discussion Hard hitting truths gay men aren't ready to hear?

[Otter]

10 minutes ago, KingDavid said:

You're telling on yourself. Nowhere did I argue people should force sexual interest in people they aren't attracted to. I said people who've internalized white supremacist ideology to the point they have no problem saying "I only find white men attractive" should stand on that ideology instead of trying to fold it into progressivism. White supremacy isn't progressive babe. 

This is not what you said  

 

I agree that people really don't need to run around stating their exclusionary sexual preferences, but even without stating them, they exist and we all ought to accept that without equating it to conscious politics.

 

Conscious politics is what will actually combat environments which create racist conditioning, trying to shame people for their attractions  or cast then as white supremacists will do nothing to move that needle. Literally everyone is informed by racist conditioning as well as neural conditioning environments (i.e familiarity, assocation of family etc)

 

Physical attraction in itself doesn't sit anywhere on any progressive spectrum, no one is entitled to your body. 

 

[KingDavid]

9 minutes ago, Otter said:

This is not what you said  

 

I agree that people really don't need to run around stating their exclusionary sexual preferences, but even without stating them, they exist and we all ought to accept that without equating it to conscious politics.

 

Conscious politics is what will actually combat environments which create racist conditioning, trying to shame people for their attractions  or cast then as white supremacists will do nothing to move that needle. Literally everyone is informed by racist conditioning as well as neural conditioning environments (i.e familiarity, assocation of family etc)

 

Physical attraction in itself doesn't sit anywhere on any progressive spectrum, no one is entitled to your body. 

 

 

I literally said stand on your white supremacist beliefs instead of trying to insert them into a "progressive" worldview because you'll fail every time. I'm not trying to convince anyone to be attracted to anyone else, I'm saying that if you have not and do not care to unpack the ways in which your "preferences" (which, funnily enough, match up with overarching white supremacist/cisheteronormative culture 99% of the time) have been informed by white supremacy, anti-blackness, etc. you should stand on them, meaning you should be who you are and be amongst like-minded people. It's not like they're hard to find; "I only like white guys" is commonplace gay cultural rhetoric; regardless of the race of the speaker.

 

The problem with gay men is that they think "I'm a champion for equality" and "I believe whiteness is the most desirable trait to seek in a romantic partner" aren't completely incongruent, and will espouse this rhetoric in a completely un-self aware way. I'm not arguing against preferences; I prefer to date tall men. I don't go up to short men and tell them they'll never be attractive to me, I don't go out of my way to demean them if I'm on a dating app, and I don't pretend my preference for height hasn't been informed by a surrounding culture that prioritizes (and uses the media to promote) the image of tall = attractive. I also don't actively discriminate against short men; plenty of them are attractive even if they aren't my "ideal."  

[Otter]

1 hour ago, KingDavid said:

 

I literally said stand on your white supremacist beliefs instead of trying to insert them into a "progressive" worldview because you'll fail every time. I'm not trying to convince anyone to be attracted to anyone else, I'm saying that if you have not and do not care to unpack the ways in which your "preferences" (which, funnily enough, match up with overarching white supremacist/cisheteronormative culture 99% of the time) have been informed by white supremacy, anti-blackness, etc. you should stand on them, meaning you should be who you are and be amongst like-minded people. It's not like they're hard to find; "I only like white guys" is commonplace gay cultural rhetoric; regardless of the race of the speaker.

 

The problem with gay men is that they think "I'm a champion for equality" and "I believe whiteness is the most desirable trait to seek in a romantic partner" aren't completely incongruent, and will espouse this rhetoric in a completely un-self aware way. I'm not arguing against preferences; I prefer to date tall men. I don't go up to short men and tell them they'll never be attractive to me, I don't go out of my way to demean them if I'm on a dating app, and I don't pretend my preference for height hasn't been informed by a surrounding culture that prioritizes (and uses the media to promote) the image of tall = attractive. I also don't actively discriminate against short men; plenty of them are attractive even if they aren't my "ideal."  

What your body experiences through conditioning isn't a "belief" though, sure some people have opaque racist ideologies at the forefront of their desire (i.e this minority group equals inferior people) but for many it's way more nuance than that. There are people who I'm attracted to who I don't even like or perceive as good people. To unpackage it or not doesn't rewire these neural pathways. That's fundamentally why I disagree that your assessment... Putting too much weighing on people's sexual selection, versus how they actually treat people is a misjudgment and pointless endeavor imo 

But I understand your wider point in the context of people being in denial or ignorant of what can inform their preferences. 

[KingDavid]

4 minutes ago, Otter said:

That's fundamentally why I disagree that your assessment... Putting too much weighing on people's sexual selection, versus how they actually treat people is a misjudgment and pointless endeavor imo 
 

 

What I'm getting at is that 9 times out of 10, when it comes to day to day LGBTQ+ dynamics and interactions, especially inter-racial dynamics and interactions, one's "passive" sexual selection and the active way they go about treating others go hand in hand. That's the uncomfortable truth gay men aren't ready to hear. White supremacist ideologies are all up and through this ***** (the LGBTQ+ "community") and we can never have a conversation about that without people coming out of the woodworks to argue against points nobody's making. Ex. "You can't force someone to be attracted to someone they aren't attracted to" -- no one's saying that? It always ends up devolving into a bunch of flimsy justifications for internalized white supremacy rather than unpacking or even directly addressing the effects of that on LGBTQ+ people. 

[Otter]

2 minutes ago, KingDavid said:

 

What I'm getting at is that 9 times out of 10, when it comes to day to day LGBTQ+ dynamics and interactions, especially inter-racial dynamics and interactions, one's "passive" sexual selection and the active way they go about treating others go hand in hand. That's the uncomfortable truth gay men aren't ready to hear. White supremacist ideologies are all up and through this ***** (the LGBTQ+ "community") and we can never have a conversation about that without people coming out of the woodworks to argue against points nobody's making. Ex. "You can't force someone to be attracted to someone they aren't attracted to" -- no one's saying that? It always ends up devolving into a bunch of flimsy justifications for internalized white supremacy rather than unpacking or even directly addressing the effects of that on LGBTQ+ people. 

Your very first statement was that if you're only attracted to white guys you're a white supremacist and that was the discussion that followed. That's a crass statement which of course is going to devolve before we eventually bring it to meaning which you elaborate on in your later responses. But we can agree to disagree about the semantics. 

 

[KingDavid]

 

5 minutes ago, Otter said:

Your very first statement was that if you're only attracted to white guys you're a white supremacist and that was the discussion that followed. That's a crass statement which of course is going to devolve before we eventually bring it to meaning which you elaborate on in your later responses. But we can agree to disagree about the semantics. 

 

Where was the lie in my first statement? If you're only attracted to white guys, you are a white supremacist. You literally believe that whiteness is a superior trait, and being white makes a man more attractive as compared to blackness, Asian-ness, etc. You're telling me Donald Trump, Brad Pitt, Timothee Chalamet, and Michael Cera are the same level of attractive, and far more attractive than the likes of Godfrey Gao or Broderick Hunter by virtue of being white? The other hard hitting truth is that gays don't want to accept that for what it is, hence you reading it and feeling the need to argue. Stop equating "white supremacist" with its most extreme forms, let's start there. As I've been saying, white supremacist ideology (even in more "benign" forms) is an everyday occurrence in LGBTQ+ interactions.

Edited August 5, 2023 by KingDavid

[Sir Galahad]

55 minutes ago, KingDavid said:

 

What I'm getting at is that 9 times out of 10, when it comes to day to day LGBTQ+ dynamics and interactions, especially inter-racial dynamics and interactions, one's "passive" sexual selection and the active way they go about treating others go hand in hand. That's the uncomfortable truth gay men aren't ready to hear. White supremacist ideologies are all up and through this ***** (the LGBTQ+ "community") and we can never have a conversation about that without people coming out of the woodworks to argue against points nobody's making. Ex. "You can't force someone to be attracted to someone they aren't attracted to" -- no one's saying that? It always ends up devolving into a bunch of flimsy justifications for internalized white supremacy rather than unpacking or even directly addressing the effects of that on LGBTQ+ people. 

I think this is an important point, many intentionally miss tbh.

 

I also find it weird the defence of racial preferences is framed as others being entitled to one's body.

[Otter]

1 hour ago, KingDavid said:

 

Where was the lie in my first statement? If you're only attracted to white guys, you are a white supremacist. You literally believe that whiteness is a superior trait, and being white makes a man more attractive as compared to blackness, Asian-ness, etc. You're telling me Donald Trump, Brad Pitt, Timothee Chalamet, and Michael Cera are the same level of attractive, and far more attractive than the likes of Godfrey Gao or Broderick Hunter by virtue of being white? The other hard hitting truth is that gays don't want to accept that for what it is, hence you reading it and feeling the need to argue. Stop equating "white supremacist" with its most extreme forms, let's start there. As I've been saying, white supremacist ideology (even in more "benign" forms) is an everyday occurrence in LGBTQ+ interactions.

There's a lot to unpack here:

1) Attraction =/= Superiority. A lot of hetero men are hella attracted to women but still see them as inferior. I may want to bang the hot twinks who go to my gymn but it doesn't mean I think they should run the country or be the predominant power in society and dominate at the expense of others (that is white supremacy). If someone is into hairy Daddies it doesn't translate into the belief that hairy daddies are superior people. 

2)Semantics are wildly loose. Someone saying they only like white men shouldn't be mistaken for them being attracted to all white men (Donald Trump). Nor does mean that have zero attraction to people outside this category. I would never go out and order pizza because there's an abundance of meals I'd much prefer over it & i have access to them, I have no issue eating pizza and will actually crave it on a rare occasion. Ultimately though, I consider myself not a fan of Pizza because of this dynamic. I think your internalizing of how people navigate their preferences is a bit too literal. 

3) There are more meaningful ways to unweave & address society's problems over calling everyone a white supremacist because fundamentally I believe the vast majority, if not all of the population is informed by white supremacy & racism. That's why I agree to disagree on the semantics. To me, it becomes reductive especially when I can just instead state that someone's dating preferences are "informed by racism" versus calling the individual an outright racist. I'm a firm believer that society can and should distinguish between the two. And subsequently, the conversation which comes from it are more meaningful and better understood.

Edited August 5, 2023 by Otter

[KingDavid]

We are literally talking about gay male culture, in which "I'm only attracted to white men" and "I openly treat non-white gay men with hostility, dismissiveness, derision, or scorn" are foundational tenets. The framework is important. Gay men do treat preferences like they mean mandatory requirements, which contributes to the experiences of non-white gay men being comparatively negative. You can say attraction is passive but choosing to exclude or demean non-white men in all manner of social situations -because- you are not attracted to them -because- they are not white is white supremacist behavior. 

[MardinBeksloy]

You don’t have to like every gay persons you meet or be part of a gay ‘click’. It’s totally okay if you feel you don’t belong, you don’t have to force yourself to be in a gay circle and do gay things. 

[themroshawottguy]

On 7/31/2023 at 4:59 PM, uusagii said:

Most of us are suffering from substance abuse/addiction and it needs to be talked about more

This is a big one. An unfortunately high percentage of fellow queer people I know struggle with substance abuse. It's really heartbreaking, and we need to be more open to exploring and overcoming it. :(

[themroshawottguy]

I've got one that I will definitely be flamed for. But the more heat I get for it, the more it proves this thread's point, so here goes nothing lol;

 

Open and/or non-monogamous relationships are destined for failure because they go against our nature. Human beings are innately jealous and possessive creatures, and we cannot have equal competitive feelings for multiple people. I personally think this goes beyond even just romantic relationships--I don't even think we can feel equally about our children, family members, or friends--but if it's all true for anything, it's especially true for romantic relationships. You cannot take somebody seriously on a romantic level and also say "you can be sexually and romantically shared with someone else." You cannot take yourself seriously and also say "I can be sexually and romantically shared." This isn't possible, and no amount of intellectualizing your communal utopian sex group pipe dream is ever going to change that very basic fact.

 

Consider this; if you have more than one lover and someone were to issue you this ultimatum;

- "You can choose one of your multiple partners to be with, but all the other(s) will be erased from your life forever, no reconciling."

If this were the decision any single one of us were to face, we all would know, even if it were deep down, who we would pick to be with and who we would ultimately let go. 

 

What's more, even if your decision to be non-monogamous is entirely based in satisfying sexual desires and has nothing to do with competing romantic feelings, it still doesn't help non-monogamy's case. Sex is an extraordinarily and irrevocably invasive and intimate act, the most so that two adults can engage in together, and if you are being intimate with someone other than your significant other, it directly challenges the sanctity of what the two of you have. If the aforementioned single-most-intimate physical act is not a state of vulnerability that you show exclusively to your S/O, and it can potentially be an acceptable thing to show to anyone, just how meaningful can your relationship ever truly be?

 

One person absolutely can be a satisfying sexual/romantic partner for your entire life. History has proven that to be the case far too many times to count. If you feel you necessarily need more than one partner in your life to be happy, the discrepancy is not in monogamy's value system, but rather in your own values and the values of those you choose to associate yourself with.

 

All of this is why humans choose only one partner. This is why the healthiest relationships are monogamous, and this is why if you are in an open/non-monogamous relationship, it is almost certainly to the detriment of your relationship's integrity.

[themroshawottguy]

On 8/1/2023 at 8:08 PM, Jude said:

Age does not matter. Size does not matter. Race does not matter.

Okay, I operate in good faith and understand what you're saying here, but please tread very lightly with statements like this lol.

[Kern]

On 8/4/2023 at 1:37 AM, J Legend X said:

Onlyfans is for people without any talents so they have to rely on their body.

Stronly disagree with this and also don't know how is that "hard hitting truth" - for who?

You can do porn to make money like you do any other job, it has nothing to do with talent 

[Comedor]

On 7/31/2023 at 5:26 PM, SapphireSky said:

Who honestly thinks that's possible lol

Last week I just heard from a friend that one of our friends had sex with a straight guy (also a friend of ours). Apparently they were sharing the same bed and the gay friend started to rub his ass on the guy’s dick and they ended up having sex.
I was like ***** that’s literally a Men.com video you believe that ****?
 

Unfortunately the straight guy is a distant friend from another country, otherwise I’d love to tell him the story that’s been passed around. 

[KingDavid]

There are plenty of straight (as in, self-identify as straight, actively seek out romantic/sexual relationships with women, and move about society with unquestioned heterosexual privilege) who also are willing to sexually experiment with men. It's crazy that everyone accepts this is true for women, but not men, as if we're different species. If straight people weren't so homophobic and gay people weren't so obsessed with bisexual erasure (but only of men) and/or catty dismissiveness rooted in jealousy whenever this topic comes up, we could have a real discussion about it.

[shinyshimmery]

- Being older doesn't make you more mature

- Yeah, sometimes you ARE the problem

- Stop pretending to be straight, you aren't fooling anyone

- Learn the value of a good kind-hearted person, over 6 pack abs

- Love worth having isn't found in clubs and/or bars 

- Being silently smart is better than being obnoxiously loud 

Edited August 6, 2023 by shinyshimmery

[Chris]

Some of the replies in here.

 

  

[Käärijä]

20 hours ago, themroshawottguy said:

I've got one that I will definitely be flamed for. But the more heat I get for it, the more it proves this thread's point, so here goes nothing lol;

 

Open and/or non-monogamous relationships are destined for failure because they go against our nature. Human beings are innately jealous and possessive creatures, and we cannot have equal competitive feelings for multiple people. I personally think this goes beyond even just romantic relationships--I don't even think we can feel equally about our children, family members, or friends--but if it's all true for anything, it's especially true for romantic relationships. You cannot take somebody seriously on a romantic level and also say "you can be sexually and romantically shared with someone else." You cannot take yourself seriously and also say "I can be sexually and romantically shared." This isn't possible, and no amount of intellectualizing your communal utopian sex group pipe dream is ever going to change that very basic fact.

 

Consider this; if you have more than one lover and someone were to issue you this ultimatum;

- "You can choose one of your multiple partners to be with, but all the other(s) will be erased from your life forever, no reconciling."

If this were the decision any single one of us were to face, we all would know, even if it were deep down, who we would pick to be with and who we would ultimately let go. 

 

What's more, even if your decision to be non-monogamous is entirely based in satisfying sexual desires and has nothing to do with competing romantic feelings, it still doesn't help non-monogamy's case. Sex is an extraordinarily and irrevocably invasive and intimate act, the most so that two adults can engage in together, and if you are being intimate with someone other than your significant other, it directly challenges the sanctity of what the two of you have. If the aforementioned single-most-intimate physical act is not a state of vulnerability that you show exclusively to your S/O, and it can potentially be an acceptable thing to show to anyone, just how meaningful can your relationship ever truly be?

 

One person absolutely can be a satisfying sexual/romantic partner for your entire life. History has proven that to be the case far too many times to count. If you feel you necessarily need more than one partner in your life to be happy, the discrepancy is not in monogamy's value system, but rather in your own values and the values of those you choose to associate yourself with.

 

All of this is why humans choose only one partner. This is why the healthiest relationships are monogamous, and this is why if you are in an open/non-monogamous relationship, it is almost certainly to the detriment of your relationship's integrity.

I'm not reading all this but kind of agree with the first paragraph, the human brain is biologically created to experience relationships with one person at a time. 

[~Start The Music]

Sometimes ass be smelling like shiz! 

[BGKC]

I think total bottoms who complain about a shortage of tops in the area are in many cases just people with performance anxiety/ED and should eat the asses of tops more often. 

[aesthetic bih]

On 8/1/2023 at 4:59 AM, State of Grace. said:

- Being a sassy, catty, mean gay is not a personality trait and it stopped being funny a decade ago. Your trauma and mental struggles don't justify it either so it's not really a "defense or coping mechanism". You will never be Regina George.

Now why tf is this sooo true. I mean ig it's cute to act like that between your friends where they are aware you are just "acting mean" and not being actually mean. But acting catty like that out of your friends circle just make you look very rude to other people!

Edited August 7, 2023 by aesthetic bih

[madonnas]

Whatever you want to say about toxic body image culture in the gay community (probably true, too), you have to grow up and learn to love yourself and can’t keep being bitter to people who are conventionally attractive.  It’s not cute.  

[Maneater]

If you’re a top you will be **** on at some point (happened to me today )

[PoisonPill]

It isn't normal or healthy to have unprotected sex with dozens/hundreds of strangers a year.