BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Head Shop >

What is "gay sex"?

  
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
 
Ganesh
10:11 / 13.05.03
Sure, but here we get into somewhat esoteric territory concerning what "most" "straight" men do and don't think about a) oral sex, and b) anal sex. Are you saying heterosexual males get dicky tum-tums thinking about the latter generally or does it matter who, mentally, is penetrating who?
 
 
Ganesh
10:13 / 13.05.03
Last post directed at Quantum, but Bill Posters expands upon my latter point with reference to 'brown love' videos. Is Baddiel really in a tiny het minority? How do we know?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:15 / 13.05.03
Oh, you know: common sense. Self-evident truths. That kind of thing.

Deva - my love for King Missile grows by the day. They are the kind of band I can appreciate because I am a sensitive artist who is different from everybody else.
 
 
Quantum
11:25 / 13.05.03
Ganesh- no, it's not generally, it's specifically the fear at being penetrated. It's a str8 man thing. Giger recognised it, look at an alien chestburster..
Lesbianism is much more acceptable (the Victoria effect) to the general public, and to women as well perhaps- girls tend to be a lot more touchy feely with their girlfriends (platonic) than men are with their mates.
Also the excellent point made somewhere above, we are an ugly gender- girls are much nicer. If I was a girl I'd be a lesbian, or maybe I am actually like Eddie Izzard- a bisexual lesbian trapped in a man's body.
;-)
I heard a delightful expression from a Kiwi about anal sex the other day. Two NZ girls taking about sex, one says to the other 'Didja get ya brown wings yet?'
 
 
Ganesh
11:33 / 13.05.03
Quantum: Well, yes, the fear of penetration certainly seems omnipresent among straight-identified men (I'd argue there's a certain fascination there too) but that doesn't explain the 'ewww, you must be gay' response doled out to the likes of Baddiel. Does this, then, narrow "gay sex" down to, specifically, anal sex between two men?

The rather nebulous (sexual?) concept of 'lesbianism' certainly seems more acceptable to the het male population, but I'm not sure straight women would necessarily agree on the grounds of touchy-feeliness with same-sex friends alone. As for men being an inherently "ugly gender", speak for yourself! It's a viewpoint I've heard expressed before, but is there actually any evidence to suggest it's more than a rather glib het male truism?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:47 / 13.05.03
Well, yeah, of course you find women more attractive, Quantum; that's because you're a straight man. If you were a straight man who primarily found men more attractive than women, you'd be...well, Ganesh, as it turns out.
 
 
Char Aina
12:30 / 13.05.03
regharding the imbalance of opinion between malemale and femalefemale GaysexTM, do you think a large part of the barrier might be that in most peoles rlations there is still a fairly obvious power dynamic of fucker and fuckee?


women are more comfortable being the fuckee in my experience(certainly not all women, and certainly not all the time), and many men take great exception when they are asked to give up their role of fucker.


prison rules, your only a poof if you take it, and all that.


a lot of people have a view of GaysexTM as this thing that will be done TO them against their will, and part of it will be the surrendering of that power.

no one will initiate sex, they figure(i suppose), unless they get to be the fucker, because as men they cannot imagine initiating sex and not wanting to be the fucker.



am i making any sense at all?
did someone cleverer and possibly gayer than me already write a book about this?
probably.
 
 
pomegranate
14:02 / 13.05.03
this thread, so interesting.
Also the excellent point made somewhere above, we are an ugly gender- girls are much nicer.
yeah, right. everyone says this and i'm tired of it. it's just cos you live in the time period that you do; tell this to the greeks back in the day and see what they say.

the whole term 'gay' people even seem to have a problem with. there are many ads on the subway looking for men to test different hiv prevention drugs on, or for support groups, etc. they don't say "if you're gay, please call." they usually say "if you're a man who has sex with men..." which i find so interesting. it's sad that people have to be so closeted: i'm not gay, i just have sex w/men.

finally, i find this entire issue interesting to ponder cos i often say things like, "we hooked up, but i didn't fuck him." being a straight girl, this to me means that me and whatever guy (not to sound like a slapper) did 'everything but,' as in other fun things besides intercourse that enabled us to get off. but sometimes i reflect on this and feel bad, cos lesbians don't really get that luxury of discerning between different 'levels' of sex. unless they don't count it unless you use a strap-on or something, which i doubt. basically the things that i do in these situations, were the guy a girl, would be considered sex.
but then people say things to me like that the degrees are there cos it *is* more serious, in the sense of what causes pregnancy, and what is more likely to spread disease. but it all seems so heterocentric to me.
i'm interested in other 'lither comments on this, please share.
 
 
that
14:09 / 13.05.03
Sorry, am too tired to participate in this thread properly...but I did want to say, praying mantis, if you're a man who fucks men, it doesn't necessarily mean you're gay. Simplistically, you could be bi. Less simplistically, it's all a matter of self-definition, and there may be many reasons, personal and social, for the way you define yourself. Not calling yourself gay doesn't necessarily mean you're a closet case. It just means you define yourself in a non-traditional manner.
 
 
mkt
14:09 / 13.05.03
praying mantis: it's sad that people have to be so closeted: i'm not gay, i just have sex w/men.

That's not necessarily an example of being closeted - a lot of people would have a problem with identifying themselves in that fashion based solely on the gender of the people they have fucked (or as, this thread is trying to establish, whether they technically fucked them). An obvious example is people who identify as bisexual, but that still ties it down to gender, which a lot of people find reductive or irrelevant. Sexuality is far more complex than gay/straight/bi and it is not 'closeted' to define oneself in a way other than that or to resist definition based on sexuality altogether.
 
 
Bill Posters
14:16 / 13.05.03
they usually say "if you're a man who has sex with men..." which i find so interesting. it's sad that people have to be so closeted: i'm not gay, i just have sex w/men.

i thought the MSM (Men who have Sex with Men) category was invented to cover all those many men who have sex with men but do not - for a whole host of reasons - identify as 'gay'. Eg i have seen an ad for a gay chatline which read: 'Just because another guy sucks your dick doesn't make you gay, right?'. I don't think it was totally or necessarily aimed at the closeted.

Of course, it is important to recall that gay sex was invented by the dirty Japanese.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:19 / 13.05.03
FWIW, I don't think many lesbians *mind* not getting mancock as part of their regular sexual experiences. But the "gay/man-sexing" thing is interesting:

which i find so interesting. it's sad that people have to be so closeted

I don;t think it *is* closeted necessarily; it's pointing up the difference between being gay and having sex with men. Somebody might identify as bisexual, for example, and thus would be a man that has sex with men but not necessarily a gay man.

But also, and significantly, you're assuming that being gay is *necessarily* tied up with being gay. One can, presumably, be a celibate gay man. One can also be gay but never have had sex with somebody of the same gender (presumably - certainly people can identify as straight before they ever have sex with somebody of the opposite gender, yes?), or arguably be gay and in a relationship with somebody of the opposite gender (Taormina, I think, did this, yes?). So, for the purposes of the drug trial, "gay" is a hopelessly inexact term.
 
 
Bill Posters
14:29 / 13.05.03
and of course on the 'other side', there are presumably many str8 men who have found themselves involved in sex-with-men which did not involve their consent. Again, the word 'gay' is not awfully helpful there.
 
 
pomegranate
14:46 / 13.05.03
good points, all. i neglected to write about being bi. i just think it's a little strange that they write "a man who has sex with men" instead of "a gay or bisexual man," even if i do see the reasons for it, including celibacy. i guess that to me, in an ideal world, no one (including yrself) would judge you for being gay (or bi), and thus you would identify yrself happily.
i know, i know, labels are for cans. but i like them, they can come in handy. cans that is.
 
 
Bill Posters
15:10 / 13.05.03
the fear of penetration certainly seems omnipresent among straight-identified men

well i'm a str8 id'd man, and i am not scared to be penetrated. Though i must report that whenever i have been it's hurt like, well, buggery, and so it's not something i'm in a hurry for grrls to do to me.
 
 
gingerbop
15:11 / 13.05.03
Afraid i have to go with the "ugly-gender" thing, for as to why lesbian sex is more acceptable. I mean, not an ugly gender, just the less beautiful gender (is someone gonna throw me a spade?)

If it wasnt that way, would there not be more semi-naked men in adverts? Cos its not because women have less spending power anymore.
 
 
Char Aina
15:59 / 13.05.03
i think taht women respond differentoy to images of nudity in advertising, and so the predominant unclothed form is there to appeal to men.

women, i recall from a psychology experiment in uni, will look at a woman first when a couple enetrs a room.

so will men.
 
 
Spaniel
16:16 / 13.05.03
Hmm, I think we need to get away from all this craziness about which is the more beautiful sex. Of course, it may be that in our contempoary society women are considered more attractive than men, by both genders (although I do have worries about what is meant by attractive in all this talk), but how the fuck can we ever know?

Ah yes, statistics.

"Gay sex" is self evidently short-hand for a multitude of scenarios - it is at best a fuzzy description and at worst slightly unhelpful in the light of the current discussion. It seems to me that the key issue here has to do with male on male intimacy.
In answer to Ganesh's earlier question: does buying flowers for another man constitute gay sex? Well obviously no, but such an act does touch on many of the anxieties that hetero males feel towards male on male intimacy, be it sexual or otherwise.
 
 
William Sack
16:20 / 13.05.03
How does a gay man or a lesbian lose his or her virginity?
 
 
Shrug
17:27 / 13.05.03
I've written a few posts for this, deleted them, written them again and even so this post will probably be none too brilliant so I'll keep it short and sweet, (sorry if this isn't much of a contribution).
To some gender is irrelevant so to be categorised as either gay or bi because of who they deem to fuck/ have fucked/ will fuck/ plan to fuck/ forgot to fuck, seems to miss the point.
 
 
SecretlyClarkKent
01:56 / 14.05.03
I have so many points to make, or bring up, and none of them are really coming out as "coherent". But "coherent" is just another label, right?

People can argue labels all day long. I used to be really against them, because I was so busy pointing out that I don't "fall under one label" that I hadn't ever stopped to think about the fact that I'll always be more than a label, and most people recognize that. The ones that don't, don't know me. And probably never will.

I'm gay. Simple as that. And I realized it a long, long time before I had physical or intimate contact with another man. At first, I called myself "bi" to ease myself in to it, and then I called myself "queer" because "gay" had too many tags following it. Now... I'm gay. I'm queer. I'm a homosexual. And I have a "top ten list of women I'd like to fuck". I find some women to be extremely attractive. And it has nothing to do with the fact that they're female. When I'm attracted to a male, though, it can be because they're a male. I have a very base, physical reaction to the male form. For me to stay attracted to a guy, there has to be a whole lot more.

My boyfriend is bisexual. He once explained to me, though, that he considers himself "gay" when he's with someone of the same sex, and "straight" when he's with a member of the opposite sex. It has nothing to do with denial, and it has nothing to do with how "fluid" his sexuality is. It's how he identifies with the situation he's in. When his sexuality comes up in conversation [with a co-worker, say] he tells them "I'm bi." And when they say "Oh, really?" he says something along the lines with "Yeah, my boyfriend's name is Jared."

I want to spend the rest of my life with him. To the best of my knowledge, he wants the same. Nothing fluid about it.

As to the topic of virginity and sex... the definitions are limit-less, and we're rarely going to change someone else's view or idea of sex.

I "lost my virginity" the first time I had any kind of sexual contact with someone else. For me, that was with a guy. And it ran the entire gamut in the course of one evening. I'm going to come off like a bit of a whore, but I had my first same-sex kiss within the same hour that I had my first same-sex oral contact... and same-sex anal. 0-60 in under forty-five minutes. [In my defense, I am not a whore. I've only ever had sexual relations with two people, my boyfriend being one of them. The other was my boyfriend at that time. I've only ever had two boyfriends. I'm twenty-one years old, and I'm very much a gay man.]

And I'm not sure any of this is relevant. I can only speak from experience. Which, maybe, is my point. It is all personally subjective.

You can't define "gay sex" without defining sex. To me, a kiss is not sex. Anything involving the arousal of genitalia is. And assuming we're all under the notion that "gay" means "homosexual", then gay sex would be defined as any instance when a person of one sexual determination arouses, and interacts, with someone of the same sex.

And I don't think I've added anything to this conversation.

-Jared
 
 
Shiva Mule
02:07 / 14.05.03
On the contrary, I think that by stating that it is all just labels for personal choices you may have answered the question.

Under your definition I am not a virgin, while I would consider myself to be. As I've never had penetrative sex with anyone, man or woman, I would personally be uncomfortable as describing myself as "not a virgin".

But it really is about personal decisions isn't it?
 
 
w1rebaby
22:26 / 14.05.03
Was reading Dan Savage just now and this thread came to mind...

I'm a 23-year-old gay male who's been following the Rick Santorum scandal, and I have a proposal. Washington and the press seem content to let Santorum's comments fade into political oblivion, so I say the gay community should welcome this "inclusive" man with open arms. That's right; if Rick Santorum wants to invite himself into the bedrooms of gays and lesbians (and their dogs), I say we "include" him in our sex lives--by naming a gay sex act after him...

...Two quibbles, SARS: First, there's no such thing as a gay sex act. There's nothing two men or two women can do in beds, bushes, or butts that a man and woman can't also do. Second, even if there were gay-specific sex acts, why save "Santorum," "Santoruming," and "Santorumed" for gay sex acts? Santorum didn't just say that gays have no right to private, consensual sex; he said that no one, gay or straight, has that right. He even said that states should be able to outlaw birth control. That makes Senator Santorum a threat to the sexual freedom of straight people too--and straight people should contemplate that fact whenever they pull a Rick Santorum, don't you think?
 
 
SecretlyClarkKent
02:36 / 15.05.03
I was just getting ready to post that, Fridge...

Although, I disagree with the statement that "There's nothing two men or two women can do in beds, bushes, or butts that a man and woman can't also do" because that's simply not true. I would love to see a man and a woman lie in bed together and have a sword fight with their nature-given cocks.

-Jared
 
 
gravitybitch
03:07 / 15.05.03
[my tongue in my cheek]

So natural is better, is it??

[/my tongue in my cheek]

Hmmmph. I go away for a short vacation and find that you've been up to the juicy stuff while I was out. Without me.

Not sure I actually have much constructive to add to this - I could bitch about bisexuals being disappeared again (I used to believe everyone was bisexual, just some were in denial, but then I realised (after meeting my incredibly gay friend Clayton) that it just isn't true- some people are totally straight, some totally gay, most are kinda mostly straight but up for some experimental fun now and again.) or add my definition of sex, but that may be all.
 
 
pomegranate
17:11 / 19.05.03
i'm interested to hear yr definition of sex, iszabelle.
 
 
--
17:51 / 19.05.03
My definition of gay sex? Something I've never done.
 
 
cusm
19:11 / 19.05.03
There was an old comedy show some years back that ran briefly called "The News." It was course stuff, sometimes very funny. There was one bit I still love where the comic was explaining why Men Love Lesbians that covers the media's treatment of homosexuality well:

Women are soft and smooth and curvy. Men are hairy and pimply with bumpy dangly bits.

FOX at its finest.

why does so much het porn depict het anal sex?

Its naughty, of course. And a primal symbol of domination that can speak to you regardless of orientation. Likely more so than with men, as men can at least get off on being buggered due to the location of the prostate, while women typically experience substantially less pleasure from it.

But really, lets not forget that the real reason Gay Sex is Evil is because Sex is Dirty and Jesus dies every time you touch yourself.

Of course, it is important to recall that gay sex was invented by the dirty Japanese.

Thank you Bill, I see my work here is done
 
 
Disco is My Class War
05:50 / 20.05.03
I don't think there's much point in trying to pin down precisely what people mean when they say 'gay sex', because I don't reckon they know what they mean.'Gay sex' signifies a whole lot of things, none of them related to what might count as sex between two men or women, anal sex, whatever. Right? Ie I would say that a lot of the fear expressed by right-wing christians and so on about 'gay sex' comes from their imaginations of what gay sex must be like. It's the unknown, yes? ( Actually, I fear it is hardly unknown to lots of Christians, specially Catholic clergymen, but there you go...) Hence a certain amount of obsessive, albeit forbidden, speculation. And an idea of 'gay sex' does upset normative power relations, or it makes that a possibility. But most of all, 'gay sex' might signify polymorphous perversity. Sex purely for the purpose of pleasure, for no purpose. Which, I think scares people most of all.

People have some really fucking weird ideas on this thread. Who said that women don't experience as much pleasure from anal sex? Why is it sad for dykes not to be able to distinguish between 'intercourse' and 'sexplay'? (Or maybe they do: 'Yeah, I licked her clit but we didn't fist.')

And, on the men who have sex with men thing, has anyone thought about the ramifications of disindentification further than 'what a pity people can't just identify as gay'? (I know some people have.) There are lots of men who have beat sex, I imagine, who wouldn't want to give up either the power their heterosexuality confers (and the status symbols of wife, children, or whatever) or the polymorphousness this state of affairs allows.
 
 
cusm
16:55 / 20.05.03
Who said that women don't experience as much pleasure from anal sex?

Basic anatomy, actually. The "g-spot" in women is the same organ as the prostate in men, and with the same purpose for the percentage of women who ejaculate. But its in a different place. The man's is more easily stimulated via anal sex than the females, for whom it is exposed in the vaginal wall instead. So, there is a very real physical reason to do it to please your partner with a man that is less apt with women.

That isn't to say women can't enjoy it, there's still much to get out of the experience if its done well. They're just not by the large enjoying it for quite the same reasons a man can.

This concludes today's lesson in sexual anatomy. Please don't make me assign homework
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:03 / 20.05.03
The same organ, you say? So, the G-spot is a gland which produces a thick liquid called semen, and a protein known as PSA that liquefies that semen? So that it can be mixed in the woman's testicles with the woman's sperm?

Thank you for the biology lesson, CUSM. I didn't even realise ladies *had* testicles.

I think you may be aiming for the idea that biomales have their prostate in a place that *might* be stimulated by anal sex, which *might* produce a particular feeling, which will not be produced in anal sex with a woman. As for pleasure, I'd imagine that probably varies from person to person. Even some biomen may not enjoy it, no matter how vigorously their prostate is stimulated.
 
 
Lurid Archive
19:07 / 20.05.03
Speak for yourself.

Also, isn't a bit sexist to say that women aren't allowed to have testicles?

But most of all, 'gay sex' might signify polymorphous perversity. Sex purely for the purpose of pleasure, for no purpose. Which, I think scares people most of all. - Mister Disco

I think there is something in this, though I think that gay sex can provoke a certain anxiety that is not common to all forms of 'sex for fun'. As has been noted above, lesbian sex is a bit different and fetishistic sex, though wierd, just doesn't come in for the same criticism.
 
 
at the scarwash
19:37 / 20.05.03
I just thought I'd put in that I can think of one exclusively gay male sexual practice, in response to Fridge's post about "Getting Santorumed." I think they call it docking, and I'm really glad to know that there are people in this world who are into it. I'm not going to describe it, for those of you who don't know what it is, just because I think it might be more fun to guess. Just think Apollo-Soyuz: docking.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:11 / 20.05.03
Hello Testpattern. Welcome to the Head Shop. Where we don't play funny guessing games about what those crazy gays get up to. Could you explain what you understand by "docking", and what makes it uniquely a "gay" sex act, as opposed to, say, a male-male sex act? Because that might neatly answer the question posed by Ganesh at the start.
 
 
cusm
20:57 / 20.05.03
Haus, the same organ in utereo before gendering and subsequent develpment takes place, much as testes and ovaries are the same organ in this respect. Nature makes some interesting shortcuts like this. The notable end result in this case being that both are wired the same way for orgasm response.

But you're right with all the "mights". That's more the point here. As always with human sexuality, individual milage may vary.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
  
Add Your Reply