah, you know what I'm going to say 😃



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    Put chinese, Wibbs and Oisin in a cell together, who would crack first, id give it 10 days



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,816 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Hah imagine my confusion when I realized one of the women I thought was one of the hottest in the Supergirl TV Series was actually born a man :)

    But I get what you mean. Not only am I not attracted to men - I can not even vicariously work out why women are either. We are all horrific :) hehehehe.

    I was gonna post a picture of us raising a glass on the forum on new years eve before I realised 1) Hell no I am as ugly as sin and have totally lost the battle against hair loss 2) I am not even sure what the site rules are on posting pictures of yerself anyway.

    Now that is a porn movie that would be a hard one to sell to any market regardless of how they define themselves :)



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,816 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    I thought you were a conservative gay guy with a girlfriend and now you're androgynous 🤣. Are you practising creative writing skills there?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Let's be clear, we're all a bit suspicious of Wibbs 😆



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,075 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Great, a word salad of nebulous relativism where definitions become essentially moving targets for cock eyed gunners. It's terribly mode de jour in some circles, but ultimately unenlightening except to themselves. And even then that's a moving target too. AKA Ballsology. And you seem to be the one running from 'personally formulated definitions', because it's all subjective and objectivity has left the room with Elvis.

    You could even be in an ongoing once a week sexual relationship of convenience with someone of the same sex - or even a full long term relationship romantically and sexually - with someone of the same sex and still identify quite coherently as a heterosexual person based on how these words are actually defined.

    There's pretty much nothing coherent in that position. If one wants to have any sort of meaningful debate on definitions anyway. One may as well throw out definitions entirely because they make a nonsense of themselves(and we're back to the relativism nothing is truly definable stuff). A woman who says she's a Lesbian, but once a week is off seeking out and shagging a bloke and presumably enjoying it, or in a long term relationship with a bloke and presumably enjoying all that too, but also seeks sexual intimacy with other women? She's not a Lesbian, or she's certainly self deluding herself while she's having a romantic sexual relationship with a man. She's the definition of Bisexual. She is capable and happy to be aroused by heterosexual sex with a man and homosexual sex with a woman and seeks out both. A Lesbian wouldn't be, to the degree that the thought of it would be deeply un-arousing sexually. And I'd emphasise the sexual part. Because that's where the rubber meets the road. Otherwise I could quite easily claim I'm a Gay man who happens to not be sexually attracted to men. It would be utter bollocks, but I could claim it as part of my 'self identity'. It's not to do with if one has had sex, but those you want to have sex with, so the virgin/incels angle is moot.

    There have even been studies into this sort of thing around arousal and sexual identity. Where they wired up the naughty bits and bobs to measure sexual response in people to see what's what. And lo and behold when guys who said they were Gay were shown media of a titilating nature they got aroused by the Gay stuff, but the Straight stuff left them meh. Straight guys had the same response that corresponded to their identity. Women as usual were more complex and they were more likely to be aroused by all sexual content, but again Straight women were more likely to get more aroused by Straight imagery. Gay women were actually more like men in that they were more particular to their preferences. Sadly and as usual Bisexual folks were left out. Though I'd bet they'd aroused to more of a degree to both. Asexual folks would be immune to all. Actually the latter group might be a good example; if someone told you they were Asexual, but they also told you that once a week they were seeking out someone to have enjoyable sex with, would you believe their self identity to have any validity? If so I'll have whatever you're smoking, because it's some class A quality stuff.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭cannonballTaffyOjones




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Not sure, 'join the SS' is going to win us the hearts and minds 😂



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,075 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs



    I'd crack one out of myself in ten minutes, never mind ten days. Though my eyes would have to remain shut.

    That said, though said in jest, would you be so quick to suggest a Gay bloke and blokess left in a cell together would be at each other like rabbits in ten days? I doubt it. I have found down the years that there is a minority of Gay men and women who seem quite convinced, or hold the fantasy that Straights can be 'turned', it's just down to circumstance. Like those Straight guys who think/fantasise they could 'turn' Lesbians. The latter is laughably daft, even pathetic and the former should be regarded in a similar vein.

    Now that is a porn movie that would be a hard one to sell to any market regardless of how they define themselves :)

    A rule of the internet is that someone, somewhere, likely many someones would pay to watch it while pulling the skeleton outa themselves.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ok the first paragraph says nothing at all and does not even make an argument except to self grandiose towards posturing itself with throw away phrases that actually say nothing - so lets skip that one and move on to the second paragraph where there seems to be some actual substance rather than just pettiness.

    I fail to see what is not coherent about the position I described? I cited the definitions upon which it is based. You - much like the time we previous had this conversation - do not do so. And in fact how you define words seems somewhat nebulous in general. I remember for example you were not sure you could call a man a "man" because he had sexual proclivities you did not share. And I am yet to see any definition of the word "man" that is even remotely related to such things. "Ballsology" indeed!

    Whatever your position on the meaning of these words I have yet to see you post any actual citations or definitions to back it up. You might not like the definitions but as I said to the user I was replying to - that is fine. There is nothing wrong with us having our own definitions of words. But we should be honest and clear about deviations between them and the actual definitions.

    But when you throw out a line like "She is the definition of bisexual" - which definition???? You have not offered one! You are making my exact point for me here which is that all the people moaning that people are not using the words defined right - appear to be percisely the people who are not offering a single definition to work with. I have done so - and there is no conflict between the definitions I offered and a lesbian who has or is having sex with a man.

    All you are doing is presuming to speak on behalf of lesbians telling us what they would or would not feel or be capable of feeling or what thoughts would or would not arouse them. Which it seems to me you are hardly in a position to be doing. I will take their input on what they feel or are capable of feeling before I would take it from a sexually conservative middle to late aged straight man who is just projecting what he feels onto what he assumes others feel. Because that is all I can see in your post - a presumption to know what thoughts would have what effects in a person who is not you. I did not take the module "psychic" when I was in college. I somewhat suspect you did not either :) But if your entire position is based (as it appears in this post to be) on assuming to know what another person thinks or feels - I will stick to the citations and definitions of actual dictionaries myself thanks :)

    Little in the last paragraph I take exception to. In does not negate or rebut or cause a problem for anything I have said. The two are in fact entirely congruent. Your question about the Asexual however I feel I have already answered with the definitions I have cited. That is - were I to seek to label such people I would do so based on enduring and typical attractions not single exceptions.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Now my inclusion would defy even Wibbs' claim that someone somewhere would buy any porno on offer :)



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,556 ✭✭✭✭AckwelFoley


    Would I have a threesome with another man and 1 woman..hypothetically.

    Can't say it would interest me, that said a few pints in me and as long as the flutes don't cross path perhaps.


    I was lucky enough to have a threesome a few years before I got married.

    My girlfriend and her friend, we were all out for the night and got shitfaced. We went home, eventually I went up stairs for a shite, and the 2 ladies were having a tear at each other. Like a true pornstar I went to the bathroom and had my shite, a man has priorities then proceeded to the bedroom and shagged both of them

    I learnt some time later that it was the cause of them becoming more distant. I think the friend mentioned to my Girlfriend she was game ball for it more often, and I got the impression my girlfriend was less interested

    Like a few others said, there is no occasion ever in my life where I'm going to be attracted to a man sexually- yes I can identify a good looking man, but do I want to shag him? Not any more than I want to shag a donkey. .that said, being from the Midlands and too close to Roscommon that can be taken either way, but I assure you it's a no dick for donkey from me



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    as i said above , years ago in ireland there were a huge number of bachelor farmers who remained unmarried as you needed a farm relatively young to land a wife , they didnt all of a sudden become sausage munchers



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Ive a terrible wandering eye myself but ive never once in my life found myself sexually attracted to a man , now i can admit that certain men are handsome dudes but thats not the same thing



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I am one of the ones who claim - often with women around me being skeptical - to not even be able to do that. I can look at a group of men around a table in a bar and have literally no idea which one the women are likely to deem the hottest of the bunch. Or if someone says a guy has punched "above his weight" and got some woman many levels hotter than him - I literally have to ask what they mean like "Ok why whats wrong with him?".

    Now at the extremes - take brad pitt on one side and Johnny vegas at the other I can most likely call it. But in general I struggle to identify what women see in us at all :)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    perhaps you just have a penchant for chubs like the OP, and it is confusing you



Advertisement