delusional Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 You know that cos you're a gay man right?All the gay people I know (bar one couple but theyre 50 odd) are only up for one night stands and would never want to settle down as a couple...Think about it, the constant chase for perfect looks, always keeping body in trim, never has a partner but always has sex... most gay people are only after sex with an anonymous partnerActually you may well find that that is most MEN. Nothing to do with their sexuality. Our culture continually tells us that men must always be after sex and women are to keep them in check by just looking for relationships, it is of course a load of bollocks, but people are impressionable monkeys and this sort of thing has an effect. So, when you take women out of the equation, there is a slight tendency for things to be seen as all about sex. Although, that is just the image of things. Having been to quite a few gay clubs and straight clubs I know which felt more like a meat market, and it wasn't the one the media would have you believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted October 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Also the fact that she would have a nicer shaped ass? And you could play with her boobies whilst going? And her vagina is like 1 1/2 inches away if you get bored? SEE! There are differences! Haha, Im aware of the differences between men and women, but the actual act of anal sex is no different with a man, and how nice the ass is would depend on what your preference is which for a gay man is a mans arse!I see what you're getting at but you're saying that as a straight man, say for example you had no preference and had no interest in sex, you would think both were the same really!Davey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willsey Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 the difference is that girls poo chocolate and fart vaporised rose petals so the whole process is much more pleasant when doing it to a lady.lmfao! of course thats totally true! thats the difference right there! Also i dont exactly disagree with gay teachers, but as i am from an all boys school, it wouldnt be a good idea, the normal teachers get terrorised enough and bringing in a gay teacher would only trigger a massive amount of conflict against gays... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 lmfao! of course thats totally true! thats the difference right there! Also i dont exactly disagree with gay teachers, but as i am from an all boys school, it wouldnt be a good idea, the normal teachers get terrorised enough and bringing in a gay teacher would only trigger a massive amount of conflict against gays...Thats true Haha, Im aware of the differences between men and women, but the actual act of anal sex is no different with a man, and how nice the ass is would depend on what your preference is which for a gay man is a mans arse!I see what you're getting at but you're saying that as a straight man, say for example you had no preference and had no interest in sex, you would think both were the same really!Davey Im not gay SALTY PIRATE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted October 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Thats true Im not gay SALTY PIRATE! Haha, bit too quick to defend yourslef there especially as I didn't say you were gay, haha. Neither am I as it goes! Easy on the smileys too..... christ!Davey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Haha, bit too quick to defend yourslef there especially as I didn't say you were gay, haha. Neither am I as it goes! Easy on the smileys too..... christ!DaveyOh, , i thought you were trying to imply that i dont care what i have sex with including men. And The smilies are just because im hyper atm. But technically theyre not smilies, theyre more 'cryies'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted October 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) Oh, , i thought you were trying to imply that i dont care what i have sex with including men. And The smilies are just because im hyper atm. But technically theyre not smilies, theyre more 'cryies'.Not at all, I was just explaining what everyone means when they say "it's no different to anal sex with a woman". They don't mean literally men and women are the same, they mean that in principal it's the same, anal sex with a person you find attractive, hence saying that it's different because women have boobies has nothing to do with it......... but yes boobies are great, weyhey!Davey Edited October 24, 2006 by Small_Gear_Big_Style Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willsey Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 go on you to then, kiss and make up... i can see it coming.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Not at all, I was just explaining what everyone means when they say "it's no different to anal sex with a woman". They don't mean literally men and women are the same, they mean that in principal it's the same, anal sex with a person you find attractive, hence saying that it's different because women have boobies has nothing to do with it......... but yes boobies are great, weyhey!DaveyI agree, boobies are great! TEEHEE - Anyway back on topic ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted October 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 go on you to then, kiss and make up... i can see it coming..Haha, it seems appropriate given the topic, but perhaps a hug would be better, young boys don't do it for me, it's big men like Pooey that I like Davey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Ill have a hug but i refuse to pick up the soap that you just dropped Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyroo Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Safe Sex: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted October 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Safe Sex: Haha, old! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anzo Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 ...Anyways,If course anal sex with a girl is the same as a man...how many different ways can you think of to have sex with someones arse?But its hardly a valid argument, it is very much different if you're not in that state of mind, I wouldn't mind f**king your missus up the ass, but I wouldn't f**k you, even if you paid me...well...If the price was right... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 Actually you may well find that that is most MEN. Nothing to do with their sexuality. Our culture continually tells us that men must always be after sex and women are to keep them in check by just looking for relationships, it is of course a load of bollocks, but people are impressionable monkeys and this sort of thing has an effect. So, when you take women out of the equation, there is a slight tendency for things to be seen as all about sex. That's exactly what I was going to say. Given the choice of a club full of willing, horny women with one thing on the mind, most men would throw out wives/girlfriends etc and would go straight down there. A different woman every night? It's the stuff dreams are made of. Shame that women don't often see it like that.You're right, it is human nature - Men/male animals have to spread their seed around. This is the best way for them to pass genes on. Whereas women need to nurture their young and make sure they survive pregnancy etc. So apparently it's human nature for men to be philanderers and for women to NEVER EVER want sex... Or something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusional Posted October 24, 2006 Report Share Posted October 24, 2006 That's exactly what I was going to say. Given the choice of a club full of willing, horny women with one thing on the mind, most men would throw out wives/girlfriends etc and would go straight down there. A different woman every night? It's the stuff dreams are made of. Shame that women don't often see it like that.You're right, it is human nature - Men/male animals have to spread their seed around. This is the best way for them to pass genes on. Whereas women need to nurture their young and make sure they survive pregnancy etc. So apparently it's human nature for men to be philanderers and for women to NEVER EVER want sex... Or something like that.I don't actually think this is "human nature" - I think it's culturally imbibed. Look at the way that female sexuality has changed in it's perception in the media and, jointly, in the real world over the last few generations. From the Wonderbra adverts on women have been told to revel in their sexuality, and this has caused an upsurge in sexuality (as opposed to sensuality) among young women. I'm very much coming around to the idea that much more of ourselves than I'd like to think is culturally informed. To relate this back closer to the topic: I'd always previously argued with people that sexuality was something natural to a person, that is that you're born into your sexuality. But recently a few things I've read have made me wonder if all the conversations I've had were wrong. I've often heard people ask if you're born gay or become gay, but I'd rarely heard anyone ask if you're born straight or become straight. I'd always somehow assumed that heterosexuality was natural to the individual, and therefore homosexuality (or bisexuality) must be as well. Looking at sexuality over time we can see that it isn't static - what's generally considered attractive in a women today wouldn't have been considered attractive 50+ years ago. So if the notion of attraction within a specified sexuality isn't fixed, why should our notions of sexuality themselves be fixed (in fact our notions of gay/straight/bi have only existed since the 18th Century, before then there was no concept of being straight or gay)? If sexuality was natural, something inherent in each person, we would reasonably assume that the number of people associated with each sexuality would be roughly synchronous across the ages (even if they had not been labeled as such in the past) but this simply isn't true. As a well known example, in Ancient Greece women were considered merely for having babies - young boys were for pleasure. What I'm trying to show is how notions of what is attractive (wether that be as broad as a gender or as narrow as a hair colour) change over time with the mores of contemporary culture. So, if this is the case, how can anyone be born into their sexuality? Essentially I've begun to think that nothing about sexuality is inherent: I'm coming down heavily on the nurture side of the nature/nurture debate. I also think that what gender you're attracted to is about as relevant as what colour hair you find attractive, but unfortunately society doesn't agree so this will continue to be a contentious topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyroo Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 I don't actually think... On that topic, I think men and women both have and want just as much anonymous sex as each other, women are just too proud to admit it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpson Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 On that topic, I think men and women both have and want just as much anonymous sex as each other, women are just too proud to admit it... not true......hence why guys masturbate every dayand women do it like 1ce a monthbut get them in the right place and get em going your well in...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 Actually isnt it like a fact or something that most women masturbate just as much as men? Someone told me that a while ago, dunno if its true or not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpson Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 Actually isnt it like a fact or something that most women masturbate just as much as men? Someone told me that a while ago, dunno if its true or not urm no its not true!!!! well from all the girls i spoke to its going to take a lot of girls to make up for jonny palm an his 5 daughters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1a2bcio8 Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 (edited) I don't actually think this is "human nature" - I think it's culturally imbibed. Look at the way that female sexuality has changed in it's perception in the media and, jointly, in the real world over the last few generations. From the Wonderbra adverts on women have been told to revel in their sexuality, and this has caused an upsurge in sexuality (as opposed to sensuality) among young women. I'm very much coming around to the idea that much more of ourselves than I'd like to think is culturally informed. To relate this back closer to the topic: I'd always previously argued with people that sexuality was something natural to a person, that is that you're born into your sexuality. But recently a few things I've read have made me wonder if all the conversations I've had were wrong. I've often heard people ask if you're born gay or become gay, but I'd rarely heard anyone ask if you're born straight or become straight. I'd always somehow assumed that heterosexuality was natural to the individual, and therefore homosexuality (or bisexuality) must be as well. Looking at sexuality over time we can see that it isn't static - what's generally considered attractive in a women today wouldn't have been considered attractive 50+ years ago. So if the notion of attraction within a specified sexuality isn't fixed, why should our notions of sexuality themselves be fixed (in fact our notions of gay/straight/bi have only existed since the 18th Century, before then there was no concept of being straight or gay)? If sexuality was natural, something inherent in each person, we would reasonably assume that the number of people associated with each sexuality would be roughly synchronous across the ages (even if they had not been labeled as such in the past) but this simply isn't true. As a well known example, in Ancient Greece women were considered merely for having babies - young boys were for pleasure. What I'm trying to show is how notions of what is attractive (wether that be as broad as a gender or as narrow as a hair colour) change over time with the mores of contemporary culture. So, if this is the case, how can anyone be born into their sexuality? Essentially I've begun to think that nothing about sexuality is inherent: I'm coming down heavily on the nurture side of the nature/nurture debate. I also think that what gender you're attracted to is about as relevant as what colour hair you find attractive, but unfortunately society doesn't agree so this will continue to be a contentious topic. I'm very much in agreement with you on this. Sexual preference is seeminlgy a product of cultural relativism. Even though I don't like to apply the term in anything narrow being as I see everything as nature but in this context, it is probably more accurate to say, in regards to animals or more specifically humans, that sexuality in itself, regardless of direction is what should be classed as "natural". Homosexuality exists on the same spectrum as heterosexuality, just in a different place on that spectrum. Besides cultural history, this is evident in the ethological term, "imprint vulnerability". Imprint vulnerability is a process that occurs in animal/human development at genetically defined points. An animal or human will at one of these points imprint a situation or thing that will, in most cases, define their perception towards that situation or thing for the rest of their life. An example of this is the goosling that imprinted a white ping pong ball as its mother. The ping pong ball possesing some archetypical characterstics that a mother goose might posses. For the rest of its life, the goose only found sexual interest in white ping pong balls, trying to mate with one at every sexually driven convenience. It's not difficult to convert this situation into human sexuality. For instance, imagine the floor bound baby that develops a foot fetish. Or, in this context, the male baby who experiences a sexuality relative imprint in the presence of their father or another male who fits the vague shape of something that should be imprinted at that time. Cultural relativism has it's place in imprint vulnerability when you consider that which a devloping infant is exposed to in a given environment at a given time.If this is the case, it would seem it's the luck of the draw who gets the socially accepted sexualites and who doesn't. There are apparantly a good deal of practices which have the potential to recreate imprint vulnerability for the purposes of exposure to something more desired by the individual. If this is right, sexuality has the potential to be transient rather than static as is assumed by so many people.Just in case you're interested, imprint vulnerability is what sets or contributes to the foundation of your character and your selective choosing and reaction to the overwhelming stimuli around you, including physical and mental abilities and personality regarding such things as general fear or general contentment. This is a hugh something if you think about it, especially when you consider re-imprinting is supposedly possible. Edited October 25, 2006 by rowly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si-man Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 Actually isnt it like a fact or something that most women masturbate just as much as men? Someone told me that a while ago, dunno if its true or not some girls i know do it all the time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minitrialer Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 your mum doesn't count.......sorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusional Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 I'm very much in agreement with you on this. Sexual preference is seeminlgy a product of cultural relativism. Even though I don't like to apply the term in anything narrow being as I see everything as nature but in this context, it is probably more accurate to say, in regards to animals or more specifically humans, that sexuality in itself, regardless of direction is what should be classed as "natural". Homosexuality exists on the same spectrum as heterosexuality, just in a different place on that spectrum. That's a nice angle. Although I'm still intrigued by what causes us to fall on the place on the spectrum that we do, what causes us to desire the sort of people we do, or in fact to desire at all. I think that the traditional association of desire to reproduction has to be invalid - the very fact that people desire others of the same gender (and thus biologically impossible to breed with) shows that desire neccessarily has nothing to do with reproduction. imprint vulnerability is what sets or contributes to the foundation of your character and your selective choosing and reaction to the overwhelming stimuli around youCheers for this! Very interesting and something I've never come across before. I'm definitely going to go away and read up on it a bit, see if it can lead me closer to an answer to desire. Any recommended starting points? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anzo Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 your mum doesn't count.......sorryAs immature as that was, still made me laugh. Well done I think ugly girls masterbate a lot because they can't get any. Lads do it if they can get any or not. Most girls I talk to act all innocent and dont know what the hell masterbation is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.