Jump to content
Male HQ

Questioning my sexuality


anon6789

Recommended Posts

Guest Puzzled Man
8 hours ago, sdniw said:

as with some of the users here, trying to put a label can be quite difficult 

for me, i identify myself closer to being an asexual than anything. have always had a low sex drive, though more physically attracted to males than females

i started exploring a little late, in my early 30s but never really felt the draw of getting into a relationship

 

my own take is that sexuality can be a really gray area, some people can identify themselves more easily with certain labels, some people may change what they subscribe to with time. 

since lust is less likely to pull you into anything long term, then why not think about what you want to achieve or what would bring you stability /happiness in the long run and work backwards. at some point, i think it would be good to be comfortable with who/what you are and discuss it with your partner then


Words I bolded: well said. All the advices should be built on this sentence. Suggestions such as visiting prostitutes only increases the instability. @anon6789 should only consider advices that increases stability upfront instead of reducing it. Some of the negative advices here really puzzles me. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2020 at 10:35 AM, anon6789 said:

 

wow thats a really long post. err just some points in response:

  • i think your understanding of asexuality is not quite accurate - i.e., it is possible for asexuals to be aroused and watch porn/masturbate. it's just that they do not feel sexual attraction/desire per se to other people. that said, it is a spectrum and of course someone who is hardcore 100% asexual may not even have the desire (or much desire) for these kinda things 
  • agree on the subordination fetish, but completely wrong on the assessment/prediction of "having a strong/dominating mother" - this one is totally off lol
  • i dont think ive been avoiding sex per se; it's just that i've never had a particular strong desire for it i guess (minus the getting off via fetishes etc.) and i guess i had other stuff to worry about / distract me prior to err, now. (i.e. other things are/were more impt to me than sex, and urges cld largely be satisfied via masturbation)
  • issue with prostitutes now is that the legal brothels are closed lol, due to covid and related travel restrictions... and i kinda dun want to "dabble" in illegal prostitution and possibly get into trouble, so...

 

 

Guest Social-Psychology Grad will probably confirm (if he advanced to that stage in his studies), most of such fetishes come from somewhere, and mostly from childhood experiences. It doesn't matter for your current situation. I don't have the background information and maybe it is sometimes better not to look back why you have this sort of fetish.

 

Please note: TS: I would never ask you to do something illegal. And please do not go into any avenue which brings you in conflict with the law.

 

Keeping you busy with other things is a sort of avoiding. Maybe you kept yourself being busy to avoid this issue of sexual attraction to bump up.

It is the sort of, I need to do I certain task at work, either don't know how or dislike it very much and then put it into the last drawer of my rolling cabinet below the desk or start reading the news articles first before I read on the work task, then go to the pantry and brew hot water, slowly place the tea bag into my cup, oh yes, could eat a cookie too, oh just noted the flowers in the office need some watering, then there is someone for a chit chat over the last holiday...

I met plenty of guys who kept themselves busy with something to avoid some questions in life, even whether they are gay and shy away for many years to meet a guy but running around with their doubts and depressive behaviour. For your health and well being it is surely not a good thing.

 

For those others here, who still did not understand, why I suggested meeting a prostitute is, due to the fact for TS not getting sufficient arousal or keeping his kkj sufficient hard when he just sees a woman naked and because it is easier to work on the domination fetish, which assist him into getting sufficient interest in the sex.

Sure, there might be other avenues in finding an open minded girl or a sex addicted girl out there. The problem is, such girls want to meet an experienced man to jump on her and don't have the time to attend to a greenhorn in sex. Got it?

However, TS's main problem is to find any such girl, open for experimentation and open for an out of the normal lying fetish.

I would be happy for him, if there is a patient girl who would be open for the fact that he did not have intercourse and for respecting his fetish, but I really doubt there is one.

 

For illustration in the gay community:

It is the same in our gay sex. There are guys who like "golden shower" (pissing on the guy or his face). If you are looking to meet a guy for the first date, how would most of you react if the guy tells you he wants "golden shower" or even worse he needs "golden shower" to being aroused and get hard? Would it be smart to approach someone you just got to know on your fetish? Then, how to find someone if you are inexperienced?

And now transfer this issue into the straight world. Wouldn't it be much more difficult to approach a girl on your fetish?

That's the issue. And in the gay community we even tend to be more open to any such fetishes compared to the straight world, from the fact that we know we are different already to the straight people.

 

Ok, I will read up more on asexuality.

Lack of sexual attraction can have certain personality backgrounds. Some people have difficulties in getting intimate with others, even difficulties in getting to know others for a talk or friendships and feeling awkward being with other people in an enclosed environment.

Lack of sexual desire can have certain origins as well, even some medical ones and it can be a focus issue. You might have had your sort of internal "orgasm" already before you come to the act or it could be lack of knowing/ having experienced what a complete sexual orgasm is about.

 

Actually, I m not so a friend of all those new labels for everything.

Guess why the LGTB - LTGTBQ+ is getting longer and longer.

 

I would still suggest to you to explore with a girl sooner or later.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, sdniw said:

as with some of the users here, trying to put a label can be quite difficult 

for me, i identify myself closer to being an asexual than anything. have always had a low sex drive, though more physically attracted to males than females

i started exploring a little late, in my early 30s but never really felt the draw of getting into a relationship

 

my own take is that sexuality can be a really gray area, some people can identify themselves more easily with certain labels, some people may change what they subscribe to with time. 

since lust is less likely to pull you into anything long term, then why not think about what you want to achieve or what would bring you stability /happiness in the long run and work backwards. at some point, i think it would be good to be comfortable with who/what you are and discuss it with your partner then

 

Yes sure, you are right on changing labels.

 

But in the end does it help the TS?

Does it resolve his issue?

 

And didn't he come out recently to ask if he is gay or straight or bi or whatever?, meaning enjoying sex with guys, girls or both. He doesn't even know this currently.

 

So? It bugs the TS. He is the one who came up to ask.

 

And is your last advice (settle your life, then find a partner) realistic ?

He might built up a relationship with (who guy or girl?) but then after some time has lapsed he opens up on his fetish, receives a hostile rejection from the partner and his life is in shatters, because the partner just runs away. The pain might be so strong that he would not look for any other partner anymore. He might get extremely and painfully hurt.

I would never suggest this to him, because it is dangerous for his psychological wellbeing.

 

In my view it is better to know on what side of the road I stand somehow and even if I stand on the middle of the road, instead of running around with no clear direction and leaving a certain part of "me" open, which seems to be important to everyone/his life and happiness.

 

What you suggest is for the TS to further run around with his issues, self-doubts and resulting insecurity.

 

Low sex drive in your case can have medical backgrounds, but this must not be the case with TS.

 

And not to get me wrong: he certainly won't know the answer by dating one single girl or guy and exploring into sexual activity in one experience. Probably to be certain about his preferences he probably will need a certain amount of "material" of experience.

 

And would you want him to waste his life in relationship with a girl (guy), when in the end it was never his thing?

 

Life is too short to waste on such crucial questions of your personality.

 

That is why I say to the TS: Go out and explore and find out.

 

 

Edited by singalion
.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Optimist
1 hour ago, singalion said:

 

Yes sure, you are right on changing labels.

 

But in the end does it help the TS?

Does it resolve his issue?

 

And didn't he come out recently to ask if he is gay or straight or bi or whatever?, meaning enjoying sex with guys, girls or both. He doesn't even know this currently.

 

So? It bugs the TS. He is the one who came up to ask.

 

And is your last advice (settle your life, then find a partner) realistic ?

He might built up a relationship with (who guy or girl?) but then he opens up and his life is in shatters, because the partner just runs away. The pain might be so strong that he would not look for any other partner anymore. He might get extremely and painfully hurt.

I would never suggest this to him, because it is dangerous for his psychological wellbeing.

 

In my view it is better to know on what side of the road I stand somehow and even if I stand on the middle of the road, instead of running around with no clear direction and leaving a certain part of "me" open, which seems to be important to everyone/his life and happiness.

 

What you suggest is for the TS to further run around with his issues, self-doubts and resulting insecurity.

 

Low sex drive in your case can have medical backgrounds, but this must not be the case with TS.

 

And not to get me wrong: he certainly won't know the answer by dating one single girl or guy and exploring into sexual activity in one experience. Probably to be certain about his preferences he probably will need a certain amount of "material" of experience.

 

And would you want him to waste his life in relationship with a girl (guy), when in the end it was never his thing?

 

Life is too short to waste on such crucial questions of your personality.

 

That is why I say to the TS: Go out and explore and find out.


@Singalion read your posts under this topic. I must say some of it does make sense, but most are really crappy. Your assumption and jumping to conclusion in suggesting his “future partner will run away and cause his life to be in shatters” is plainly inciting pessimism. Please do not incite fear and worries, this is unwarranted.

 

Judging from the way the person who started this topic, he is seeking genuine help, your advices might appear to be helpful but instead I find it to be virulent. I am unable to see how it helps him. Crudely speaking, your methodology will probably cause more shit than lessen it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Optimist
13 hours ago, sdniw said:

as with some of the users here, trying to put a label can be quite difficult 

for me, i identify myself closer to being an asexual than anything. have always had a low sex drive, though more physically attracted to males than females

i started exploring a little late, in my early 30s but never really felt the draw of getting into a relationship

 

my own take is that sexuality can be a really gray area, some people can identify themselves more easily with certain labels, some people may change what they subscribe to with time. 

since lust is less likely to pull you into anything long term, then why not think about what you want to achieve or what would bring you stability /happiness in the long run and work backwards. at some point, i think it would be good to be comfortable with who/what you are and discuss it with your partner then


Yes! Think of what would bring stability and happiness for the long term. Lust is for the short term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mr. common sense

so just have sex in front of a huge mirror. this way u can stay really aroused. o but if u this were to happen with a guy u then end up u think u are gay cos u can stay aroused by a guy... but actually staying aroused is thank u to the mirror and not the guy u have sex with. lmao

 

use your common sense... i give u a sports car, super nice the car n u love it... do u go to the petrol kiosk n pump the petrol to the tank or u pump petrol to the exhaust pipe? no need use brain also can think. lmao.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2020 at 12:34 PM, anon6789 said:

 

would it make a difference, though, in your assessment that i may be heterosexual, the fact that if there was an attractive male and female in the room, i would probably look at/notice the attractive male first and appreciate his features/physique etc? i think the main issue for me is that if i was truly hetereo or bi, then why do i feel v little attraction to the naked female form? but then again the naked male form also like not super duper appealing lol. idk, maybe it's just what i'm used to seeing - e.g., common to see topless guys (but not naked) but not common to see topless girls. but i suppose a "normal" straight person wouldnt feel this way lol

Just listen to your heart, and do whatever make you happy. There is no right or wrong, but don't regret on what you let go. 

 

There is nothing wrong if you wanted to have family and kids, while keeping a male friend for clean fun, as long as you draw a clear line between friend and family, I think it's quite OK. 

 

After all, this is your life, do the right thing for yourself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, anon6789 said:

lol what does that even mean sia

Behold for the REVELATION, there are more for you to offer than physical sex.

38 minutes ago, NeverAsk said:

Just listen to your heart, and do whatever make you happy. There is no right or wrong, but don't regret on what you let go. 

 

There is nothing wrong if you wanted to have family and kids, while keeping a male friend for clean fun, as long as you draw a clear line between friend and family, I think it's quite OK. 

 

After all, this is your life, do the right thing for yourself. 

Check out the fetishes he claims to be into.  And the discriminations Larry claims he suffers HERE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Fact checker

please allow me to present some facts after reading the dilemma that  @anon6789 is in
 

disclaimer: we can agree to disagree the facts I will be presenting, the choice to accept the is up to anyone. the objective is to lend anon6789 a helping hand and not discrimination

 

fact 1: homosexuality is a social construct that is slowly taking shape since the 19th century and making significant inroad in the 21st century

 

fact 2: heterosexuality is purely driven by biological forces

 

fact 3: sexual orientation can be changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality while homosexuality desires linger on. A study involving close to 150 ex-homosexuals male has shown that 66% of them reached good heterosexual functioning and sustained loving heterosexual relationship. 89% were not /slightly bothered by the lingering homosexual desires
 

fact 4: we can have homosexuality desires but the choice is up to us if we want to act on them. most of us here have chosen to act on them, it is up to @anon6789 if he wants to act on them

 

explanation:

many homosexual claims that we have not chosen our identity and it is natural for us that we were born that way. however, because something was not chosen does not equate that it was inborn. sexual desires are acquired /strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. let me take for example, most alcoholics did not choose to be one, but they can become habituated to alcohol. so just as one can acquire alcoholic desires without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires, by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behaviour. this could happen even without consciously choosing them. since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning, homosexual desires in us is also subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. as to explain why @anon6789, myself and many of us has little sexual arousal by female, this can be attributed to what is term as a cognitive error /distortion. @anon6789 has to decide for himself if he wish to correct the cognitive error /distortion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Guest Fact checker said:

please allow me to present some facts after reading the dilemma that  @anon6789 is in
 

disclaimer: we can agree to disagree the facts I will be presenting, the choice to accept the is up to anyone. the objective is to lend anon6789 a helping hand and not discrimination

 

fact 1: homosexuality is a social construct that is slowly taking shape since the 19th century and making significant inroad in the 21st century

 

fact 2: heterosexuality is purely driven by biological forces

 

fact 3: sexual orientation can be changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality while homosexuality desires linger on. A study involving close to 150 ex-homosexuals male has shown that 66% of them reached good heterosexual functioning and sustained loving heterosexual relationship. 89% were not /slightly bothered by the lingering homosexual desires
 

fact 4: we can have homosexuality desires but the choice is up to us if we want to act on them. most of us here have chosen to act on them, it is up to @anon6789 if he wants to act on them

 

explanation:

many homosexual claims that we have not chosen our identity and it is natural for us that we were born that way. however, because something was not chosen does not equate that it was inborn. sexual desires are acquired /strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. let me take for example, most alcoholics did not choose to be one, but they can become habituated to alcohol. so just as one can acquire alcoholic desires without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires, by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behaviour. this could happen even without consciously choosing them. since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning, homosexual desires in us is also subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. as to explain why @anon6789, myself and many of us has little sexual arousal by female, this can be attributed to what is term as a cognitive error /distortion. @anon6789 has to decide for himself if he wish to correct the cognitive error /distortion.

...are you for real? 

 

Citations needed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Guest Fact checker said:

please allow me to present some facts after reading the dilemma that  @anon6789 is in
 

disclaimer: we can agree to disagree the facts I will be presenting, the choice to accept the is up to anyone. the objective is to lend anon6789 a helping hand and not discrimination

 

fact 1: homosexuality is a social construct that is slowly taking shape since the 19th century and making significant inroad in the 21st century

 

fact 2: heterosexuality is purely driven by biological forces

 

fact 3: sexual orientation can be changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality while homosexuality desires linger on. A study involving close to 150 ex-homosexuals male has shown that 66% of them reached good heterosexual functioning and sustained loving heterosexual relationship. 89% were not /slightly bothered by the lingering homosexual desires
 

fact 4: we can have homosexuality desires but the choice is up to us if we want to act on them. most of us here have chosen to act on them, it is up to @anon6789 if he wants to act on them

 

explanation:

many homosexual claims that we have not chosen our identity and it is natural for us that we were born that way. however, because something was not chosen does not equate that it was inborn. sexual desires are acquired /strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. let me take for example, most alcoholics did not choose to be one, but they can become habituated to alcohol. so just as one can acquire alcoholic desires without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires, by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behaviour. this could happen even without consciously choosing them. since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning, homosexual desires in us is also subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. as to explain why @anon6789, myself and many of us has little sexual arousal by female, this can be attributed to what is term as a cognitive error /distortion. @anon6789 has to decide for himself if he wish to correct the cognitive error /distortion.

hi can you please provide evidence for what you have mentioned lol. like links to the relevant articles etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Citation
40 minutes ago, Guest Fact checker said:

please allow me to present some facts after reading the dilemma that  @anon6789 is in
 

disclaimer: we can agree to disagree the facts I will be presenting, the choice to accept the is up to anyone. the objective is to lend anon6789 a helping hand and not discrimination

 

fact 1: homosexuality is a social construct that is slowly taking shape since the 19th century and making significant inroad in the 21st century

 

fact 2: heterosexuality is purely driven by biological forces

 

fact 3: sexual orientation can be changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality while homosexuality desires linger on. A study involving close to 150 ex-homosexuals male has shown that 66% of them reached good heterosexual functioning and sustained loving heterosexual relationship. 89% were not /slightly bothered by the lingering homosexual desires
 

fact 4: we can have homosexuality desires but the choice is up to us if we want to act on them. most of us here have chosen to act on them, it is up to @anon6789 if he wants to act on them

 

explanation:

many homosexual claims that we have not chosen our identity and it is natural for us that we were born that way. however, because something was not chosen does not equate that it was inborn. sexual desires are acquired /strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. let me take for example, most alcoholics did not choose to be one, but they can become habituated to alcohol. so just as one can acquire alcoholic desires without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires, by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behaviour. this could happen even without consciously choosing them. since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning, homosexual desires in us is also subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. as to explain why @anon6789, myself and many of us has little sexual arousal by female, this can be attributed to what is term as a cognitive error /distortion. @anon6789 has to decide for himself if he wish to correct the cognitive error /distortion.

Can you please cite all your research studies please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Wonderful

Amusing, simply amusing. In an era of fake news, does citations even work.

 

In human history, humans just want to find reasons to believe what they want to believe in, to increase the acceptance or reduce the guilt, especially when what they want to believe is hard to be accepted. This is why fake news strive.
 

No one ask for citations for all the other theories and advices presented, but when someone present an argument with scientific terms and evidences, so many ask for citations. I wonder how, i wonder why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Guest Wonderful said:

Amusing, simply amusing. In an era of fake news, does citations even work.

Citations are definitely relevant. Good science and methodology, as well as information literacy, have never been more important in an era of "fake news". It's because of the scientific method that a fact is a fact, not a statement of faith, or belief.

 

52 minutes ago, Guest Wonderful said:

In human history, humans just want to find reasons to believe what they want to believe in, to increase the acceptance or reduce the guilt, especially when what they want to believe is hard to be accepted. This is why fake news strive.

Correct. Which is why scientific literacy is more important than ever. Otherwise you get things like flat Earth societies and anti vaxxers.

 

52 minutes ago, Guest Wonderful said:

No one ask for citations for all the other theories and advices presented, but when someone present an argument with scientific terms and evidences, so many ask for citations. I wonder how, i wonder why.

Because they were presented as thoughts and advice, which are obviously subjective. And as far as I can tell there has been rigorous exchange on the soundness and merits of whatever was brought up. No one made the big claim of their ideas being fact, as you have. 

 

"Scientific terms and evidences"? Where? I for one would love to see those peer-reviewed articles.

 

47 minutes ago, Guest Wonderful said:

At the TS: do you even ask for citation and scientific evidences if someone suggests you are gay?

You said it yourself; those are suggestions. TS has mentioned seeing a qualified, licensed counselor, which I hope he continues to do. He has also been advised by multiple people to be cautious. What he has not faced is someone with a very obvious bias stuffing rhetoric down his throat as objective "facts".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cold War

This topic is turning into a proxy war on ideologies of sexuality.

 

Clearly, blowingwind is not the best place to seek advice. An LGBTQ site wld only give advices bias towards LGBTQ lifestyle. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Guest Cold War said:

This topic is turning into a proxy war on ideologies of sexuality.

 

Clearly, blowingwind is not the best place to seek advice. An LGBTQ site wld only give advices bias towards LGBTQ lifestyle. lol

What do you mean by "LGBTQ lifestyle"? There is no fixed way that someone who is gay has to live. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Guest Way said:

What do you mean by "LGBTQ lifestyle"? There is no fixed way that someone who is gay has to live. 

Just as there is no fixed way a straight person has to live his/her life. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Guest Fact checker said:

please allow me to present some facts after reading the dilemma that  @anon6789 is in
 

disclaimer: we can agree to disagree the facts I will be presenting, the choice to accept the is up to anyone. the objective is to lend anon6789 a helping hand and not discrimination

 

fact 1: homosexuality is a social construct that is slowly taking shape since the 19th century and making significant inroad in the 21st century

 

fact 2: heterosexuality is purely driven by biological forces

 

fact 3: sexual orientation can be changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality while homosexuality desires linger on. A study involving close to 150 ex-homosexuals male has shown that 66% of them reached good heterosexual functioning and sustained loving heterosexual relationship. 89% were not /slightly bothered by the lingering homosexual desires
 

fact 4: we can have homosexuality desires but the choice is up to us if we want to act on them. most of us here have chosen to act on them, it is up to @anon6789 if he wants to act on them

 

explanation:

many homosexual claims that we have not chosen our identity and it is natural for us that we were born that way. however, because something was not chosen does not equate that it was inborn. sexual desires are acquired /strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. let me take for example, most alcoholics did not choose to be one, but they can become habituated to alcohol. so just as one can acquire alcoholic desires without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires, by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behaviour. this could happen even without consciously choosing them. since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning, homosexual desires in us is also subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. as to explain why @anon6789, myself and many of us has little sexual arousal by female, this can be attributed to what is term as a cognitive error /distortion. @anon6789 has to decide for himself if he wish to correct the cognitive error /distortion.

 

Please ignore this post.

 

Homosexuality exists since the start of human mankind.

 

Why would the old testimony, Egyptian papers or stones, Greek and Roman literature cover homosexuality?

 

Alexander the Great was openly gay.

 

Please don't get distorted..

 

 

Those guys proposing sexual orientation conversion should be ignored. Studies found most people having gone through such procedures have suffered serious distress.

 

Anyhow has never been the topic here.

 

Please read above post carefully and with caution!!!! 

 

Best to ignore above quoted post totally.

 

 

Edited by singalion
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/16/2020 at 3:59 PM, anon6789 said:

Hi everyone

 

I'm looking for some advice (serious only please) - I've been in a relationship with a girl until recently but during our relationship, we have not really been physically intimate, save for some light touching and stuff (partly also cos' she mentioned she did not want to have pre-marital sex). But at the same time, urges to have sex/physical intimacy leading up to sex was fairly minimal during our relationship - although I wonder if it's because I am generally quite a cautious / socially cautious person (for other aspects of my life as well) and didn't feel confident enough to do such things esp when the other party (my ex) wasn't really showing signs that she wanted it / the whole relationship just lacked that physical element kinda from the start so the inertia was there to go beyond what became a comfortable level of physical intimacy (other aspects of our relationship was going well). Not sure if things would have been different if she had, for example, been more proactive or signalled more actively that I should be more physical with her. And also not sure if I would have actually enjoyed sex with a girl, had it actually happened - recently been looking at images on tumblr of guys/girls being engaged in foreplay before sex and it was quite hot/arousing to me. However, generally speaking, the naked female form is not particularly appealing to me and doesn't quite arouse me all that much.

 

Since puberty (teenage years), I mostly looked at pictures of shirtless guys online to masturbate - and sometimes also very specific fetishes like bdsm, wrestling, speedos, etc. (quite often, these fetishes involve fantasising about me being in pain/humiliation-type scenarios) But i've never been attracted (IRL and even just online pics) to:

  • male genitalia (would strongly prefer the subject to be at least in their underwear)
  • anal sex
  • oral sex 
  • and even me masturbating/touching someone else's penis.

 

Even when I masturbate, I don't quite "fantasise" about sex with the men I find attractive - often I fantasise about how great it would be if I was as good-looking/attractive as them. I've also not met up with any guy for just sex in general (without the fetish part) and tbh, when it comes to mutual masturbation after the fetish-bit (for the meet-up) is over, I am much much less aroused (if at all) compared to when engaging in the fetish itself (quite often I actually lose my erection at this stage). 

 

For me, I've never really had a "crush" or desire to be in a romantic relationship with a guy (all through teenage years till now, I've only had crushes on and romantic interests for girls). I guess it would be different (and more straightforward) if this was not the case then I'd be like ok, quite clear that I am probably gay and should just accept it and live life accordingly. 

 

I have been spending time reading up online about this and it appears I might be "heteroromantic homosexual" or lie somewhere on the asexuality spectrum (since I don't actually have strong sexual attraction/desire from either gender, although there's some form of "aesthetic attraction" to the male form as opposed to the female form). Of course, some people say I might just be gay and in denial / have internalised homophobia that is tricking me into thinking that i don't want a relationship with a guy and can only be romantically interested in girls. 

 

Has anyone gone through something similar before / know of someone who has gone through something similar? Kinda confused and feeling like stuck in terms of what or how i should live my life going forward...

 

 

When a guy is attracted to another guy, he is gay

When a guy is attracted to a girl he is straight.

When a guy is attracted to both guy and girl, he is bi and simple as that.

 

I will talk about myself for your reference.

When i see girls near i always tries to move away as i always feel uncomfortable near them afraid of accidentally touching them.

There are a few things that i am similar to you. That is i am not attracted to male genitals especially those big one and i feel it looks horrible. I am also not attracted to anal and oral sex pics and will definitely not wanting to touch anal sex forever. The only male parts that i am attracted to is the face, chest and abs. When i see a handsome lean fit guy gets touch here and there by others in a porn i gets horny too. 

 

To be in a relationship with a girl is out of the question. My dream is to live with all the guys that i have attraction to them. I really love hugs and cuddles from guys that i have attraction to. Having already know what i want and needs i will not be confuse and is consistently making lots of gay friends to fulfill my dreams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Simplicity
On 9/16/2020 at 3:59 PM, anon6789 said:

Hi everyone

 

I'm looking for some advice (serious only please) - I've been in a relationship with a girl until recently but during our relationship, we have not really been physically intimate, save for some light touching and stuff (partly also cos' she mentioned she did not want to have pre-marital sex). But at the same time, urges to have sex/physical intimacy leading up to sex was fairly minimal during our relationship - although I wonder if it's because I am generally quite a cautious / socially cautious person (for other aspects of my life as well) and didn't feel confident enough to do such things esp when the other party (my ex) wasn't really showing signs that she wanted it / the whole relationship just lacked that physical element kinda from the start so the inertia was there to go beyond what became a comfortable level of physical intimacy (other aspects of our relationship was going well). Not sure if things would have been different if she had, for example, been more proactive or signalled more actively that I should be more physical with her. And also not sure if I would have actually enjoyed sex with a girl, had it actually happened - recently been looking at images on tumblr of guys/girls being engaged in foreplay before sex and it was quite hot/arousing to me. However, generally speaking, the naked female form is not particularly appealing to me and doesn't quite arouse me all that much.

 

Since puberty (teenage years), I mostly looked at pictures of shirtless guys online to masturbate - and sometimes also very specific fetishes like bdsm, wrestling, speedos, etc. (quite often, these fetishes involve fantasising about me being in pain/humiliation-type scenarios) But i've never been attracted (IRL and even just online pics) to:

  • male genitalia (would strongly prefer the subject to be at least in their underwear)
  • anal sex
  • oral sex 
  • and even me masturbating/touching someone else's penis.

 

Even when I masturbate, I don't quite "fantasise" about sex with the men I find attractive - often I fantasise about how great it would be if I was as good-looking/attractive as them. I've also not met up with any guy for just sex in general (without the fetish part) and tbh, when it comes to mutual masturbation after the fetish-bit (for the meet-up) is over, I am much much less aroused (if at all) compared to when engaging in the fetish itself (quite often I actually lose my erection at this stage). 

 

For me, I've never really had a "crush" or desire to be in a romantic relationship with a guy (all through teenage years till now, I've only had crushes on and romantic interests for girls). I guess it would be different (and more straightforward) if this was not the case then I'd be like ok, quite clear that I am probably gay and should just accept it and live life accordingly. 

 

I have been spending time reading up online about this and it appears I might be "heteroromantic homosexual" or lie somewhere on the asexuality spectrum (since I don't actually have strong sexual attraction/desire from either gender, although there's some form of "aesthetic attraction" to the male form as opposed to the female form). Of course, some people say I might just be gay and in denial / have internalised homophobia that is tricking me into thinking that i don't want a relationship with a guy and can only be romantically interested in girls. 

 

Has anyone gone through something similar before / know of someone who has gone through something similar? Kinda confused and feeling like stuck in terms of what or how i should live my life going forward...

 

 

No point writing so much and at the end of the day, you only can have I person to settle down with. Whether is chicken, pork, beef or lamb, at the end of the day they are a dish. Does it matters to you if he/ she is gay, bi or straight to you? Ultimately is whether is likes or loves you. And can you guys clique. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Guest Cold War said:

This topic is turning into a proxy war on ideologies of sexuality.

 

Clearly, blowingwind is not the best place to seek advice. An LGBTQ site wld only give advices bias towards LGBTQ lifestyle. lol

 

 I m 150% (or more, lol) gay.

 

At all my posts I assessed TS as heterosexual. My personal opinion.

 

I would never push him into gay sex.

 

But nobody here can decide for TS. 

 

If you write something it shouldn't lead to confusing him further.

 

In my personal view, if TS doesn't explore the he wouldn't know to what side he leans to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Guest mr. common sense said:

 

use your common sense... i give u a sports car, super nice the car n u love it... do u go to the petrol kiosk n pump the petrol to the tank or u pump petrol to the exhaust pipe? no need use brain also can think. lmao.

 

I like your common sense!  Pumping gas into the exhaust pipe! :lol::D   I also don't like anal sex, and find that much sex can one have without going into that.

 

 

 

9 hours ago, Guest Fact checker said:

 

fact 1: homosexuality is a social construct that is slowly taking shape since the 19th century and making significant inroad in the 21st century

 

fact 2: heterosexuality is purely driven by biological forces

 

fact 3: sexual orientation can be changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality while homosexuality desires linger on. A study involving close to 150 ex-homosexuals male has shown that 66% of them reached good heterosexual functioning and sustained loving heterosexual relationship. 89% were not /slightly bothered by the lingering homosexual desires
 

fact 4: we can have homosexuality desires but the choice is up to us if we want to act on them. most of us here have chosen to act on them, it is up to @anon6789 if he wants to act on them

 

explanation:

many homosexual claims that we have not chosen our identity and it is natural for us that we were born that way. however, because something was not chosen does not equate that it was inborn. sexual desires are acquired /strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. let me take for example, most alcoholics did not choose to be one, but they can become habituated to alcohol. so just as one can acquire alcoholic desires without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires, by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behaviour. this could happen even without consciously choosing them. since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning, homosexual desires in us is also subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. as to explain why @anon6789, myself and many of us has little sexual arousal by female, this can be attributed to what is term as a cognitive error /distortion. @anon6789 has to decide for himself if he wish to correct the cognitive error /distortion.

 

You call yourself a "Fact Checker" but your post reveals you as one with an homophobic agenda.

 

Your facts 1 and 2 are nonsense.  Both sexual orientations have the same structure, so they share a common name: sexual orientations!

 

Your fact 3 is absolutely false.  Our orientation does not change.  External influences may change how our orientation develops.

 

Your fact 4 is nothing but an incorrect stupid statement.  All our desires that are not essential to stay alive can become a choice.

 

Therefore, your "explanation" has nothing truthful left to explain.  It makes a deceptive comparison of orientation with addiction, which is false.  Your mentioning of "cognitive conditioning" does not validate anything you write.  I was born in an environment free of gay influences. I never thought of sex until I was attracted to a boy in elementary school.  And I never had any sexual attraction to girls until much later in life.  Your proposal, promise of sex re-education has been solidly debunked.  

 

Only natural homophobics, rabid conservatives, religious nuts attribute homosexuality to "cognitive error/distortion".  

While they fail to realize, or recognize,  that they are all "cognitively fucked up"!

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, singalion said:

But nobody here can decide for TS.

If I may...

 

My only personal gripe is GAY and SEX should not be used together in a sentence :P 

 

Being Gay: Same gender attraction that is beyond the sex part but encompasses their (his or her) entire lifestyle through life.

 

Sex is Sex. Primal and at times uncontrollable. By 2020, internet has spilled the secrets of private or hidden practices of sex. A myriad of sexual indulgences that are good and bad. Taboo and contradictory to the norm even. Maybe without a label yet to be coin. But that has nothing to do with lifestyle, race or country. There really are no rules as to who can do it with whom or what. Prudish or purist who want to try to control the narrative of what defines a Gay person or not, many I feel have lost the plot a long time ago by not observing the world at large but still with an old fashion magnifying lens. Why do we need to set up a tribe of you with-them or with-us mentality? Safety in numbers???  Really, look at gays bitching against gays here. What safety? LOL

 

I see many, focused on defining everything about 'who you suppose to be by the sex act' and ignore all the other encompassing attributes of your personal outlook, actions and choices that makes you gay or str8. You are categorizing people in sheep pens base SOLELY on shallow properties like asshole fucking is gay and vagina is str8. I know many guys who like to anal their female partners and girls who enjoy it or peg their husbands' ass. So what now? They gay too? Our bias, being too quick to accuse any guy looking an asshole or penis too long, so he's gay. :P Imagine, you fall for a guy, you desperately test for the smallest itsy-bitsy sign just so you can justify chasing him because die-die he must be gay. That's looking for trouble in all the wrong places.

 

Life is WAY MORE COMPLEX AND VARIED than closed minded people are willing to give it credit. THUS, here lies more reasons for confusion and bitching and why we have topics like this popping up every so often. If we want society to accept us as gays for what we do, we have to also help other different from us be accepted as well with no T&C attached.

 

Free yourself from old outdated tribal labels. It's really freeing. Trust me. You-be-you. I-be-me. Seeking to be a decent human being's priority than whom you choose to poke, a vagina or asshole or both .....or none. Life will always be an ever-changing organic spectrum whether you accept it or go the way of the dinosaurs. Love it or not. I love it that way. :P Also your sexual appetite and practices will change over the course of your own life's journey. And that's fine too. I see no rules to say you can't. And let no dinosaurs tell you otherwise. Be true to yourself. It's easy living your life, your way. Then one dictated by a stranger.

 

 

Edited by upshot

** Comments are my opinions, same as yours. It's not a 'Be-All-and-End-All' view. Intent's to thought-provoke, validate, reiterate and yes, even correct. Opinion to consider but agree to disagree. I don't enjoy conflicted exchanges, empty bravado or egoistical chest pounding. It's never personal, tribalistic or with malice. Frank by nature, means, I never bend the truth. Views are to broaden understanding - Updated: Nov 2021.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, upshot said:

If I may...

 

My only personal gripe is GAY and SEX should not be used together in a sentence :P 

 

Being Gay: Same gender attraction that is beyond the sex part but encompasses their (his or her) entire lifestyle through life.

 

Sex is Sex. Primal and at times uncontrollable. By 2020, internet has spilled the secrets of private or hidden practices of sex. A myriad of sexual indulgences that are good and bad. Taboo and contradictory to the norm even. Maybe without a label yet to be coin. But that has nothing to do with lifestyle, race or country. There really are no rules as to who can do it with whom or what. Prudish or purist who want to try to control the narrative of what defines a Gay person or not, many I feel have lost the plot a long time ago by not observing the world at large but still with an old fashion magnifying lens. Why do we need to set up a tribe of you with-them or with-us mentality? Safety in numbers???  Really, look at gays bitching against gays here. What safety? LOL

 

 

Good for you that your only personal gripe is that GAY and SEX should not appear together in a sentence. 

 

If so,  plan to keep griping forever.  Because GAY and SEX are intimately related.  SEX is the main difference between GAY and STRAIGHT, you like it or not.

 

If not for SEX,  why were we gays so discriminated since the beginning of times until very recently?  Why if not for the condemnation of GAY SEX?  After all, isn't your abominable law 377A about SEX?   It is not about whether you wear a hand purse or not.  Why do religious nuts condemn GAYS because their SEX does not procreate?  In fact, our path to equality is the removal of the condemnation of GAY SEX.  Some countries' legal systems already do that.  Now organized religions should do the same.

 

So many straight men could be taken for gay if they are slightly effeminate, and vice versa gay men like me can be seen as straight.  Appearances, attitudes don't necessarily define the sexual orientation,  but SEX definitely does. 

.

 

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

I like your common sense!  Pumping gas into the exhaust pipe! :lol::D   I also don't like anal sex, and find that much sex can one have without going into that.

 

 

 

 

You call yourself a "Fact Checker" but your post reveals you as one with an homophobic agenda.

 

Your facts 1 and 2 are nonsense.  Both sexual orientations have the same structure, so they share a common name: sexual orientations!

 

Your fact 3 is absolutely false.  Our orientation does not change.  External influences may change how our orientation develops.

 

Your fact 4 is nothing but an incorrect stupid statement.  All our desires that are not essential to stay alive can become a choice.

 

Therefore, your "explanation" has nothing truthful left to explain.  It makes a deceptive comparison of orientation with addiction, which is false.  Your mentioning of "cognitive conditioning" does not validate anything you write.  I was born in an environment free of gay influences. I never thought of sex until I was attracted to a boy in elementary school.  And I never had any sexual attraction to girls until much later in life.  Your proposal, promise of sex re-education has been solidly debunked.  

 

Only natural homophobics, rabid conservatives, religious nuts attribute homosexuality to "cognitive error/distortion".  

While they fail to realize, or recognize,  that they are all "cognitively fucked up"!

.


I’m gay but I think everyone is entitled to their views. You last paragraph is too nasty and badly representing our community, bringing shame to us. We are the ones fighting for freedom but you are doing the opposite with your choice of words. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Guest Lovely said:


I’m gay but I think everyone is entitled to their views. You last paragraph is too nasty and badly representing our community, bringing shame to us. We are the ones fighting for freedom but you are doing the opposite with your choice of words. 

 

????

 

Can you explain which words that I chose are doing the opposite of fighting for gay freedom?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Say no to FT

Can someone get this Steve guy away......... he is American Caucasian living in USA. this forum is for Singapore residents and extended to Malaysian residents. Why have unfriendly Ang Mo come and stir

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Guest Say no to FT said:

Can someone get this Steve guy away......... he is American Caucasian living in USA. this forum is for Singapore residents and extended to Malaysian residents. Why have unfriendly Ang Mo come and stir

 

It doesn't matter what is your nationality and race,  YOU are the unfriendly anonymous troll "guest" who comes here to stir.

You are not even a member, and you have the nerve to demand who should or should not be a member?   You are pathetic!

 

It is possible that you and "Guest Lovely" are the same person.  After you criticized my post for no reason, now you refuse to explain why you did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2020 at 1:46 AM, Guest mr. common sense said:

use your common sense... i give u a sports car, super nice the car n u love it... do u go to the petrol kiosk n pump the petrol to the tank or u pump petrol to the exhaust pipe? no need use brain also can think. lmao.

 

My common sense also says that I don't see anybody go to the petrol kiosk n pump the petrol into the radiator, but yet ...... 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Guest Fact checker said:

please allow me to present some facts after reading the dilemma that  @anon6789 is in
 

disclaimer: we can agree to disagree the facts I will be presenting, the choice to accept the is up to anyone. the objective is to lend anon6789 a helping hand and not discrimination

 

fact 1: homosexuality is a social construct that is slowly taking shape since the 19th century and making significant inroad in the 21st century

 

fact 2: heterosexuality is purely driven by biological forces

 

fact 3: sexual orientation can be changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality while homosexuality desires linger on. A study involving close to 150 ex-homosexuals male has shown that 66% of them reached good heterosexual functioning and sustained loving heterosexual relationship. 89% were not /slightly bothered by the lingering homosexual desires
 

fact 4: we can have homosexuality desires but the choice is up to us if we want to act on them. most of us here have chosen to act on them, it is up to @anon6789 if he wants to act on them

 

explanation:

many homosexual claims that we have not chosen our identity and it is natural for us that we were born that way. however, because something was not chosen does not equate that it was inborn. sexual desires are acquired /strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. let me take for example, most alcoholics did not choose to be one, but they can become habituated to alcohol. so just as one can acquire alcoholic desires without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires, by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behaviour. this could happen even without consciously choosing them. since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning, homosexual desires in us is also subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning. as to explain why @anon6789, myself and many of us has little sexual arousal by female, this can be attributed to what is term as a cognitive error /distortion. @anon6789 has to decide for himself if he wish to correct the cognitive error /distortion.

The claim of homosexuality as a social construct is an interesting and controversial topic.

 

went on to to research on the web and found this interesting piece:

http://www.nickyee.com/ponder/social_construction.html

 

Ps: but i would like to reserve my views, i do not want to be too quick to shoot it down or agree. Simply sharing the article as there are few others like me asking for citations, i believe there is an interest in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

If not for SEX,  why were we gays so discriminated since the beginning of times until very recently?  Why if not for the condemnation of GAY SEX?  After all, isn't your abominable law 377A about SEX?

 

Some historical inaccuracy here. Homosexuality was never discriminated against "since the beginning of times". It was far from uncommon in ancient Greece and Rome. In Asia it was prevalent in earlier centuries, indeed millennia. Several Chinese emperors had gay lovers. In his book "A Hidden Love: Art and Homosexuality" Dominique Fernandez makes it clear that China had "a glorious erotic culture, largely but by no means exclusively heterosexual". Same with Korean Kings. King Hyegong of the Silla Dynasty was known for his adventures with other men and was even described as "a man in appearance but a woman by nature." After his wife died, King Gongmin of the Koryo Dynasty went as far as to create a Ministry whose sole purpose was to seek out and recruit young men from all over the Kingdom to serve at his Court. 

 

A Chinese bonze introduced homosexuality to Japan around the 9th century and it became far from uncommon. It was not discriminated against. Erotic woodblock prints illustrating two men engaged in explicit sexual positions were found alongside those featuring heterosexual acts. The erotic and explicit temple carvings in India's Khajuraho and the towns in Nepal's Kathmandu Valley have very clear depictions of gay sex. One of the Nizams of Hyderabad was very gay and maintained a galaxy of handsome young male servants and courtiers.

 

It was the arrival of colonial powers and their accompanying band of missionaries and their ridiculous idea of saving souls for Christ that started the movement against gay sex. "Your abominable 377A" legislation was introduced in Britain and all British colonies in the 19th century despite the fact that there was considerable homosexual behaviour under the surface of England's surface Victorian morality. In both Singapore, Malaysia and quite a number of other countries it remains on the statute books even though, having agreed their colonies becoming independent, the hypocritical British immediately got rid of the law in England and Wales.

Edited by InBangkok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

Some historical inaccuracy here. Homosexuality was never discriminated against "since the beginning of times".

 

 

Thank you for the comment.  But I wrote the above just for expediency, to mean "since a long time ago".   Of course I cannot know if homosexuality was discriminated since the beginning of times since I wasn't there then. :lol:   But I cannot know either if it was NOT discriminated.

 

Forgive my humor,  but you were responding to a Catholic.  As such,  the beginning of times for me should be the Creation in Genesis by Jehovah.  And I was taught that Jehovah hated homosexuality (and if he changed his mind since, he hasn't told yet).  So I think that with the formality of my religion, I am correct in saying that homosexuality was discriminated since the beginning of times,  which was the Creation. 

 

But I am not serious about my argument,  and I agree with what you wrote about the earlier societies we know from history.  :) 

. 

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, upshot said:

If I may...

My only personal gripe is GAY and SEX should not be used together in a sentence :P 

Being Gay: Same gender attraction that is beyond the sex part but encompasses their (his or her) entire lifestyle through life.

 

I see many, focused on defining everything about 'who you suppose to be by the sex act' and ignore all the other encompassing attributes of your personal outlook, actions and choices that makes you gay or str8. You are categorizing people in sheep pens base SOLELY on shallow properties like asshole fucking is gay and vagina is str8. I know many guys who like to anal their female partners and girls who enjoy it or peg their husbands' ass. So what now? They gay too? Our bias, being too quick to accuse any guy looking an asshole or penis too long, so he's gay. :P Imagine, you fall for a guy, you desperately test for the smallest itsy-bitsy sign just so you can justify chasing him because die-die he must be gay. That's looking for trouble in all the wrong places.

 

Life is WAY MORE COMPLEX AND VARIED than closed minded people are willing to give it credit. THUS, here lies more reasons for confusion and bitching and why we have topics like this popping up every so often. If we want society to accept us as gays for what we do, we have to also help other different from us be accepted as well with no T&C attached.

 Be true to yourself. It's easy living your life, your way. Then one dictated by a stranger.

 

But I see a main difference here between gay sex and straight sex, even if arousing the dick in the end may be the same or if the place where the dick is entered is a part of the body (or two).

 

The straight guy may like to indulge into anal sex with his female partner (not sure if all girls allow or like to be fucked into the anus, left that aside) but the straight guy still fucks a girl and doesn't fantasise about anything else than girls. He enjoys sexual activity to a girl. But the straight guy would object to fuck a guy.

98.5 % of straight guys would not be able to fuck the anus of a guy, because he would feel disgusted (in having sex with a guy).

It is not like you can just switch the sex partner to everyone. The straight guy won't indulge into any sex of any sort of sexual activity with a guy.

 

The same goes for gay guys. Who is gay, won't ever want to fuck the anus of a girl or even worse a girl's pussy.

 

I still see gay sex as being different than straight sex. You can't say gay and straight sex is the same.

You put a girl into the room with my guy sex partner, I might not even get hard on the sight of a girl or such turned down.

I know it sounds funny, but some guys have boops nearly as big as girls, not every gay finds this a turn on.

And let's be honest, gay sex is often different to straight sex, because it happens more "on the road".

I don't think there is something like "cruising" for straight guys (in reference to girls). There is pick up or "sex talk" at bars with girls, but sex between straights mostly (if not near to always) happens indoors. I can't say this about the gay sex.

 

I don't think you can conclude sex is sex (be it two guys or guy and girl) but gay and straight (non sexually related) is something different.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

Forgive my humor,  but you were responding to a Catholic.  As such,  the beginning of times for me should be the Creation in Genesis by Jehovah.  And I was taught that Jehovah hated homosexuality

 

Better perhaps not to make sweeping statements which are inaccurate without the caveat that it refers to a personal view. A narrow Middle Eastern concept originating far back in the mists of time which cannot be proved can surely not be discussed as a universal truth. 

Edited by InBangkok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

Better perhaps not to make sweeping statements which are inaccurate without the caveat that it refers to a personal view.

 

Please refer to a sweeping statement which YOU made and is inaccurate, which I brought up in the post you are replaying to:

 

46 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

Homosexuality was never discriminated against "since the beginning of times".

 

This is a sweeping statement which is inaccurate because nobody knows exactly the behavior of prehistoric humans, so THERE IS A POSSIBILITY that homosexuality was discriminated "since the beginning of times".  

 

From the Internet: "While our ancestors have been around for about six million years, the modern form of humans only evolved about 200,000 years ago. Civilization as we know it is only about 6,000 years old, and industrialization started in the earnest only in the 1800s."

 

Let's see...  200,000 - 6,000 = 194,000.  So prehistoric humans could have existed for 194,000 years.  If so, the probability that homosexuality was discriminated sometime somewhere in this period is close to 100%. 

 

Please notice also that what I wrote "since the beginning of times" is not "at the beginning of time" and therefore can also mean "at any time since the beginning of times" .  Any discrimination after the day 200,000 years ago, happened "since the beginning of times",  even if it happened yesterday.  Therefore, my original statement is correct. Q.E.D.  :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest I love Humanities
30 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

Some historical inaccuracy here. Homosexuality was never discriminated against "since the beginning of times". It was far from uncommon in ancient Greece and Rome. In Asia it was prevalent in earlier centuries, indeed millennia. Several Chinese emperors had gay lovers. In his book "A Hidden Love: Art and Homosexuality" Dominique Fernandez makes it clear that China had "a glorious erotic culture, largely but by no means exclusively heterosexual". Same with Korean Kings. King Hyegong of the Silla Dynasty was known for his adventures with other men and was even described as "a man in appearance but a woman by nature." After his wife died, King Gongmin of the Koryo Dynasty went as far as to create a Ministry whose sole purpose was to seek out and recruit young men from all over the Kingdom to serve at his Court. 

 

A Chinese bonze introduced homosexuality to Japan around the 9th century and it became far from uncommon. It was not discriminated against. Erotic woodblock prints illustrating two men engaged in explicit sexual positions were found alongside those featuring heterosexual acts. The erotic and explicit temple carvings in India's Khajuraho and the towns in Nepal's Kathmandu Valley have very clear depictions of gay sex. One of the Nizams of Hyderabad was very gay and maintained a galaxy of handsome young male servants and courtiers.

 

It was the arrival of colonial powers and their accompanying band of missionaries and their ridiculous idea of saving souls for Christ that started the movement against gay sex. "Your abominable 377A" legislation was introduced in Britain and all British colonies in the 19th century despite the fact that there was considerable homosexual behaviour under the surface of England's surface Victorian morality. In both Singapore, Malaysia and quite a number of other countries it remains on the statute books even though, having agreed their colonies becoming independent, the hypocritical British immediately got rid of the law in England and Wales.


There are key differences of how the concept of homosexuality is viewed in the past compared to today.

 

In the past, apart from western culture where the word “homosexuality” was coined in Germany, “homosexuality” did not define a person’s identity. Our concept today is mainly derived from the western culture and therefore, the polarised views that comes along with it as a package. The western concept only started in the last century or two.

 

In the past concepts, the same sex relationship between two guys were understood and taken as a variation of relationship - a special kind of bond between two person and these concepts are incompatible with today’s western concept of essence that defines a person. This explains how and why “homosexuality” was accepted in places like Japan, China and India. Therefore when we look at history we ought to look through the lens of history as well.

 

Sexual activities, present or absent within the special bond may be different between the various cultures, and also the acceptance of it. Whereas today’s western concept strongly suggest the integration of sexual activities with the label of homosexuality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Please refer to a sweeping statement which YOU made and is inaccurate, which I brought up in the post you are replaying to:

 

Quote

Some historical inaccuracy here. Homosexuality was never discriminated against "since the beginning of times". 

 

 

23 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

Please notice also that what I wrote "since the beginning of times" is not "at the beginning of time" and therefore can also mean "at any time since the beginning of times" .  Any discrimination after the day 200,000 years ago, happened "since the beginning of times",  even if it happened yesterday.  Therefore, my original statement is correct. Q.E.D.  :) 

 

Split hairs if you wish. But my statement is accurate, You conveniently omit that you added "only recently" to your comment. That directly not only infers but actually means that you intended before "recently" to mean that gays were discriminated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Guest I love Humanities said:

There are key differences of how the concept of homosexuality is viewed in the past compared to today.

 

In the past, apart from western culture where the word “homosexuality” was coined in Germany, “homosexuality” did not define a person’s identity. Our concept today is mainly derived from the western culture and therefore, the polarised views that comes along with it as a package. The western concept only started in the last century or two.

 

Absolutely correct. Thailand had no words for heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual until the 20th century and these came from the west.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

 

Split hairs if you wish. But my statement is accurate, You conveniently omit that you added "only recently" to your comment. That directly not only infers but actually means that you intended before "recently" to mean that gays were discriminated.

Just as Larry's open letter gravitates from freedom of speech to discrimination by some within the 'community', I suspect you two are shifting towards homosexuality as a sin.  

The catch is the cut off point.  Steve probably still subscribes to the notion of civilization equals patriarchy or prophets.  Hence, when or since time begins.  I take into consideration matriarchal times and assume there is a tomorrow, and can't be bothered, pardon the expression.

Did TS mention his religion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Guest I love Humanities said:


There are key differences of how the concept of homosexuality is viewed in the past compared to today.

 

In the past, apart from western culture where the word “homosexuality” was coined in Germany, “homosexuality” did not define a person’s identity. Our concept today is mainly derived from the western culture and therefore, the polarised views that comes along with it as a package. The western concept only started in the last century or two.

 

In the past concepts, the same sex relationship between two guys were understood and taken as a variation of relationship - a special kind of bond between two person and these concepts are incompatible with today’s western concept of essence that defines a person. This explains how and why “homosexuality” was accepted in places like Japan, China and India. Therefore when we look at history we ought to look through the lens of history as well.

 

Sexual activities, present or absent within the special bond may be different between the various cultures, and also the acceptance of it. Whereas today’s western concept strongly suggest the integration of sexual activities with the label of homosexuality.

 

The word "homosexual" was first used in an article in 1869 by the Hungarian writer Karl Maria Kertbeny to object against the criminal prosecution of gays by the criminal laws. It was not used to look down on gays but to avoid the expression "Sodomite" which was used to label gays. Previously gay acts were named as "acts against human nature/ pervert acts or unnatural acts" in most criminal books. He wrote a letter to the Minister of Law of Prussia, which was published in the newspaper. Prussia because a part of Hungary was inside the Prussian Empire.

From that time on, the word became common to describe gays (lesbians etc).

 

China not sure you can talk of acceptance.

It is said, homosexuality was quite common during the Song (960 AD) to Qing Dynasty. However most reports refer to the Emperors having male lovers. But does this permit to conclude what was permitted for the royal courts was accepted for all others? Having plenty of side wives was permitted for the emperors and royals in China but not for the common man. There are tales about the story around 余桃断袖 and mostly involve royals.

The first recorded law against gays in China was implemented in 1740. Wasn't this too early to say, it was from a "Western push"?

Some Chinese researchers say anti-homosexual moves came from Western society and introduced into China, but there are plenty Chinese researchers who object and see it more as an internal stronger focus on making marriage between man and wife to a pillar of the Chinese society. The slogan "It came from Western culture/ the evil came from the West" was often a "scapegoat" to wrongly label things in China.

 

Communist China even made life worse for homosexuals. Starting 1949 gays in China were executed. Until the year 2001 homosexuality was considered a mental disease in China. But after 1997 gay sex was no longer any criminal offence.

 

Don't forget the West had periods of open liberalism of gays (Greek and Roman Empire).

It was more the Catholic Religion that pushed a drive to condemn gay sex, once large parts of the (East) Roman Empire came under the Christian Religion, implemented by Emperor Theodosius I in 347 AC. Punishment by public burning.

 

However, not to forget the oldest law indicating the criminalisation of gay sex is from 1100 BC at the Law tables of the Middle Assyrian Empire. The punishment was castration. The second record dates from the Jewish Books under Leviticus around 550 BC and was the first to implement the capital punishment* for "gay relationships" between men.

(* = death penalty)

 

I would not dare to say, the origins of homophobia or criminalisation of homosexuality are or have been "Western concepts" or derived from the Western culture. That would be too easy.

 

There is sufficient evidence on criminalisation of gays from other parts in the world.

 

One problem is for any research on this area, which probably won't come from any Singaporean university is not having any written papers or confirmations as this was not common during those days. So much of it will be in the unknown.

 

Hope this clarifies.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by singalion
..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, singalion said:

The first recorded law against gays in China was implemented in 1740. Wasn't this too early to say, it was from a "Western push"?

Some Chinese researchers say anti-homosexual moves came from Western society and introduced into China, but there are plenty Chinese researchers who object and see it more as an internal stronger focus on making marriage between man and wife to a pillar of the Chinese society. The slogan "It came from Western culture/ the evil came from the West" was often a "scapegoat" to wrongly label things in China.

 

I agree that what is known about homosexuality in China is confined mostly to the Emperors and their Courts. Further it is clearly a stretch to assume that such gay behaviour would have filtered down to the mass of the population. At least I do not know of any sources. As Dominique Fernandez points out in his book, literary texts and erotic paintings attest to the fact that the high water-mark of homosexual culture in China was reached in the Ming Dynasty. Certainly there is a large number of silk paintings from that period illustrating in detail male sexual couplings.

 

The art of the erotic painting began to decline with the advent of the Qing Dynasty. This, along with the general change in the attitude to sex between men, seemed to be a result both of the influence of Confucianism and Christian propaganda. The Catholic priest Matteo Ricci had arrived in Macao in 1582 and soon found his way to Beijing. The Ming had welcomed him and his Catholic colleagues and even gave Ricci a position at Court. The Emperor was far less interested in his religious ideas than in the knowledge he passed on of mathematics, geography, astronomy and hydraulics. Since Ricci and his priests had learned Chinese, Jesuit teachings on sexuality and procreation must surely also have seeped through to at least some members of the Court. I therefore suspect (without having researched it) that western religious cultural values regarding sex had become quite widespread at Court before 1740.

Edited by InBangkok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • G_M locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...