Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
I am not one to put a label on a guy, but if his friend isn't gay, my personal description may need modification.
This old lady needs her vapors.
(And by that I mean, of course, that he kindly articulates what he wants/enjoys in bed and is also open to constructive feedback and special requests from his partners.)
@2 - the friend is definitely bi/heteroflexible. Might be repressed gay, depends on if he really prefers cock or if he's just ok with it when he can't get pussy.
Thing is, if he's bi/heteroflexible then he seems relatively normal, but if he's actually gay then he's kind of a closeted self-hating mess - but maybe young enough to grow out of it.
And thank you @18.
The straight guy also deserves a lot of credit for being mature.
There are many straight men who are terrified they might be gay, even if they never had gay sex. I have a straight male friend who always wonders if he is gay whenever he has problems with his girlfriend, or when some girl in his class doesn't like him, or whatever. Women in American society don't have the same problem. If a woman has problems with guys nobody questions her femininity. College girls can even experiment with the same gender without being considered lesbian. It's about time men had the same privilege. Gay men have no choice but to be open minded, because they are automatically outside of the mainstream. Straight men such as the one described in the letter need to make a conscious decision to reject the mainstream and accept what works for THEM. He deserves credit for making the right choice.
The two guys in the Rules of Attraction could have learned from them.
Kudos to you COCK for handling this in a very mature manner.
Oh, and your friend isn't really all that straight. He may choose to identify as straight, and he may honestly be mostly interested in girls. But if he likes repeated blowjobs, and is willing to at least give you a handjob in return, he is at least a little bit bi-curious. Perhaps a 2 on the Kinsey scale. I wouldn't press him on this because it is obviously a sensitive subject for him, and it isn't up to you to decide how he wants to describe his sexual identity, whatever that might be. For some people it doesn't count as gay if you are only on the receiving end of a blowjob. Personally, I think that is bullshit rationalization, but if it helps them maintain whatever label they feel they need to identify with, then whatever. Not my problem.
Say, how come Seattleblues doesn't comment on these?
See, we can still be helpful.
(also, Azul is right, thanks for writing back COCK)
He's doubly wrong, because:
(a) I bet there are plenty of women who aren't attractive enough for him; and
(b) he's forgetting that it's much safer to go down on female strangers than male strangers.
His empathy skills are seriously lacking. Also, he's not very good at apologizing. "I'm sorry you took offense when I meant none" isn't much of an apology.
Really? As I recall, most of the advice was to run away from the homophobic straight fratboy thugs or you'd become the next Matthew Shepherd.
Yes, a few people went off on the friend, but the fear of him being harmed was more related to involving the other two guys who the letter writer didn't really know. Most of the criticism towards the friend was more about the insensitivity he displayed in offering his friend up as a sex toy for the other two guys. Something which he, himself, seems to have recognized and apologized for.
And I just went back and read the Matthew Sheppard comments in the original thread. One was just kind of a random mention of his name without any real context. But Matthew Sheppard was mainly brought up as a counter to your claim that gay bashers don't ask gay guys to suck their dicks. The post was explaining that Matthew Sheppard left with his killers willingly because he was mislead about their intentions.
It's also worth noting that the same poster who brought up Matthew Sheppard also expressed in that same post that he felt that the fear of danger being expressed by some was overblown.
So yes, there was some fear mongering regarding the friend, but the majority of the thread was not how you described. You seem to be remembering it very selectively and you may want to go back and re-read through the whole thing again to be reminded of what was actually said.
It seems that almost half of the posts were questioning if the letter was even real, and about how hot the scenario was, and about the nature of the friendship between COCK and the friend and how the sex might be influencing and changing that.
The friend was an asshole for making the offer to the other two friends. That was a red flag that prompted others to suggest that COCK tread carefully. Which he did.
My personal advice was to tell the friend to go fuck off. And while I am glad that things worked out for COCK I still stand by that recommendation. COCK can easily find a nice gay boy to blow, who will be happy to return the favor with more than a hand job. He can do better.
Too bad I didn't really have any gay friends in college.
Ms Comment - But he should not have been ignorant after having known the LW for so long and so closely. This is a close friend of his to whom he paid so little attention that he could mistake his character to such an extent as to think a disgusting idea would be applicable to him. And there is still something extremely shady about the original proposition which has not been explained. A friend would have framed it as being able to hook the LW up with multiple partners if he really wanted a wild weekend, or something similar. Instead, the friend asked if the LW would be willing to be passed around like a party favour or a naughty cigarette. I have a sense that this had something to do with why the LW's previous visit went badly despite an upped level of servicing, but of course the two could well be unrelated.
I think there is a glimmer of growth here, but I am not going to fall into the heterocentric trap of grading straight men's success at being decent human beings on the curve you do. (Yes, quite a lot of straight men are doing much worse than the friend, but I don't see a quota requiring that 60% of the class has to pass.) They have enough privilege, thanks.
Ms Erica - To be fair to the friend, "I didn't think it would be offensive," is a shade or two better than, "I'm sorry you took offense when I meant none." At least he conceded that the idea was objectively offensive.
Mr Fortunate - Your conclusion is exactly what has me worrying. Why invest so heavily into this friendship when he can do so much better? I am really clinging to the hope that he doesn't want to be dating right now, but without as much confidence as I'd like.
Like I said I am giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming ignorance. You may be right and it might be some sort of passive agressive thing.
To be totally honestI don't really buy into male privilege anyway. The pressure to be manly may result in a lot of male CEOs, but it is hardly a privilege to be boxed into any collection of social norms.
I can give ignorance some benefit of the doubt, but it's not a constant. It's more of a mitigating factor in some circumstances than others, and for some people. Here I'd say that a straight person enjoying a kyriarchal relationship with someone underprivileged, and having enjoyed that relationship for a considerable period of time, has a pretty clear responsibility to educate his own flipping self and that maintaining his ignorance here is an action that is privileged out the wazoo.
Actually, I'm just really frustrated about the bad weekend, and worry that whatever was driving that misunderstanding might be festering only to poison things at a later time. If I were making a novel out of this, I'd be tempted to make the friend's two buddies into low-level blackmailers who decided it was no fun, to explain their apparently vanishing from the picture.
We could perhaps have an interesting discussion about how much of male privilege is really freedom from female disprivilege, but that's a side point. I was specifically referencing straight male privilege, which is, sadly, in quite a healthy state whether people believe in it or not.