@96 Ricardo
(As always) I'm not here to defend tim browne saying something like:

"rampant sex addicts or in a really weird corner of the closet"

That assertion is certainly as you say "unwise", because it doesn't logically follow. And maybe as you say it's "prejudice".

But when you say "germ-phobia" I'm reminded of your position on casual sex without condoms, so I guess we're talking about condom-free gloryholes.

I don't think phobia is why one would not completely expose oneself (let alone one's unsuspecting partner!) to high risk of infections with serious health impacts. So I'll say what I've said about this before:

Exposing oneself to so much risk that's so serious is a psychological issue (but not 'phobia'). In our society people who expose themselves or others to so much risk are not considered healthy. tim's dumb assertions are wrong; what it is is self-harm/self-destructive behavior, which I urge people to work on.


Sportlandia, I really don't understand your comment @88. We need a sarcasm indicator (if you are being sarcastic or just dismissive or if you are in fact agreeing with me, I can't tell).

"@73 Yesyes, women are just fine dating bi guys, they just don't want to date guys who have sex with other guys because they're likely to get an STD. Important distinction"


@91 The vibe I got from her letter is that she wanted to encourage him to explore his "real sexuality" and didn't perceive it as a threat to their relationship. Maybe she was just downplaying that element? IMO, the idea that man in a monogamous relationship who doesn't mind if his GF hooks up with other women doesn't sound too extreme to me (ahem) so this doesn't seem unusual either. Obviously LW should take care of prioritize her own health but - let's assume he is only doing what he says he does, just gloryhole servicing - how safe does he realistically need to be? There's a 100% chance they both have the herpes virus and while yes there are ways to transfer an STD from a cock to a pussy via a third party mouth and not en-scene, it seems low risk (sorry I know it's discussed in this thread but I'm presently too lazy to re-read it). But I dunno, there are couples (woe be them) that are married and monogamous and still use condoms and such. I know a married woman who revealed she'd never, ONCE, had skin-to-skin sex! [the irony is that I find sex with a condom - and I'm saying this as a straight man - just as pleasurable; it's just annoying to take on or off or have them handy]

@92 I'm not responsible for what other people say and I'm not going to stop giving back as I get. Go get therapy yourself for your cant-stop-poking-the-hornets-nest-and-dont-understand-why-they-keep-stinging-me-itis; or better yet, you and BDF can get group rates for your uppity-beckies-who-cant-mind-their-own-fucking-business problem. There's a pill for it.


@104 IMO it's pretty blatantly sarcastic - but my point is that you're making a delineation by offering two explanations for the same thing. Yes, they don't dislike bi men FOR being bi, just for doing things that one could presume bi men do. It's like those folks who don't hate black people, just big lips and dark skin.


Ricardo, men’s public toilets and some private ones stink of urine. If it’s clean enough to have a shit it’s clean enough to get a bj? No. I stand by my response and I think it’s about shame, this behaviour. Not eroticism. Or a blend of the two.


I understand that historically men had to hide, finding each other in toilets. Good a place as any.
If my in denial bi bf was off behaving like this, I’d not be having the patience of this lass. He’d be gone gone gone. Let him fathom his confusions elsewhere.


Lava @101, yes, I could. So could you. But it's our choice to engage when someone makes an offensive and ignorant comment. Sometimes I choose to engage, other times I decide not to bother.


@97. Lava. Thank you! New decade, new leaf. I'm waiting until at least next week before getting up anyone's nose--wink wink!

I find glory holes super hot--the idea of them slightly more than the reality. In my experience there are always (well, usually) more people wanting to suck off than stick through. Some of the first gay experience I had at 17, 18 was at glory holes--but I can't remember how much, in that if you're willing to suck guys off at that age, you usually have the energy and appetite ... well, not to go without.

All my recent experience with glory holes has been in the bowels of clubs. If there's an app for holes--and there's an app for everything--I don't know what it is. I would think there's a sense in which the anonymity caters, more than average, to men who are closeted or eg heterosexually married.

@108. Lava. There are female glory holes (beds) in sex clubs and dungeons, and they're always in use.


Curious @ 103 - And what exactly is my position on casual sex without condoms that you are reminded of? I fail to see the link you're trying to establish. I never had anything ressembling risky sex in such environments (in the sense of "risk of transmission"; of course, it's somewhat risky, that's part of the thrill).

Things have changed since my cruising days thanks to the introduction of effective HIV drugs, but they have changed across the board: people are now having unsafe sex in every context. It has nothing to do with the place, it has to do with the fact that human beings are human, and given a chance, they'll do something silly.

I said "germ-phobia" because TB's reaction is typical of those who equate having sex in a non-pristine environment to having unsafe sex (that may have been a bit of an overreach, I'll admit, but in my experience, they systematically go together). They seem unable to distinguish between household germs and dangerous life-destroying viruses and bacteria. Back in the aids day, those people were always the first to be surprised that they had gotten HIV when they'd only had unsafe sex with "clean-looking" guys... whereas I'm still HIV-negative.

Lava @ 107 - First: I cleaned toilets for four years in my youth. On average, the women's were filthier. Second: Have you ever had sex in public toilets? Have you ever talked to people who do? Perhaps ten percent of the men there are in the closet. The others just go there because it's a quick, convenient and thrilling way to have sex. You have zero knowledge of what you're talking about, so your opinion is nothing more than that, an uninformed opinion. And we all know what they say about opinions...


@111 Ricardo
Oh I see "germ" wasn't about STIs, but about the bathroom environment. My bad.

And I see I also wrongly extrapolated that the gloryhold sex in discussion was condom free.

So I never should have spoken up, and let's pretend I didn't instead of talking about condoms again (I think you and I've had that discussion, though I could be mistaken; in any case let's not repeat it).


GHs make me think of a lot of vintage authors upon whom one could rely to wax nostalgic for straight-chasing.

The only thing that pops into mind about toilet stalls was a parody novel from thirty-odd years ago in which some outlandish number of men crammed themselves into one and went at it in a way that seemed like seeing how many people would fit in a telephone booth.


Don't date messy closet cases - higher emotional risk, higher disease risk (people ashamed of the sex they have are MUCH less likely to use protection, as that usually requires planning ahead, which requires acknowledging their desires to themselves, which they're actively trying to deny if closeted). And that doesn't even get into how long you can date someone who frequently make jokes-not-jokes about zir sexuality before it becomes intolerable. DTMessA.

@1: Classic Onion; well played.

@3: Nah. People can insist they're straight all they want, and I'm under no obligation to believe them if their behavior doesn't match. I strongly suspect bisexuality (qua desire) is WAY more prevalent than we think based on self-identification rather than behavior, while cultural homophobia/biphobia/misogyny (while some isn't, it's clear a lot of homophobia is rooted in men fearing the kind of misogynistic objectification and abuse to which they subject women or at least to which they agree it's culturally acceptable to subject women; one also sees that kind of projection a lot with fear of racial equality). "Straight" men whose behavior is homoerotic or homosexual (sometimes or exclusively) are simply in denial.

@14: It's not just recently, and it's a function of demographic statiatics plus gendered social roles. Vastly more women than men read and write to advice columns, and social pressure for women to be accommodating of men means that a substantial proportion of letters to a relationship/sex advice column are going to be in that vein. Lower proportions of published letters in that vein are probably a function of editorial selection for different letter types for the sake of variety/interest for the column.

If you want to get REALLY depressed about women putting up with absurd bullshit from men, read through the Captain Awkward archives; some of them are harrowing (Glass Guy/Dude may still be the most nightmare-inducing).


@59: Nah - the specific guy in question is having likely-unprotected sex and was lying about it. CPOS: DTMFA.


Curious @ 112 - I've never been good at pretending things that happened didn't, but I won't hold it against you (tongue firmly in cheek). This is a discussion, not an exam.


@117 Ricardo
"I've never been good at pretending things that happened didn't"

How about pretending things that didn't happen did, like when enjoying fiction books and films? ("suspension of disbelief") I hope you're good at that!


Curious: I am only able to suspend my disbelief as long as the inner logic of the (more or less) fictional world is respected to a T. Any little detail can make me snap out of it, like incoherences in time (I still think the original Star Wars had a dubious timeline, and have held that criticism every since I was 12), and I won't enjoy the rest. I saw Parasite the other day, and two little things bothered me; so although I found it enjoyable, I also consider it too flawed for all the rave reviews it's receiving, and (in my never very humble opinion) every critic who called it a masterpiece should find themselves another line of work as far as I'm concerned.

That's why I no longer read fiction, as you can sometimes miss such anomalies in a movie when things are going too fast, but not in a book.

But that's me, Ricardo the nitpicker.


@119 Ricardo
Wow, that's very interesting. I'm glad I asked, though I don't know why I did, I thought it was no more than wordplay.

I didn't know that was a thing. (I do know people who can't abide unreal/unmodern fictional elements. For example that dragons aren't real, or that period clothing isn't customary, pulls them completely out of enjoyment.)

Now I feel all the more lucky that it feels very natural to me. I see the anomalous stuff, and I can note it to remember it, but after a moment doing that I I can pop right back to being warmly ensconced in the embrace of the fictional world. I have a sense that suspension of disbelief might come more naturally to me than average.

Perhaps relatedly, even IRL on some level I feel like /anything/ is possible; it's not so much that I /think/ that, it's that I try hard to be open to it being true, because I don't want disbelief to ever get in my way of realizing things that are true. Thus for example I'll take a class in qigong ('energy' work) and be very surprised to find it's even possible let alone that I can do it.


Cocky @ 123 - Indeed, but not only that. Public toilets get cleaned regularly, like every hour or two. Adult bookstores, every day. Grindr hookups' places? I don't know.


John Hortsman @ 114
I like your take on lack of protection as a reflection of how one feels about themselves. Sadly this is often apparent in other aspects of life.
Suggestion if I may… it helps connection with your comments when you add the screen name to the post number you refer to, especially when we have more than one page of posts.

Dr. Zhivago @ 116
You finally got it right. We don’t want our exes back, yet appreciate your major areas of concentration in curing different types of human infections.

Ricardo @ 119
“every critic who called it a masterpiece should find themselves another line of work as far as I'm concerned” is often the problem I have with current films. I strongly suspect that in addition to owning the theaters the studios also own the critics. Capitalism is rigged.

Doctor strikes again @ 120
Thanks, we got it.


@120. Dr Elighaloa. No, you are making it up.

@122. cockyballsup. Maybe I should look this app up; it might be of more use to me than Grindr, an app on which, in my experience, men solicit dick pics of bottoms. There's something very hot about casual sex in a funky washroom...


CMD @ 125 - Your answer to "Dr. Zhivago" is a classic!

As for critics (movies or music), I simply think the new generation lacks the knowledge to make valuable judgments. When Pitchfork (the self-billed "most trusted voice in music", hahaha) released a list of the 200 best albums of the 60s, I, quite a fan of that period, thought that they were totally missing most of what had been good about it (in all its hippy naïveté) and had merely produced a hipster's bluffing guide to the music of the 60s.

I no longer read Pitchfork.


The heart wants what the heart wants. His heart wants cocks lots of them! As many as he can get.

Bi now gay later.

Homophobes always turn out to be gay. Thats why they use glory holes so they can keep their secret yo!

    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

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