[CH-Toronto]

A few weeks ago you probably remember Salon's article which was essentially 'pedophile acceptance'. Somehow they've topped themselves.

The “Bro Job”: Why “straight” men have sex with each other

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/12/the_bro_...r_partner/

Posting for posterity

Quote:

At this point, lesbian sex (the porny kind) is practically considered vanilla. But when it comes to two self-identified straight guys getting together, we tend to stiffen up, and not in the fun way.

The term “bro job” generally refers to sex acts taking place between heterosexual men. The phenomenon was recently explored by Dr. Jane Ward in her book Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men, who suggests it’s a lot more common than most people may think.

Sex therapist Susan Block agrees. “I hear about it going on in Saudi Arabia, in Latin America – I talk to guys from all over the world who are doing this. In all different cultures.”

Block explained to AlterNet that sexual activity between self-identifying straight males is one of the most common topics introduced during her therapy sessions with men.

“We’ve shut down on the phenomenon of male sexuality. Now, we’re starting to ease up on that natural fluidity of men. But it’s always been there,” she says. “Sometimes you hide it because you don’t want to suffer from society’s punishments.”

Of course, identity politics is a messy game. And while arousal makes up just one piece of the very complex puzzle that is sexual orientation, it is a major player. We’re quick to assign the “bisexual” label to those for which sexual arousal is not dictated by gender. But it’s not always a welcome title. “I am often forced to call myself ‘bi,’ but I rarely find labels appropriate,” says model Paul LaBlanc (a pseudonym).

As Block explains, sexual orientation goes a lot further than the sexual activities we engage in. “I think to a great degree when people think about their own sexual orientation, they’re thinking about their hopes and dreams for themselves in terms of love and romance. Not just sex.”

In her book, Ward insists that sex acts between men are not symptoms of a suppressed gay identity, but rather an example of the fluid nature of human sexuality. Still, some ask, why men?

Ward writes, “By understanding their same-sex sexual practice as meaningless, accidental, or even necessary, straight white men can perform homosexual contact in heterosexual ways.”

“Meaningless.” A hard word to sneak by a therapist. But this notion of meaninglessness may help explain what makes sex between men appealing. “Women are full of meaning,” says Block “One of the things that men like about other men is how meaningless it is. It’s just for fun.”

That’s not to say that men don’t crave intimacy – they do, in its place. But Block suggests that for men looking for free, no-strings-attached sex, a male partner may be their best bet. Removing sex from its prescribed context is often discouraged in heterosexual relationships. If you’re looking to have sex for sport, doing it with another man might make some sense.

Professional dominatrix Sandra LaMorgese once told AlterNet, “I’m dominant in every aspect of life but I’m not going to have a submissive partner. I need someone to dominate me. That way I get the balance too.” LaMorgese refers to herself as an “alpha submissive.” It’s an experience that many men crave as well. And some will step outside the bounds of gender to achieve it.

LaBlanc explains, “I tend strongly towards being dominant with women and submissive with men. Not totally in either direction, it’s not that simple… But it is clear that I take on different roles with different genders.”

“To me, no man has the soft indescribable beauty of a woman. And no woman can ‘take me’ the way a man can.”

There are other reasons self-identified straight men might have sex with each other. Block explained that some men are looking for the BDSM element, which can involve humiliation by means of another penis, a larger penis. There’s the curiosity bit, the desire to be with someone ‘who looks like me.’ There’s also mutual masturbation. And then there’s the simple fact that males manifest their sexual excitement in much more obvious ways than women, and that’s something a lot of guys find arousing, even relieving. Of course, condensing the scope of sexual desire isn’t something that can be done in a thousand words or so.

The recent wave of interest in this not-so-recent phenomenon says something about the our current sexual climate. We can now admit that “bro jobs” are happening, and happening often. Though where they take place is often indicative of how people expect others to digest the news of these rendezvous. “I hear a lot about secrets,” says Block.

The fact that society is starting to have more open discussions about sex is good. The fact that society only wants to discuss certain kinds of sex leaves something to be desired. But if we take a step back we might find that what traditionalists deem “unnatural” sexual behavior (i.e. anything outside the confines of heterosexual marriage) can be fairly intrinsic. However those participating in them want to self-identify is up to them.

Block suggests we take a look at our closest “kissing cousins,” the Bonobo. In her book, The Bonobo Way: The Evolution of Peace Through Pleasure, Block explains that the apes often engage in what’s known as “penis fencing,” whereby two males will rub their erect penises against each other’s.

She told us, “They stop each other from killing each other by rub rub rubbing, until they come come come. And then have a banana together or something,” adding, “I think there’s a very positive and certainly very natural aspect to this.”

First of all, I don't believe this for a fucking second. I can understand being gay. I can understand being "bi". I am NOT accepting - "I'm straight - but I have sex with other men." That's up there with the craziest things I've ever heard.

Second, scarily enough - I can see this happening as thirst in countries go up. Where straight will need to resort to having sex with other straight men in order to get a fix. Hear me out - in 25+ years I can definitely see it being "accepted" in our society.

Third, it's clear that this entire article is just more media manipulation to make 'gender-fluidity' accepted. No one is straight anymore. Women don't have to be women. Men don't have to be men. We're all hermaphroditic snails and worms and whatever happens- happens.

Fuck.

[2Wycked]

Although they have read extensively about them, I'm not sure the readers of Salon have met an actual heterosexual man.

[SamuelBRoberts]

If you have sex with other men, you are gay. That's what the word means.
I thought being gay was supposed to be a point of pride for these people. Why are they trying to say that you can have sex with a man and be straight?

It's like the famous onion article.

[wi30]

I don't care how much pussy you get. If you suck dick/bang/get banged by guys, you are a faggot. Men are not bi. There is no grey area.

[BortimusPrime]

Women can't understand things that are not themselves, and they'll fool around with each other. So going on women's basic assumption that men are just defective women, they assume all men are secretly gay and childishly won't admit it.

[Captainstabbin]

To quote Dice Clay - "You either suck dick or you do not suck dick. There's no in between."

[Private Man]

A long-winded essay originating from projection.

Same as it ever was.

[Hades]

The article led off with this hilarious quote -

dumb whore at salon Wrote:

Sexuality is one of the few areas where women are afforded more leniency than men

I can't honestly think of many areas in life outside of cumulative sexual partners and the Wall where women are NOT afforded more leniency than men. Society has largely agreed, in unspoken terms, that women are children and not really responsible for their actions. It has also agreed that when a woman feels slighted or wronged, a man is at fault.

(10-13-2015 08:10 PM)2Wycked Wrote:  

Although they have read extensively about them, I'm not sure the readers of Salon have met an actual heterosexual man.

I know, right?

The writing staff at Salon sees fit to publish complete bullshit that clearly only exists in somebody's imagination filed next to a bunch of shitty formulaic gay cowboy brokeback novels and the two or three episodes of the Wire featuring Omar Little and according to those goofballs the manosphere is populated with basement-dwelling trolls who deny the nature of reality. I have to get off the internet.

[Eskhander]

How much of this is her fetish?

[Soma]

Some other hard-hitting articles from Salon's Carrie Weisman:

Guys, are you squeamish about prostate play?
Think it's only for gay men? Maybe it's time to erase the stigma around heterosexual prostate massage

9 ways to make anal sex more pleasurable
Go slow and remember that lube is your friend. Once you put your mind at ease, your sphincter will follow

Does sexual behavior have to mimic sexual orientation?
What do you do when presented with a set of genitalia you didn’t think you were wired for?

etc.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

This seems like utter fiction. And projection.

It reminds me of the scene in the film "Raging Bull" where Jake LaMotta's wife is pissed at him, so she accuses him and his brother of "sucking each other's dicks" out of spite.

That's the level this article is one: It's rage-writing, on the (low) intellectual level of Italian immigrant women from 1950 who had no education, so the only way they could express themselves was through perverse profanity.

In all of my years, I've never done this, nor have any straight men ever brought it up. And I ran in very liberal arts circles with guys who had massive "dry spells." But even the most annoyingly liberal gay-friendly men were out to fuck women when push came to shove.

If this is a "thing" in other countries, I'll admit ignorance to that, but something tells me this is typical "writerly" bullshit. Meaning: Ignore the mainstream, focus on the outliers, and make the public think the weird is the norm. Then people wonder why I stopped writing.

***

But beyond that, science proves this article wrong. Remember science? Liberals supposedly "fucking love it," except when it doesn't fit their thesis.

There was a study that showed that when monitored straight men were only aroused by women, gay men by men and women by all sorts of things. The finding was that men are pretty binary in their likes while women's desires are more far-reaching.

Unfortunately, I can't find the articles on that study, but it was floating around the manosphere a few years ago. Maybe someone can find it.

Anyway, my point here is that unlike women, men need to get erect to actually have sex. And for straight guys, bringing another guy into the picture results in a limp dick. Ergo, no sex (unless you bring Viagra, but that's a bit extreme).

Does Dr. Jane Ward think men can just get it up and keep it up for anything and anyone? Clearly that's a fallacy because sometimes we even fail at that when we're aroused over women. A "doctor" who misses this important of the equation should consider turning back in her license.

I put "doctor" in quotes, because it seems Jane Ward is really a gender studies professor, not a medical doctor.

[shayneToxic]

This really wouldn't surprise me too much given the American ratios. Craigslist casual encounters is full of self-identified "straight men" courting other straight men and saying they prefer straight men for gay behavior (that way they probably don't feel as gay about it). When there's simply not enough available women for every man, no legalized prostitution, you have to expect this sort of behavior. The left probably doesn't know how to address it, since they can't really celebrate it, most of those guys would probably choose a woman given the chance.

Look on plentyoffish in ANY town in the US over 100k, choose a 5 mile radius, age 22-45. Exclude body type BBW, prefer not to say, a few extra pounds, then for men do the same (they use Big & Tall for men).

At any given time "online now" you'll see the average male/female ratio in America. Currently 210 men online now compared to 45 women in my town. Include "all body types" and it's 102 women. Men still outnumber by over 100 more. Include the fatboys, now it's 320 online, still more than three times as many men.

This ratio repeats itself like a Fibonacci sequence regardless of app or site.

Every message you get, that's hundreds of men who didn't get a message. Every chick you even get a date with, that's potentially hundreds of guys who didn't get that date. Every chick you bang, that's thousands of guys who didn't get that bang because the ratios are really that bad in the US.

Someone should make a graph illustrating this.

[RawGod]

It's a bit off the mark to talk about the quality of the writer or whether it's projection or whatever.
It's the latest stage of deliberate, scientific shaping of society through media propaganda. It's been incredibly effective so far and shows no signs of slowing down.

[MrXY]

(10-13-2015 09:03 PM)Eskhander Wrote:  

How much of this is her fetish?

It's not a fetish, it's a well thought out strategy developed over a long period of time.

[Hades]

(10-13-2015 09:23 PM)shayneToxic Wrote:  

This really wouldn't surprise me too much given the American ratios.

Incels go on dry spells.

Nobody has ever gotten frustrated from not getting laid with women and suddenly decided to log into grindr and cruise for anonymous gay sex unless they were a faggot to begin with.

[Quintus Curtius]

More propaganda.

I think the author is trying to sell the homosexual lifestyle to the uninitiated.

By claiming that "everyone is doing it," it becomes that much more "acceptable."

Devious, very devious, but likely to be effective on certain segments of the population: alienated, demoralized, effeminate men with no good role models or guidance to protect them from homosexual recruiters.

[Aquiles_Baesta_Parada]

Author:
5.6/10 WNB



Another jewel from her:

Why we need to see more fat women in porn




Wait a moment... No more playboy and more fat bitches in porn?!

[AnonymousBosch]

Why are you reading Salon?

(10-13-2015 10:08 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

I think the author is trying to sell the homosexual lifestyle to the uninitiated.

Obviously, no agenda from the researcher...



As for Weisman, it seems she's very careful to hide her identity, but what she shows doesn't look promising.



Edit: Equilius found a pic that gives off the whiff of being an old one.

[shayneToxic]

(10-13-2015 09:40 PM)Hades Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 09:23 PM)shayneToxic Wrote:  

This really wouldn't surprise me too much given the American ratios.

Incels go on dry spells.

Nobody has ever gotten frustrated from not getting laid with women and suddenly decided to log into grindr and cruise for anonymous gay sex unless they were a faggot to begin with.

Part of that matters on if someone believes in the Kinsey scale or not. There's going to be a class of men who prefer women, but still have occasional attraction to men, whether it be out of mitigation or true attraction.

One thing is true, it doesn't make sense that it's essentially easier to be gay. If someone told you that you have exactly one hour to pick someone up online or they will kill you, this person can be male or female - almost all men would have an easier time picking up another male. A passable transgendered woman is going to get attention from society-deemed straight men as well.

I've studied Kinsey, Masters & Johnson, J.M. Bailey et al in depth.

It's one of those things that is difficult to address because you essentially implicate yourself just by the mere discussion of it. America has a wildly uneven ratio that is going to manifest itself in some strange ways (especially as the social climate becomes even more anti-straight male).

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(10-13-2015 10:15 PM)Aquiles_Baesta_Parada Wrote:  

Author:
5.6/10 WNB



Another jewel from her:

Why we need to see more fat women in porn

I hate to hammer the same point over and over, but I just read the article linked above by Carrie Weisman on fat women in porn. Once again, it misses the point: Men need to have erections if they plan on jerking off. That doesn't happen when most of us see fat women, just like it doesn't happen when we see naked men. (Even thinking about this makes me recoil.)

How can a so-called sex writer have so little understanding of male sexuality?

If she's reading, it's simple. I'll explain. We discover our sexuality at around 12 or 13. We see hot women. Our dicks get hard. We see fat women, our dicks shrink like scared turtles.

The end.

OK, seriously I'll explain more. There is a reason the fat girl sat in the corner at the school dances. And there is a reason we called the gay kid "fag" and shooed him away instead of wanting to screw him. It's because both of these things are IMPEDIMENTS to our sexuality. They make our dicks shrivel and die, where as models and porn stars -- and average women, of course -- make them expand.

Our sexuality is there for us to propagate the species. That means we get it up for healthy-looking women because, biologically speaking, they connote healthier offspring. Of course, our 13-year-old bodies don't understand all this. All we know is "Hot porn star! Erection!"

And there you have it. You can talk "body-shaming" and "aesthetics" all you want. You can put women who look like Rebel Wilson in porn films. But 99 percent of men will not look at these and if they do they won't be jacking off to them -- which is the whole point of porn.

A sex writer should probably know all this. This is probably more evidence that women live in a sealed-vacuum existence because they don't have the natural curiosity of men.

[eatthishomie]

(10-13-2015 10:15 PM)Aquiles_Baesta_Parada Wrote:  

Author:
5.6/10 WNB

I'll bet you she's a SIF too.

[Suits]

Some gay men are still in the closet. What else is new?

[Hannibal]

It's about rights they said. It's not a slippery slope they said.

[PolymathGuru]

Homosexuality might be normal given certain conditions. While the behavior itself not healthy, it would be important to understand why it occurs. If a man cannot extract love from a women, perhaps their second best choice is to obtain it from men.


To quote CleanSlate's Deaf Game Datasheet

(05-12-2015 02:24 AM)CleanSlate Wrote:  

I would be remiss to not write about online game. As much as some of you guys hate it or bash it, it has been a boon for a deaf guy like me. Before the days of the Internet, it was impossible for deaf people to date anyone other than other deaf people because they couldn’t talk on the phone. In the old days, you had to approach and get her phone number and then call her. Either deaf men married ugly deaf women, or became gay. Some became celibate.

To quote Roosh's blog "Men who choose homosexuality over American women"

Quote:

One morning we got to talking at the dining room table and I asked him when he realized he was a homersexual. He said, “I didn’t know until really late. In college I tried to date girls but had trouble connecting with them. After college I couldn’t even get dates. I thought something was wrong with me. Then I experimented with a guy and it felt more natural. It felt right. It’s so much easier for me to meet men than women.”

...

Let’s put his story through the Roosh Translator™:

“I was tired of being a virgin.”

From Socrates

Quote:

"By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher."

[Teutatis]

I didn't bother to read the article, like Quintus said, this is just another propaganda piece to make it seem more acceptable and common "hey, this is normal, you should do it too", but why did she specifically referred to white men doing this and not just man in general?