Comments

1
Dan is progressing a bit at a time; a few years ago he'd have shut this guy down: YOU'RE STRAIGHT, KNOCK IT OFF.
2
I call fake.

Hot, but fake.
3
Speaking of Joey, anyone else have the Spartacus Gay Guide with him on it besides me? http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y120/Th…. I remember on the inside it had some disclaimer saying appearing on the cover does not indicate the model is gay. :)
4
What do you think?

I think you're silly for cock.
5
I scrolled down after I read this and there's a photo of Norm McDonald eating a hot dog....
6
@2: I call fake as well, and maybe it's just that I'm straight, but I don't think it's that hot. Or maybe it's just that my mind is getting away from me worrying about the hygiene of any such locker-room encounter. Don't wanna get Athlete's Wang.
7
I agree with those calling fake. Doesn't mean the advice isn't valid.
8
I'm a straight guy and I'm pretty sure I already have all the dick(s) I need. You know, one, mine. I'm having trouble imagining me craving someone else's. Obviously, your letter writer isn't having the same trouble. Maybe I'm just set in my ways and unimaginative, but I'm not sure your letter writer is as straight as he assumed he was. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Just wondering if you can be wanting to suck dick and still consider yourself a straight guy. If it was me, I'd at least consider copping to being bi.

But, yeah, probably fake.
9
Why does this Falcon Studios shit happen to the straight guy but NOT TO ME!?
10
I'm straight, and, trust me, it's hot.

11
But I'm thinking that going to a gym at 4am and eyeing another guy as he leaves the shower is not the sign of someone completely uninterested in cock. So I think the idea was there before his first glimpse of the Locker Room Beast.

It could also just be really nice for him to get hit on, for a change.

[still fanning herself... Yep, definitely hot.]
12
This reads like a Letter to Penthouse, but more believable.
13
That is one erotic scenario.
And, he was newly washed.You walked away, you say?
Not in my version..
14
LW, enjoy your erotic life.. Don't worry about labels.
15
Just curious, what about this seems fake to everyone? The size? Too Hot To Happen? What?
16
@15: For me, it's the craftsmanship of the letter. The innocent confused tone and the bit about hearing the other guy around the corner (very predator/prey) seem too good/hot to be true.

One doesn't have to be into cock to appreciate how cock can be hot to those who are into it.
17
The tone struck me as fake, the obsession with size as a source of eroticism as opposed to insecurity in a supposedly straight guy, the 'I thought I was alone' but ooops! there's a hung naked guy here too....
18
@8

Whether you are gay, bi, straight or another of the multitude of variations, it is not uncommon at all to have slight, situational and singular deviations from your norm.

Being sexually aroused by one girl in your lifetime or being curious about straight sex because of seeing a particularly attractive woman does not mean that a lifelong gay man or heterosexual woman is bisexual.

It means that human sexuality and sexual attraction are not as rigid in reality as some people attempt to define it.

Pull that stick out of your ass, Brooklyn, before someone thinks you like it.
19
This is Mr Archer's version of a wet dream, the stone that was used as the foundation for the dreadful era of postgay in which same-sexers will be erased into needing to build a separatist community from scratch.

I have a prime example before me. The Winter edition of my alumni bulletin had a big section on love. Now, there has been a Queer organization on campus for more than twenty years; I'm planning to endow an annual essay prize in my will if I can. It was always Q; there was never any organization for T, B, L or G. So in the great postgay world, the Love section of the issue followed up on the number of alumni couples and gave ten couples a paragraph to tell of their meeting. Of course all ten couples were OS, and there was no mention of any SS married couples. Classic postgay. Because we're accepted, they never have to include us any more. An illustrated examination of various types of couples on campus featured all clearly OS couples, and the articles about attraction were highly heterocentric in wording. The only mention of the existence of same-sexers came in one article about one alum, a woman making a documentary about the marriage vote in North Carolina, so that there was no celebration at all of any same-sex couple or even same-sex attraction, and a mention only in the context of the angst of trying to make straight people like us (and it was as bad as Mr Palmer standing for Parliament, I can assure you). Now for the kicker - the Spring issue letters contained only a letter from a Christian who claims to want SSCs to have rights (conveniently omitting how many) extended to OSCs but who will never accept marriage because the word is taken, and who goes on to say that No True Christian will ever give on this one and to imply that No True Christian is in any way motivated by hate when oppsoing marriage equality.

If it weren't that I predicted exactly this as soon as ever I read Mr Archer's book The End of Gay (far worse than Ms Rosen's book ), I'd have written a charming little commentary on the Winter issue. I have written a rebuttal of the Christian's letter, but the 300 word limit makes it almost pointless to send, as there's so much having to go without being addressed properly that it might do more harm than good.
20
Why does he have to be any specific sexual orientation?

Why can't a person just be sexual?

It seems like the only reason to label a person hetero, homo, or bi, is to either discriminate or give inappropriate praise for being the "correct" orientation which is still discriminating just in reverse mode.

Unless you are interested in dating the letter writing, you really shouldn't be concerned, and even then it's probably best to know whether or not he might be into dating you.

Otherwise, really what good can come from discussing another person's sexuality?

In this case your covered because he was the one who wrote in, but seriously, why can't a person just be sexual as in they enjoy sex with humans and not be focused on whether or not he sucks dick, licks pussy, or both?
21
Mr. Ven @19, I would encourage you to write a letter to your alumni magazine, stating approximately:

>> The Love section of the issue followed up on the number of alumni couples and gave ten couples a paragraph to tell of their meeting. All ten couples were opposite sex, and there was no mention of any same-sex married couples. And yet there has been a Queer organization on campus for more than twenty years, which could easily have helped find same-sex married couples for the article. Apparently acceptance means we can be erased from the picture. >>
22
DEAR LW: HULK REMEMBER THAT NIGHT! HULK FRESHLY SCRUBBED, NOTICED YOU PEEKING AS COME OUT OF SHOWER, THINK "HMMM... HULK HAVE SEXY TIME!" THEN YOU SLINK AWAY WHEN HULK SAY HI. HULK SAD. HULK CRY.

(P.S. HULK WITH @20! WHY NEED LABELS?)
23
Dan, you should have also told the OP that it is NOT COOL to have sex in the locker room at the gym. The other people there (including the staff) don't want to have to deal with stumbling onto your hookups. It's a gym - not a bathhouse. Invite him to your place or let him invite you to his. Then go crazy.
24
Tooootally fake.

This exact scenario is played out again and again and again among certain fanasty game-playing communities.
25
Ms Erica - I've already written a letter, and am just wondering whether on balance what it covers makes up for what it omits. The difficulty was just that the 300-word limit imposed a whirlwind blitz due to addressing the Christian's letter as well (a necessity now to avoid appearing to accept the testimony of the witness); what I put was spread very thin, and I only got around to about 70% of what I wanted.

Had I sent something earlier, it would have been much like what you've kindly suggested.
26
As for the unlabelers, it's one thing to say Let's Eradicate All the Labels when yours is the overwhelmingly dominant default to which everyone goes when labels are removed. It is exactly like Francis Urquhart in Prime Minister's Question Time proposing the adoption of a Unified European Language - and (Deidre Chambers) What a Coincidence that the only possible language just happened to be English. A lot of people pushing "Acceptance" realize that they can live with it as a preferable alternative to Inclusion (of course, whether that's Real Acceptance is open to interpretation). What they can't kill by discrimination they'll erase with assimilation. The Unstraight don't have to stick together then, and can therefore easily be erased from public sight because it won't be done with any accompanying antipathy. Eventually it will go too far and create a fresh need for Identity and let the cycle begin again.
27
@22: JUST SO HULK KNOW, #20 THINK MOON LANDINGS FAKE. ALSO THINK MANY OTHER DUMB CRAZY THINGS. VENOMLASH THINK HULK NICE GUY, NOT WANT DUMB CRAZY PEOPLE BEING BAD INFLUENCE ON HULK.
28
@26, are people really saying let's eradicate all labels?
LW, says he's not gay/ yet he was aroused by a homosexual encounter.. His confusion. The label ( am I gay? I'm not gay), is getting in the way of him experiencing his real sexual responses/
I am heterosexual, cause I like cock/ but, I have had sexual fantasies of being with women. My emotional/ intimacy needs are better served with women/ so what label should I apply to myself? At this point in my life, 3 yrs after divorce from a 30 yr marriage, fantasy is all I got.. At the moment. You got a label that covers my life, my reality? Of course labels help people clarify their truth/ but for many people/ it ain't either / or.
29
I was in the WAC locker room a few months ago and saw a guy who looked just like Dan. He had a big cock AND 2-Xist underwear. But he ignored me when I ogled him . . . there's just no telling these days. Even straight guys look gay.
30
Ms Lava - Plenty of people are arguing for eradicating all labels, though it seems a little past its peak. There's no reason labels have to be simple; devise one of your own by all means.
31
It is was your thing to say "Let's Eradicate All Labels"

it's what you said, with your erudite Yaleian whining snob artificial grammar.

It's not what I said or anybody else, I say be loud and proud if you if you want to, but I am also saying that if you know what it's like to be wrongfully afflicted by the hands of idiot men, it would be wise to be idiot men (or women acting like idiot men) when the world is finally coming around and the afflicted are gaining ground.

Points of view like EricaP's are wise, the way you sound, you want to be the victim, it sounds like if they had published the accurate ratio of hetero to homo, you'd still be butt hurt because then you couldn't complain.

and if I am wrong, then it is your duty to write the editor a letter, otherwise nothing happens except you get to take the opportunity to whine in a grammatically correct fashion.

Which perpetuates the problem, because if you say nothing, you won't know what the Truth is as to why they only published hetero love stories.

And if it happens again -- after bringing it to their attention -- then you'll know it wasn't an honest mistake, and plus that way you can also suggest that every submission start with their sexual orientation declaration in the title in all caps, Hetero or Homo or one of the LGBT labels

I am not saying hide, I think it would have been great for half or all of the stories to have been about same sex couples, or secret service couples, or whatever the hell were you being ambiguous about.

Idiot journalists have a tendency to be to spineless to spit out what they are really trying say, which is why they are best at create drama for a good story, but as far as tackling any of the worlds problems you can only count on them to sabotage the resolution, as then they what have nothing interesting to write about

or perhaps you could point us to the idiot Christian's letter, if this was truly published, would you point to it?

If not, why do you insist on being so... male about it?

If you aren't male Vennominon, why do you insist on taking such an utterly male point of view in these subjects?
32
Ms Clust - I think I have an established record of trying to improve labels, not eradicate them. Ms Erica may recall one or two ideas I've floated. (I encourage defying labels because it tends to lead to expanding them and making them more accurate in the end, not in using them to box people and keep them in their boxes.)

At first, I noted the omission and the heterosexist articles/illustrations primarily with the thought that it proved me right about how the postgay mindset accommodates erasure through assimilation. Had I not been severely ill at about the right time, I might have written a letter similar to that suggested by Ms Erica - the first third of the letter I've actually written runs along those lines. If anything, I was curious about a point of the little "study" of on-campus couples. It's possible that same-sex couples are too few to register a blip on "the relationship scene" (as it was called). It would have been interesting to see/start a dialogue about SSCs on campus, especially for someone in my position of not having been there since before the Queer organization formed. Are there just extremely few of them? do they hide? is there some reason they don't interact with people like the writers of the section? For all I know, the atmosphere could be extremely homophobic on campus. Otherwise, perhaps the writers were lazy thinkers expanding their own experience, which is common enough for second-year students.

What made me angry (I apologize if I sounded merely hurt; perhaps that's an effect of my trying to avoid Ragemode) was seeing the letter from a Christian alumnus of a few years after me. It was largely a typical anything-but-the-M-word letter. I greatly disliked a clumsy attempt at the end to jump from not all Christians being motivated by hate to blanket immunity for ALL Christians opposed to SSM. It was highly reminiscent of letters I saw from Libertarians during marriage initiatives saying that, while they had no animus against SSCs at all and wished them equal treatment under the law, their desire to see the government get out of recognizing marriages entirely meant that they could not in good conscience support the expansion of the institution.

My letter has been written for a couple of weeks now. I debate about sending it because the 300-word limit made it impossible to address enough points sufficiently, and I fear it would do more harm than good. Looking at my letter now, I had to skimp or pass on:

* defining "postgay" for those unfamiliar with the term
* agreeing that, in an ideal world, I'd have created a new institution instead
* ruminating on whether such a marriage alternative should (or not) be SSC only
* exemplifying how alternatives to the M word are not being accepted
* chiding the Christian letter for a major case of bi erasure
* pointing out the attempt to jump from Not All Like That to None Like That At All
* pointing out how some Christians HAVE had changes of heart on equality
* the extent of dislike for same-sexers only being mentioned in the context of our wanting to make straight people like us, while not faulting the article making the mention, which seemed quite even-handed and would have fit well into a hypothetical section of the bulletin called Queer instead of Love

just to go from the top. I did deal reasonably to my own satisfaction with:

* how anything-but-marriage had a golden opportunity Christians declined
* explaining that the effect of anti-equality matters exponentially more than motivation

I could always chop and change a bit, but anything in 300 words or less seems likely not to be able to be sufficiently comprehensive. But you have given me a good idea. I believe I shall contact the Queer organization with a general inquiry about what campus life is like these days regarding inclusion. There could be some interesting dialogue here.

(I did also check the original section, which was written by four second-year students and which included solicited contributions from two (female) professors. Three of the four authors have almost-universally-female names, and the fourth has a name in common use by those of various genders but about three or four times more likely to be attached to a woman of the age in question than to a man. I don't draw any generalization from this, but just mention it for clarification.
33
Thank You Venn, obviously my assertions about your point of view and where you are coming from were flat out wrong.

I appreciate the strength of your character, as I am sure it was not easy to take the time to clearly explain your situation to someone who just got done wrongly insulting you.

It's also hard to find will to write thorough explanation when it appears that the person has already closed their mind off to honestly attempting to understand your position

Thank You, it takes a person of extraordinary character to do what you just did. Doing your best to right my wrong

The reason I am so passionate about these topics is because I am worried that the world will not take advantage of the peculiar circumstances we are finding ourselves in.

It isn't easy nor it is convenient to practice honesty and have the masses recognize how human societies have a serious problem of confusing Love with hatred, that our blindness is enabled by good intentions, but failures to honestly ask ourselves important question in regards to whether or not we are truly doing the right thing.

Some of the most gross injustices carried out by humans are born from people believing they are trying to help, that they are doing the right thing

And it's those types of actions (wrong actions taken by people with essentially a decent and caring heart) that will lead to society's failure and collapse, as people who do wrong with good intentions are actually more dangerous then the truly wicked, uncaring, and e wrong evil people.

Cold blooded criminals are easy to deal with because they are easily recognized.

The world is stepping into a space that there is miraculous levels of opportunity for the human race to correct major problems that will condemn US as a species. Never before has the opportunity for such a great understanding of each other presented itself to so many people and never before has that ability to understand each other been so easily attainable.

In the past it would have taken impossible levels of work to come to a point of understanding, these days it can happen by simply being open to accepting a peaceful world where people of all walks of life are able to respect those they cannot Love, for whatever reason

Please wait...

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.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.