I am confused about my sexuality at 25...
I thought I was only gay and I had only sex with men until now. But I developed more and more the desire to feel masculine and I fantasize about pleasing a girl, making ger go wild and orgasm...but I don't know if it would work in the real situation, I mean, maybe I could please her but maybe it doesnt make me horny in the end...I don't know how to approach women with this...I get hit on by women, men much less, so I seem masculine...but I don't know how to play it...
You sound pretty gay, dude. I should know.
Honestly, if you have any apprehension about being able to get aroused in such a situation, then you probably aren't heterosexual at all.
Sounds like you convinced yourself you were a faggot and therefore you intentionally discounted women. Shit like this happens all the time, it's one of the reasons I wish people would stop spreading homofaggot propaganda.
Who cares? It's true. A lot of people organize themselves into little boxes based on a lifestyle that has been prescribed to them whole cloth.
Most gays don't just like men, they are told in advanced that "gays only like men" so once they begin to call themselves such they begin enforcing that rule on themselves, often in spite of their real preferences. A lot of the time they get you when you're still young and you never even give it a second thought. People like OP just think "I am gay" and that's the end of it, when it really isn't so.
I dont like the words "homofaggot propaganda" but I agree with you in that people put themselves into boxes, I thought I was not allowed to like women and that I have to act gay. Also, I have a terrible mom, so I grew up with a bad image of women. That changed only now. Other thing, my first high school crush was a girl, only the second (with more sexual feelings) a guy
Well, I've encountered a lot more insecurity within the bisexual community than I have the homosexual community, personally.
(This extends to both men & women)
But yes, it was the "homofaggot" remark that I resented..
It gives people the impression that by labelling themselves that way they have to act a certain way too. This is why I used the term "homofaggot propaganda," and by that I mean all of the media centered around making homosexuality seem good. It has a dual purpose of "defining" homosexuality in people's minds so you get the problem I'm describing. It does everyone a disservice, I cannot find any reason why I should have to be nice about it.
I think there's a strong case to suggest "homosexuality" may not even exist, but this totally contrasts with the idea that you're either straight or gay, which is what people are used to hearing. I think it's peripheral to typical human behavior; people are turned on by very general stimuli which can include all sorts of varying shapes and sizes. People consciously police themselves once they become invested in the homosexual "identity," so they convince themselves to avoid women. In reality they would probably still get hard from touching a butt because they are men.
That wasn't me. Calm your faggot ass down, faggot.
I am the other anon, OP, it hasnt got to do with listening or not, the words are just discriminating, as if you are against homosexuals in general. and that is not the question I want to discuss here
that is crap, I think you are just 100% straight and don't know what it's like and what our struggles are, my straight friends also used to say such shit because they didn't believe other men could actually have these feelings
You caused your own problems by radically altering your lifestyle. You're intentionally clashing with your community. If you haven't studied psychology then you may well not understand the power words and abstract ideas hold over people.
The fact that such an identity "exists" in the marketplace of ideas legitimizes it for most people. That's the end of their thought process, it exists to them because other people believe it and that must therefore be how it works. There is a precedent for it and new ideas are scary, it is easier to fall back on old ideas you already have.
There are a million different ways the gays could improve their reputation within a community but instead your relationship with the rest of us degrades a little more every year. You reject all criticism because "we don't understand" or "that's just your prejudice talking." It shouldn't matter why I came to this conclusion, and it definitely doesn't matter that I'm too treating it too clinically. What matters is that you cause people to treat you differently and you could fix it, but you refuse.
You're stubborn, and as far as I can tell the reason for this stubbornness just comes back to the "gay identity" and what you think you are supposed to say and do when interacting with us.
You're mad at me for using slurs. Why would you call a complete stranger free of all convictions a "fucking idiot" unless you were looking to blame me? In either case your anger is misdirected, you mean it for me, not anon.
I fully understand that this is 4chan, where the use of informal language and derogatory slang is commonplace.
But ultimately, if do you seek for your opinion to be deemed valid, you should perhaps used more inspired language.
I'm pretty indifferent overall - just saying.
How can people maintain/perpetuate such misguided notions when they're in no way affiliated with the culture/scene themselves (a fact that is glaringly obvious purely based upon the language used, once again.)
I'm telling you, bisexual people are overwhelmingly more insecure, man.
I don't have an answer, considering you came to that conclusion on your own and I never commented on it.
This is such crap. I used a trigger word that offends you and that means I'm "one of them." Get a grip you cocksucking faggot.
I wasn't inferring that you were homosexual, I was just basically saying that you're talking out of your non semen-covered asshole.
Not everyone that is homosexual subscribes to the agenda or succumbs to it's persuasion.
Ever since I can remember I was attracted to guys, before I even knew what gay was and before I started feeling attraction towards women. There was no identity attached to it and no one pushing any kind of gay identity on to me.
If this is OP >>16663560 he's right, you really don't know the struggles of being either bi or gay.
Not only do you only have 5% of the population to choose from, but there usually is no clear way of knowing if someone is gay or bi which makes living a normal life as your purpose more difficult.
To many this means being the flamboyant gays that people usually see because its a way to signal to others that they are gay.
This leaves us at the fact that a normal guy person, dubbed "straight acting" by the "community" faces attacks from LGBTs as well because we allegedly have internalized homophobia.
If you are basing your view on homosexual and bisexual men on what you see on tv or the ones you see in real life I could perhaps understand your point but there are gay/bi men you never see or know are gay, that don't go to parades, that don't conform to any community or the identities you speak of.
Seems like my point is being ignored. In fact both of you have already given testimony to corroborate my view and presented it as evidence to the contrary.
What the fuck does any of this have to do with what I said? I'm talking about human attraction, not hurr hurr the gay community boo hoo bullying. The self-inflicted social issues are secondary, but I believe they are a direct result of the actual problem which neither of you has actually addressed.
Your point is that people are told "homofaggot propaganda" and believe it and then believe it so much that they shield themselves from seeing potential partners in women.
Do you honestly think that other people, especially people that live their lives with this haven't already had such notions themselves? Or do you think you've come up with a brilliant view that hasn't been on the table.
I already said that I had a innate attraction to the same sex before I knew what homosexuality was, there was no homofaggot propaganda involved, it just was and always have been.
For obvious reasons, we don't particularly care how we do or don't integrate into regular society, nor should there be any expectation of conformity. We don't seek to be like you, and an overwhelming majority do not even seek your acceptance.
Perhaps we could live harmoniously without people like you spouting unfounded fantastical bullshit in an attempt to segregate us further, or to provide your interpretation of what the subculture is actually about.
Merely a thought.
You are us. What makes you think you're different from us other than that you CLAIM to be? Other than the subculture gays INTENTIONALLY ERECTED TO SEGREGATE THEMSELVES, where and why do you draw this line?
I never mentioned anything about "the subculture" to begin with, I'm talking about memes. Preconceived notions people have about what they can and cannot be. Existing ideas that people rely on to make decisions rather than reasoning for themselves.
From the top:
>Sounds like you convinced yourself you were a faggot and therefore you intentionally discounted women
>Most gays don't just like men, they are told in advanced that "gays only like men"
>A lot of the time they get you when you're still young and you never even give it a second thought.
>I think it's peripheral to typical human behavior; people are turned on by very general stimuli which can include all sorts of varying shapes and sizes.
>In reality they would probably still get hard from touching a butt because they are men.
I've yet to be convinced that anyone is "born this way," but I have seen a million times people being completely confused because they feel they must align themselves with some kind of group or label. Often they self-diagnose and just assume they are like a group and start unintentionally living by the "rules" of the group. If you'd never heard about homosexuality or the memes (read: ideas) surrounding them you would not magically declare yourself to be exclusive to men, would you? You wouldn't even think it was an issue, but today people have already made that decision for you.
Can we get back to topic?
What is about pleasing a girl and having her go wild that tickles your fancies?
And why does it concern you that you won't be aroused by fingering a girl and eating her out? You could do that without proceeding to fuck her, you know.
Being in some sort of orientation-limbo is far, far more damaging then just opting for sexual-inclination that seems most suitable for you.
If you like fucking boys, you're in the minority. But that's nothing to be ashamed about, and you don't immediately need to associate yourself with any particular sexuality because of it, but you don't need to deny that you feel precisely what you feel towards a specific class of sex(es). The problem lies is in the shame and stigma surrounding it - which is thoroughly counterproductive. If no prejudice was held, if it wasn't seen largely as "abnormal", people wouldn't live in shame and hiding.
The scene itself is a byproduct of oppression and prejudice, and ultimately - liberation. The idea of complete & utter self-imposed segregation is fundamentally flawed.
Your theory on memes can easily be flipped around.
At what point did heterosexual people be fed the idea that they are exclusively heterosexual. If things are as free as you say and "we are all the same", shouldn't everyone then be bisexual and choose what to they are attracted to or partake in?
That's not really how life is tho, is it?
My point is that while it doesn't happen often, they're not in the minority at all. It doesn't happen much but it does happen consistently. The concept of "gay" itself is what I'm calling into question. The concept altogether colors their attitudes.
It's pretty clear you are trying really hard not to get this. I'm suggesting that what you'd call "straights" are incidentally bisexual and what you'd call "gays" are incidentally bisexual, but have mistakenly internalized the idea that this makes them "gay" and thus they will only have sex with men.
OP is an example of a male who did gay shit and thus in his mind he must be "gay," yet now that he's even thinking about women he thinks that something is terribly wrong.
>At what point did heterosexual people be fed the idea that they are exclusively heterosexual
They didn't. You declared it so. Most people don't think "I'm a straight," they just do whatever. This is the natural state of things and obviously they are mostly just meeting women and having children.
>shouldn't everyone then be bisexual
See above. I don't want to call it that because it isn't really accurate. People are attracted to some loosely-defined stimuli which is present in basically everybody. Sexual dimorphism just means that women are generally more attractive, you know, in an objective sense. If you had to label it, "heteroflexible" is probably the most accurate descriptor for how people naturally act.
>choose what to they are attracted to or partake in?
Which is why this isn't accurate. The "gays" are honestly attracted to men, at least I'm pretty sure they are, but not exclusively by any means. Their exclusivity is mental.
To quote myself:
>I think there's a strong case to suggest "homosexuality" may not even exist, but this totally contrasts with the idea that you're either straight or gay, which is what people are used to hearing.
I'm just repeating myself at this point but if you're actually listening now, that's why.
Seriously, we should be talking about juicy pussy itt.
How does women approach you, OP? What exactly is stopping you from using this to you advantage and experiment with chicks you could consider fucking?
So if straight people didn't choose to be straight, you think someone is spreading propaganda to make people gay? Is that right?
Again, my attraction was before I knew what homosexuality was.
Homosexuality is epigenetic, food the mother consumes lays foundation for it and nurture later determines how hard it strikes.
You know of the kinsey scale perhaps? There are two exclusive orientations, 100% straight and 100% homosexual, then there is the seventh which is x, or asexual.
You are right in that these are labels, and labels are mostly for other people. But if you are a five on the kinsey scale there is little point in going around saying you are straight.
Gay identity, unlike homosexuality is quite new in terms of things. Romans had same sex relations they didn't identify as people identify as gay today, but even then there are accounts of people that were exclusively homosexual, like Elagabalus.
You are one of the most closed-minded people I have ever met. Everything you say is such a phoned-in stock response from the homo handbook.
Labels are not just words, they are ideas and all sorts of complicated information come attached as well. You know this and yet you ignore it. It's the same reason you read "faggot" and discount everything I could have to say. When I'm talking about the label I'm not talking about the word, I'm talking about everything that comes in the package.
You're part of the problem, and I don't say that lightly. Your viewpoint is rigid because you follow rigid guidelines set for you. The Kinsey scale is a horrible model and my whole point is that it isn't factual. There is no sliding scale, people are just reacting in various ways to stimuli all human brains would regard as titillating.
>Romans had same sex relations they didn't identify as people identify as gay today
No they didn't. They occasionally had thigh sex. Some wealthy people who purchased prostitutes and slaves (non-citizens that you could penetrate) sometimes had a very noticeable preference for men, and they were viewed as shameful deviants 100% of the time. People characterize the Romans as gay as evidence of some kind of sexual enlightenment when in reality they were just practicing that incidental bisexuality I described before. From that view they were just old-fashioned and did whatever they pleased, which 90% of the time was vaginal sex for the purpose of procreation.
OP here, thanks!
yes, please back to topic.
I am curious. I want to see if it arouses me and if I am capable of pleasing a woman. I want to see an actual wet vagina in front of me, first of all just have the experience without judging it. Also, it would give me an ego boost to be able to seduce a woman and get laid, just like any hetero man I guess. I want to experience that. And then, I just think it would be cool to be bi, to know what it's like to be a hetero man as well. In general, I am trying to discover what kind of man I am and how to feel like myself and a proud man. Just being gay doesn't feel like totally me, but totally straight neither.
Word of warning: the best conditions for this are to meet an inexperienced virgin and explore for yourself. Women you could get without much effort just to fool around with are generally going to be an inferior product in every way, and it will probably be a little more gross than it should be. The best way is unironically to find a woman worthy of marriage, but then you're sort of at an impasse.
Kind of walking into a complicated situation here. You shouldn't fool around with sluts if you want to enjoy this, but if you don't want to marry a woman, well...
Vaginal sex has a very low rate of transmission compared to buttsex. He could be as pozzed as they come and she would still not catch it from him.
I am just afraid that the woman would take it personally if I am not aroused (the first time maybe)
and I am maybe a bit pussy about it haha
I notice that girls check me out, noticed them getting aroused of me in a handful of occasions and also had some direct flirting happen
I think my advantage to straight men is that I am a bit more sensitive than most of them
I can relate to the women taking it personally, but let me tell you - it's all about how to tackle the situation. I recently started seeing a woman, gorgeous body. I love eating her out (happened five minutes after the first time we kissed, two weeks ago). Made her come twice from oral and fingering. She was blown away, but I was unable to have successful intercourse with her, probably due to too much alcohol. This happened three more times the following week (I drink a lot and stay up way too late during xmas break.) I'm borderline worried about erectile dysfunction, but had no problem when I fucked my +5 years long-term lover three days ago, so could also be that I'm slightly intimidated by this new chick.
Anyway, I made sure she knew that it wasn't her, and that it probably was the drinking. She was well pleased anyway, because she's not used to cumming from oral, and I treat her really nice, and we just laughed about it.
Tl;dr if the girl is into you, and you don't fuck up by making it into a huge thing and being all insecure about it, you shouldn't be worried about making her feel bad for not being able to return the favour or arousing you enough for you to be able to penetrate her. Just have a good time and come across as a secure and pleasant guy at all times. Not every sexual experience has to end in fucking and ejaculating.
Best way to do that is to approach as much as possible, and be as outcome-independant as possible. Just have fun, and eventually some girl will do most of the work. Good luck, wet pussy is incredible!
>Vaginal sex has a very low rate of transmission compared to buttsex. He could be as pozzed as they come and she would still not catch it from him.
Really? I did see that statistic, but this page is saying otherwise. From first page of Google
Hello, OP. I used to have this dilemma when I was younger, but have since come to conclusions based around the thought process evidenced by this gentleman here
First, some background: My entire life people called me gay before I even knew what the fucking word meant. I was always quiet, sensitive, and I like sympathizing with people. When you go to a middle school in the ghetto, that kind of behavior doesn't fly very well. Thus, my title of "gay" was coined.
Because of my title, I thought I HAD to date guys and that I HAD to like it. This is just how human though processes work; if you sort yourself into a group, or, in my case, other people sort you into that group, you're more likely to behave to the expectations of said group. The very idea of putting yourself in the group of "homosexuals" is enough to fuel actions that are appropriate for those people.
Anyway, a lot of faggotry and cum-guzzling happened until I turned 21, when I had a HUGE crush on a female in a class I had. I took a leap of faith, ignored the fact I was "gay," and asked her out. We dated for about 4 months before I had to move for a job, but I thoroughly enjoyed the time I spent with her, and still keep in touch. Ever since then, I sort of began to realize that maybe sexuality is more complex than black and white, and maybe we're just driven by the set, setting, and whatever hormone is most active at the time.
Since I enjoyed my time with the girl in question so much, I continued to date girls exclusively, cut contact with the people who I told I was "gay," and never looked back.
Tl;dr: Exclusive homosexual is not real, anyone can be attracted to anyone if there's enough internal or external pressure, cognitive dissonance does some crazy shit, and don't fucking label yourself and do what you want.
P.S: Don't get offended by the word faggot, you faggot. It's a commonly used word and the fact you're showing offense to it makes you seem vulnerable. I'm a faggot, the end.