So what you are intimating is that we men who like "hot girl on girl action" are just deflecting (not so subtly) our inner homophillic tendencies?
That's pretty hilarious!
The "homophobic" lie
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
So what you are intimating is that we men who like "hot girl on girl action" are just deflecting (not so subtly) our inner homophillic tendencies?
That's pretty hilarious!
And then there's this. Absurd. Try this.
Men get hot looking at beautiful women.
Men get hotter looking at naked beautiful women.
Men get even hotter looking at naked women gyrating sexually.
Men get SUPER HOT watching TWO naked women gyrating and such with each other!
Horses, fish, and blind men
No doubt. But why?
It just seems convenient. I think male homophobes who like "hot girl on girl action" are deflecting their inner nancy.
As I was walking to St. Ives ....
So this one summer, '97 I think, we were heading back to the middle of nowhere to see Phish play two days in the heat. At the last minute, Shemp backed out. I pulled a line that was common in our circle in those days, that he was just bitching and moaning and would be mad if we actually left him behind, to convince him to come along. And come along, he did. We ended up in a farm town on Friday night, looking for a mutual friend. As we wandered from bar to bar, all we had to do was stick our heads in and ask, "Seen Phelan?" The bartender would say something like, "A couple hours ago. Try _______."
Eventually, we tracked down our friend in this room that would have made a great practice room for a band. (It did, eventually, I think.) And there, sitting beneath the missing, rumored-to-be-destroyed (and would eventually be destroyed) "spaceman" painting, was Phelan. Sitting beside him was Toby, and Shemp's jaw dropped. Toby was Shemp's best friend twenty years ago, when they were both in kindergarten. Now, Toby was Phelan's roommate.
Reunions completed, we returned to Toby and Phelan's place to smoke copious amounts of dope and get cosmic. At one point, though, Toby decided he just had to show us something.
It was a video file, called "horsegag.avi". Those of you who don't need to use much of your imagination are already shuddering. And, you know, yeah, there's good reason. The horse didn't gag. The woman did, because there was too much to swallow.
It was ... um ... enlightening. I knew such things went on, but had never seen it. But it was curious because even Toby and Phelan, who had seen it several times at least, could only focus on how disgusting it was. Don't get me wrong, it was disgusting. But that was the point of talking about it at all, of showing it to us in the first place: to create an affirmation of disgust.
And that was at least as curious as the video segment itself. Rather, maybe I figure it was that curious in order to not dwell on the chick blowing a horse. One of the things that strikes me is that for all the jokes about being "hung like a horse", f@cking "like a stallion", "riding the baloney pony", and such, people actually find the real thing disgusting. Consider a joke about women:
Author Jean Markale notes:
I should also point out that the same text recalls Ferenczi's discussion of the fish as a phallic symbol.
Either way, I think we're all agreed that if we walked in on Troy McClure during an icthyphilic moment, we'd probably all stop at, "Ick."
People might have certain jokes or cultural references, but they don't want to see it. Hence, "hot girl on girl action" makes perfect sense for the homophobic male.
Or something like that.
Is everyone appropriately unsettled, yet?
Superluminal said:
No doubt. But why?
It just seems convenient. I think male homophobes who like "hot girl on girl action" are deflecting their inner nancy.
• • •
As I was walking to St. Ives ....
So this one summer, '97 I think, we were heading back to the middle of nowhere to see Phish play two days in the heat. At the last minute, Shemp backed out. I pulled a line that was common in our circle in those days, that he was just bitching and moaning and would be mad if we actually left him behind, to convince him to come along. And come along, he did. We ended up in a farm town on Friday night, looking for a mutual friend. As we wandered from bar to bar, all we had to do was stick our heads in and ask, "Seen Phelan?" The bartender would say something like, "A couple hours ago. Try _______."
Eventually, we tracked down our friend in this room that would have made a great practice room for a band. (It did, eventually, I think.) And there, sitting beneath the missing, rumored-to-be-destroyed (and would eventually be destroyed) "spaceman" painting, was Phelan. Sitting beside him was Toby, and Shemp's jaw dropped. Toby was Shemp's best friend twenty years ago, when they were both in kindergarten. Now, Toby was Phelan's roommate.
Reunions completed, we returned to Toby and Phelan's place to smoke copious amounts of dope and get cosmic. At one point, though, Toby decided he just had to show us something.
It was a video file, called "horsegag.avi". Those of you who don't need to use much of your imagination are already shuddering. And, you know, yeah, there's good reason. The horse didn't gag. The woman did, because there was too much to swallow.
It was ... um ... enlightening. I knew such things went on, but had never seen it. But it was curious because even Toby and Phelan, who had seen it several times at least, could only focus on how disgusting it was. Don't get me wrong, it was disgusting. But that was the point of talking about it at all, of showing it to us in the first place: to create an affirmation of disgust.
And that was at least as curious as the video segment itself. Rather, maybe I figure it was that curious in order to not dwell on the chick blowing a horse. One of the things that strikes me is that for all the jokes about being "hung like a horse", f@cking "like a stallion", "riding the baloney pony", and such, people actually find the real thing disgusting. Consider a joke about women:
What did the blind man say when he walked past the fishmonger's? "Hello, ladies."
Author Jean Markale notes:
I should also point out that the same text recalls Ferenczi's discussion of the fish as a phallic symbol.
Either way, I think we're all agreed that if we walked in on Troy McClure during an icthyphilic moment, we'd probably all stop at, "Ick."
People might have certain jokes or cultural references, but they don't want to see it. Hence, "hot girl on girl action" makes perfect sense for the homophobic male.
Or something like that.
Is everyone appropriately unsettled, yet?
Last edited:
Why what?
Oh ok.
It's TWO naked women gyrating and such with each other!
How can this require explanation???
It's TWO naked women gyrating and such with each other!
How can this require explanation???
I've had some time to think about this ....and I've decided that I do fear gay men.
I also fear snakes, especially rattlesnakes. So when I go out into the field, I always carry a big stick. When I see a rattler, he scares me, so I beat that fuckin' snake with the big stick until it finally quits twitching.
Yep, I've decided now to carry that big stick with me even when I go into town ...just in case I see a gay male, and he scares me!
Baron Max
I also fear snakes, especially rattlesnakes. So when I go out into the field, I always carry a big stick. When I see a rattler, he scares me, so I beat that fuckin' snake with the big stick until it finally quits twitching.
Yep, I've decided now to carry that big stick with me even when I go into town ...just in case I see a gay male, and he scares me!
Baron Max
Scissor me timbers!
In the context of homophobia, and why lesbians are either acceptable or invisible, it's a relevant explanation.
Don't get me wrong: I agree. Scissor me timbers, I agree.
Unless, of course, it's a battle of the bearded clams. But that's just aesthetics.
If a gay man explained his lust to you by saying, "It's an eight-inch, perfectly circumcised, proof-of-god-it's-so-beautiful cock, how can this require explanation?" would you simply nod and say, "I see your point"?
Okay, maybe you would. But as a general question, yeah, actually it does require some explanation.
Superluminal said:
In the context of homophobia, and why lesbians are either acceptable or invisible, it's a relevant explanation.
Don't get me wrong: I agree. Scissor me timbers, I agree.
Unless, of course, it's a battle of the bearded clams. But that's just aesthetics.
If a gay man explained his lust to you by saying, "It's an eight-inch, perfectly circumcised, proof-of-god-it's-so-beautiful cock, how can this require explanation?" would you simply nod and say, "I see your point"?
Okay, maybe you would. But as a general question, yeah, actually it does require some explanation.
Fair enough.
The most straight-forward explanation I can conjure is that a straight man who is naturally attracted to naked females views two females in "hot girl-on-girl action" as:
#1 Being still clearly hot naked women
#2 Engaging in sexual play with no other male in sight as competition
#3 Not likely to inseminate each other (see #2)
#4 Two targets of opportunity in an already aroused state
Yes?
Okay I have a question for Tiassa because it's been sitting in the back of my head for a while. I will ask but you don't have to answer if you don't want to.
Remember you were saying in a thread (not sure which one) that your wife was going out and screwing men behind your back? And you were really pissed about the whole thing calling her names and such. Well could the reason be because she knew you were fucking other men (as you stated here, that you do time to time) :shrug:
Remember you were saying in a thread (not sure which one) that your wife was going out and screwing men behind your back? And you were really pissed about the whole thing calling her names and such. Well could the reason be because she knew you were fucking other men (as you stated here, that you do time to time) :shrug:
This is relevant, too. Men think that "lesbian" sex is just a warmup for the "real thing", and that the women they are watching would immediately turn their attention to a male if there was one available.
What they fail to realise is that real lesbians aren't interested in men.
Think about it.
(Insert title here)
There are a couple of problems with that thesis, although I'll give it good credit for working with the elements you have.
Of slight relevance:
Of greater relevance:
I would have given her any resolution she wanted ... but it turns out that what she really wanted was my seed. Sounds arrogant, I know, but you have to understand how warped she really is. The purpose of having a child, it seems, was to gain a status symbol. Everyone was really nice to her when she was pregnant, and they congratulate her for having a cute daughter. And this is what she wanted. When, as the family collapsed entirely, I asked her why she spent all of her time in bars if her daughter was so important to her, she explained to me that "the number one priority for raising a happy child is a happy mother".
In other words, all of the drinking, cocaine, lying, and seeing her daughter for maybe an hour a week were all sacrifices she made for her daughter's best interest.
Does it sound like I'm making a really bad, misogynistic joke? Yeah, I know. It sounds that way to me, too. But it's true.
I mean, we're talking about someone who wants to find a "stable" relationship, so she picks up a married guy in a bar.
Shorty 37 said:
There are a couple of problems with that thesis, although I'll give it good credit for working with the elements you have.
Of slight relevance:
• She actually wanted me to fuck guys.
• That was a different period in our relationship.
• I honestly can't remember the last time I was with a guy.
• That was a different period in our relationship.
• I honestly can't remember the last time I was with a guy.
Of greater relevance:
• She had a chance to walk away from the relationship in 1998, four years before our daughter was born.
• She chose to lie at that time, only bothering to correct herself in 2004, almost two years after our daughter arrived.
• She had said she wanted to try to build a family between us and our daughter.
• She never had any intention of doing so, but we only know this in retrospect.
• When she said she was ready to get back into things and take part, it turns out she wasn't referring to the family she said she wanted, but her social circle at the bar.
• She chose to lie at that time, only bothering to correct herself in 2004, almost two years after our daughter arrived.
• She had said she wanted to try to build a family between us and our daughter.
• She never had any intention of doing so, but we only know this in retrospect.
• When she said she was ready to get back into things and take part, it turns out she wasn't referring to the family she said she wanted, but her social circle at the bar.
I would have given her any resolution she wanted ... but it turns out that what she really wanted was my seed. Sounds arrogant, I know, but you have to understand how warped she really is. The purpose of having a child, it seems, was to gain a status symbol. Everyone was really nice to her when she was pregnant, and they congratulate her for having a cute daughter. And this is what she wanted. When, as the family collapsed entirely, I asked her why she spent all of her time in bars if her daughter was so important to her, she explained to me that "the number one priority for raising a happy child is a happy mother".
In other words, all of the drinking, cocaine, lying, and seeing her daughter for maybe an hour a week were all sacrifices she made for her daughter's best interest.
Does it sound like I'm making a really bad, misogynistic joke? Yeah, I know. It sounds that way to me, too. But it's true.
I mean, we're talking about someone who wants to find a "stable" relationship, so she picks up a married guy in a bar.
Ummm.. I think we realize this. This is what one technically refers to as a "fantasy". Clearly "real" lesbians are, well lesbians.
I suspect point #2 is highly relevant.
And I suppose if a man focused exclusively on this type of fantasy it would be highly indicitave of something...
I'm interested in where you got this all or none hypothesis.
Well, if a man only thinks only about "lesbian" sex, then maybe he's like me: a lesbian trapped in a mans body!
:m:Or as pointless. In an atmosphere where pansexuality is generally accepted, "girl/girl action" doesn't draw much notice. For instance, I've never had a boyfriend express real interest in seeing me with another woman.
Then again, this is a matter of set, setting and scene. I'm sure that you could get a good deal of attention by "making out" with another girl in a mainstream bar, but in a less predatory sexual atmosphere it really doesn't attract undue notice.
(Insert title here)
Oh, point #2 is definitely relevant. I just figure to not shoot from the hip on this one. My first response, for instance, is to wonder about how that relates to male bonding over GoG porn.
Incidentally, this is part of what I found so funny about the South Park LoTR/porno episode: every guy in town was obsessed with the idea of watching penises enter recta.
Let's have some fun and do some trivia (anyone's invited to answer):
Anyway, my point is that when most of the men I know talk about porn, the one thing they don't want to talk about is the man in the scene. This could be, of course, the competitive aspect you've raised. But if you pay close attention when men are talking about porn they have in common, you'll notice that they are sharing a sexual experience while sublimating (at best) any consideration of the penis. The reality is that guys do get one another horny, but just don't want to admit it.
Superluminal said:
Oh, point #2 is definitely relevant. I just figure to not shoot from the hip on this one. My first response, for instance, is to wonder about how that relates to male bonding over GoG porn.
Incidentally, this is part of what I found so funny about the South Park LoTR/porno episode: every guy in town was obsessed with the idea of watching penises enter recta.
Let's have some fun and do some trivia (anyone's invited to answer):
1. Why is Ron Jeremy popular?
2. Essay: Why do you think so few people ever talk about the comparative qualities of the coital strokes of Ron Jeremy vs. Harry Reems?
3. Free answer: How many of Jenna Jameson's on-screen partners can you name?
A) Because he's handsome, charismatic, and everything else a lady could want.
B) Because men are jealous of the number of women he's been paid to have sex with.
C) Because people are naturally attracted to short, tubby, hairy men nicknamed "The Hedgehog".
D) Because he is legendary for having blown himself.
B) Because men are jealous of the number of women he's been paid to have sex with.
C) Because people are naturally attracted to short, tubby, hairy men nicknamed "The Hedgehog".
D) Because he is legendary for having blown himself.
2. Essay: Why do you think so few people ever talk about the comparative qualities of the coital strokes of Ron Jeremy vs. Harry Reems?
3. Free answer: How many of Jenna Jameson's on-screen partners can you name?
Anyway, my point is that when most of the men I know talk about porn, the one thing they don't want to talk about is the man in the scene. This could be, of course, the competitive aspect you've raised. But if you pay close attention when men are talking about porn they have in common, you'll notice that they are sharing a sexual experience while sublimating (at best) any consideration of the penis. The reality is that guys do get one another horny, but just don't want to admit it.
Not in Amish country.
It's probably more a matter of scene than place, but I thought that most 16-30 year old females were more or less bisexual by default.