Evidences that All Straight men have a sexual need for men

Discussion on what it means to be straight acting, whether it's good, bad or indifferent.

Moderators: selective_soldier, furface

Evidences that All Straight men have a sexual need for men

Postby masculinity » Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:21 am

The concept of Sexual Orientation says that:

1. The masculine, normal males who are the majority are sexually into women, constantly and exclusively.

2. A minority of 'different'* males are into other men.

* These days, it is not politically correct to call gays effeminate, so they're just called 'different'.

If even the straight males had a sexual interest, (a strong sexual interest, which could even be exclusive), in other men, then the entire concept of dividng people on the basis of sexual orientation would be useless.

Of course, when you force a particular people to fit into a certain scheme, however unnatural the scheme is, after a period of time, the reality starts to seem like the 'unnatural' is natural. Therefore, the West of today, does seem to be divided strictly into men who like women (masculine majority) and men who like men (feminine minority).

However, look at any other society, and you'll find that most men indulge in sexuality with other men. And not only that, as the restrictions, conditioning and hostility in the society against man to man sexuality decreases and as acceptability increases, as men are given more and more freedom to be their true selves, men start preferring their sexual relationships with men more than those with women ... to a point that sex with women, for most men, start to be just a social responsibility in order to sustain reproduction, while their real romantic and sexual interest lies in (an)other man/ men.

Here, I seek to gather both scholarly and anecdotal evidence to put forward my case.

I'd appreciate your comments.
Last edited by masculinity on Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Gays are a different species altogether from men (and women). They're not "men who like men," they are "third gender who like men."

http://youth-masculinity.blogspot.com
masculinity
Member
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 1:44 pm
Location: India

Postby masculinity » Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:26 am

Evidence no. I

Please note that although, the writer of this article, apparently a flaming gay, uses the words 'homosexuality' and 'homosexuals' to talk about sexuality between men, the use of such Western terms to describe these are quite out of place here.

Quotes from a scholarly article by Rictor Norton... Although, Rictor is interpreting the data wrongly, in order to support the homo-hetero divide, the data do tell a different story about men.

http://rictornorton.co.uk/social12.htm

After marrying a woman, the Cretan man nevertheless continued to live in the male barracks; ‘It is thus most likely that even if an adult male had both a male "partner" and a wife, he would actually live with the former rather than the latter, at least until he was relatively old’ (Boswell 1994). It is quite possible to consider the Cretan model as evidence for predominant homosexual relationships with temporary and minor heterosexual interludes. Several studies of institutionalized homosexuality in Melanesia have also found that the transition from homosexual youth to heterosexual adult is not so abrupt and easy as it is often portrayed; for example, among the Marind once the youth achieves adult status and becomes the dominant inseminator of a younger partner ‘he is in no hurry to marry as he finds much gratification in his status’, and even after marriage Marind men continue to engage in homosexual affairs throughout their lives (Creed 1994).

... the Etruscans were bisexual, as they did have wives and courtesans, but according to the fourth-century Greek philosopher Theopompus ‘They certainly have commerce with women, but they always enjoy themselves much better with boys and young men.’

... In Rome in the second century it seems ‘that most young men had male lovers’ (Greenberg 1988). Sextus Propertius in the first century BC ‘prayed that his enemies would fall in love with women, and his friends with boys’.

... But Greenberg really overstates the case when he says that ‘Indifference to the sex of a sexual partner’ is manifest in the works of Martial, Catullus, Philostratus, Horace, Plautus, Tibullus, and Meleager. Virtually all readers, scholarly and ordinary, straight and gay, would agree that the love poetry addressed by Horace and Philostratus is artificial whereas their love poetry to boys and young men has the ring of truth and sincerity.

... In indigenous cultures where institutional homosexuality has been documented, ethnographers point out the usual fact that these relations are integrated within larger heterosexual relations and then conclude that they both are part of a larger nonspecific category of sexuality. But a closer look at such societies often reveals not only the existence of the hetero/homo dichotomy, but a preference for homosexual relations. For example, ‘Lower-class women and female prostitutes are readily available to the men of the Swat Pukhtun of Northwest Pakistan, but they consider the most satisfying form of sexual gratification to be anal intercourse with a bedagh (passive male partner).’ Among the Swat, pederasty has declined mainly because they can no longer afford to have several bedaghs in their retinue, though adult men nevertheless continue to have young male lovers (Greenberg 1988). The bisexual net is similarly cast over the ancient Celts because they had boys as well as wives, but what Diodorus Siculus actually said, in the first century BC, is that ‘the men are much keener on their own sex’.
Gays are a different species altogether from men (and women). They're not "men who like men," they are "third gender who like men."

http://youth-masculinity.blogspot.com
masculinity
Member
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 1:44 pm
Location: India

Postby furface » Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:31 pm

Image
"Do not ascribe malice to that which can be reasonably explained by ignorance ... or incompetence."
Isaac Asimov
User avatar
furface
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:35 pm
Location: The Colony, TX

Postby solat » Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:06 pm

I was going to respond something like this.-

masculinity wrote:Here, I seek to gather both scholarly and anecdotal evidence to put forward my case.


All conjective. There's no way of making a scientific assessment for the simple reason it's impossible to set up the circumstances to do so. In the case of ancient references, there's no way to establish the biases of those whose written record survives, mostly in attenuated form, and whether their views reflect their wider society in any meaningful way. Quite likely, their writings reflect the views of an elite, exclusive minority, reflected in the fact they were literate.

In more modern times, what we have are reflections of aspects of various societies in which sexual accommodations have been alloted more or less approved forms and roles. The anecdotal views of commentators are just that, and prove little or anything.

The whole argument is ultimately pointless except where it intrudes on the ability of individuals to make and act on thier sexual preferences, whatever they are.

When that occurs, it's generally a reflection of religious imperatives of one sort or another, coupled with the assertion of state authority for whatever reason.



But I'm thinking a more appropriate response would be something like this:


furface wrote:Image
X2!
User avatar
solat
Moderator
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:03 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby masculinity » Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:06 am

solat wrote:All conjective. There's no way of making a scientific assessment for the simple reason it's impossible to set up the circumstances to do so.

It isn't? You think all these scholars are wasting their time, merely speculating on things in the air? You think the historians are frauds just like the psychiatrists? Would you question them if they said that the ancient world was divided into homo-hetero and a majority heterosexuals, if gave you evidence...? Do you believe that the ancient humans had nuclear heterosexual families like today's West?

You are discounting the scientific/ academic documentation, only because it does not suit you. But this is completely unacceptable, even on a non-scientific forum.

Of course, biological science is incapable to prove stuff like human sexuality, simply because it is not advanced enough to do so, so expecting a 'proof' there is again like evading the issue. For a long time, the scientific institution held that 'homosexuality' was a disease, and they just wouldn't listen to you guys. What happened after that... was there a scientific breakthrough that changed their mind... no... you guys just forced them with your political power to change science. That is how the 'scientific' proof you are talking about works. But, any science which is wrong can be challenged and exposed to be so.

So, let me see you guys expose the weaknesses of this historical documentation, rather than summarily writing this off.

Whatever the values or circumstances were, it is clear that straight men did indulge in sexual and romantic bonds with other men, and that they preferred them to relations over women.

solat wrote:In the case of ancient references, there's no way to establish the biases of those whose written record survives, mostly in attenuated form, and whether their views reflect their wider society in any meaningful way. Quite likely, their writings reflect the views of an elite, exclusive minority, reflected in the fact they were literate.


a). You're again assuming that the Historians don't know their job. When they arrive at a conclusion, usually, they do a lot of research, consult a lot of different sources and then arrive at a conclusion.

b) not all of these societies are ancient ones. A couple of them survived till the modern times and were documented live, like the Melanisian tribes.

And I have other evidences from the contemporary world, that has been verified by modern scholars and seen with their own eyes. :wink:

solat wrote:In more modern times, what we have are reflections of aspects of various societies in which sexual accommodations have been alloted more or less approved forms and roles. The anecdotal views of commentators are just that, and prove little or anything.


These are Historians not ordinary commentators. The 'views' of the commentators are not 'anecdotal', they are rigorous and scientific. Otherwise, they would be shred to pieces by the scientific community. They teach in universities and write authoritative books on the subject.

solat wrote:The whole argument is ultimately pointless except where it intrudes on the ability of individuals to make and act on thier sexual preferences, whatever they are.

I don't know what you mean here. Can you be more to the point?

But I sure know one thing, that the documents are irrefutable. Even for the unaccepting mind, it surely is a reason for further investigation into the beliefs and values one has grown up with.

And, more important than that, if the evidences (empirical as well scholarly) from all the different areas, including the following:

- natural world (animals)
- History of humans
- Contemporary societies (both direct and indirect evidences)

point to the same thing, then it is an indisputable fact.

solat wrote:But I'm thinking a more appropriate response would be something like this:
furface wrote:Image
X2!


I have to say this to both of you:
Image
Gays are a different species altogether from men (and women). They're not "men who like men," they are "third gender who like men."

http://youth-masculinity.blogspot.com
masculinity
Member
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 1:44 pm
Location: India

Postby masculinity » Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:47 am

Is the above a site supported spam? :lol:
Gays are a different species altogether from men (and women). They're not "men who like men," they are "third gender who like men."

http://youth-masculinity.blogspot.com
masculinity
Member
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 1:44 pm
Location: India

Postby Daknee » Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:18 am

masculinity wrote:Is the above a site supported spam? :lol:


It has to be it's on just about every thread here. :lol:
User avatar
Daknee
Member
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:56 am
Location: Phoenix

Postby furface » Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:25 pm

Administrator's Note:

This topic and thread has run its course and is locked.

Anyone wishing to pursue this subject is directed to masculinity's site on the subject: http://youth-masculinity.blogspot.com

Reiterations of this topic will be deleted.

End Administrator's Note
"Do not ascribe malice to that which can be reasonably explained by ignorance ... or incompetence."
Isaac Asimov
User avatar
furface
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:35 pm
Location: The Colony, TX


Return to Straight Acting Men

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron