Jump to content
Male HQ

Questioning my sexuality


Recommended Posts

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 post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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 phys

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 intim

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 homosex

1 hour ago, wilfgene said:

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.

 

That is certainly not my view.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 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.

 

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.

 

 

 

Totally agree. Unfortunately, this thread has been hijacked by anonymous trolls trying to push their agenda. OP is only trying to ask for some advice and people are arguing about the history of homosexuality. 🤦‍♀️

 

anon6789 please ignore these biased opinions and take your time to explore your sexuality. It's great that you are asking these questions and even talked to a counselor about it. Everyone's is unique in their own way, it's just our current society still wants to put labels on everything even if it doesn't exactly fits. 


Personally, I view sex and relationships as distinct. Sex is simply what turns you on, the sexual urges you get when you see or think of something/someone. They are raw emotions that you feel in the short-term and may change over time. Whereas relationships are more of a long-term feelings you have for someone, that makes you want to commit your life to. You can have healthy relationships without the sex and vice-versa. The trouble is we were never taught to distinguish these emotions and we tend to mix it all together. So maybe this frame of thinking can help you work out some of your confusion. It's never too late to explore your own sexuality, just try and do it in a safe and comfortable manner. 

Edited by freed
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
3 minutes ago, freed said:

Unfortunately, this thread has been hijacked by anonymous trolls trying to push their agenda. OP is only trying to ask for some advice and people are arguing about the history of homosexuality. 🤦‍♀️

 

Because I see guest making more sense than members, and it seems to be the members who are arguing about the history of homosexuality here.  So I guess you mean some of those recalcitrant trolling members when you say "anonymous trolls"

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, freed said:

 

Totally agree. Unfortunately, this thread has been hijacked by anonymous trolls trying to push their agenda. OP is only trying to ask for some advice and people are arguing about the history of homosexuality. 🤦‍♀️

 

anon6789 please ignore these biased opinions and take your time to explore your sexuality. It's great that you are asking these questions and even talked to a counselor about it. Everyone's is unique in their own way, it's just our current society still wants to put labels on everything even if it doesn't exactly fits. 


Personally, I view sex and relationships as distinct. Sex is simply what turns you on, the sexual urges you get when you see or think of something/someone. They are raw emotions that you feel in the short-term and may change over time. Whereas relationships are more of a long-term feelings you have for someone, that makes you want to commit your life to. You can have healthy relationships without the sex and vice-versa. The trouble is we were never taught to distinguish these emotions and we tend to mix it all together. So maybe this frame of thinking can help you work out some of your confusion. It's never too late to explore your own sexuality, just try and do it in a safe and comfortable manner. 

 

Whilst you might be right with your opinion on the anonymous Guest posts but I think the problem of TS is not the difference of a romantic relationship (with whom whoever) or sex but whether he is homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual or even asexual.

I think the TS is quite clear on the difference of sex and relationship.

 

How to go along in a life if you don't know whether you are more attracted to girls or more to guys or maybe to both or in another case don't find sexual activity with any of them worthwhile?

 

And these last points have something to do with sex and sexual preference.

 

And if you read along the posts and responses from the TS, you will note, there is a certain lack of sexual experiences. TS stated that he has been in a romantic relationship with a girl.

TS, in my understanding, never had the issue of falling in love with everyone after first date...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, freed said:

Totally agree. Unfortunately, this thread has been hijacked by anonymous trolls trying to push their agenda. OP is only trying to ask for some advice and people are arguing about the history of homosexuality. 🤦‍♀️

 

Yes, some here might have sidetracked on the homosexuality, but the starting point was exactly to shape a difference between sex and sexual orientation and resulting labeling.

 

Some sidetracking might be acceptable because the issue of TS touches a topic which covers innate parts of being gay (or not being gay).

 

Regarding the majority of Guest posts, I would agree with you for the TS to ignore all of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
21 minutes ago, singalion said:

And if you read along the posts and responses from the TS, you will note, there is a certain lack of sexual experiences. TS stated that he has been in a romantic relationship with a girl.

 

And for that, your advise was to go have sex "as soon as possible" and do it with a "prostitute"??? 

 

19 minutes ago, singalion said:

Regarding the majority of Guest posts, I would agree with you for the TS to ignore all of them.

 

And you told TS to ignore all "guests'" post?? What about yours? LOL! 

 

@anon6789, be wary that the road to destruction is fraught with fake advisors.

 

When it comes to sex, there's really no rush and no pressure. For most of us gays here, it would be a nightmare to even to dream of having sex with a women, much less doing it for real with a woman. Whatever you want to do, take ti easy, and do it at your own nice pace. Just don't force yourself to do anything that you yourself are uncomfortable with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, singalion said:

. . . I think the problem of TS is not the difference of a romantic relationship (with whom whoever) or sex but whether he is homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual or even asexual.

I think the TS is quite clear on the difference of sex and relationship.

 

Having now read the TS in more detail, he is clearly very confused - and I am sorry that he feels that way. If someone has some form of relationship with a girl, enjoys being with her but is not very interested to pursue it beyond friendship, how interested is it likely that he will be with sex with another girl who might take more of an initiative as regards sex. The TS makes clear he is not sure.

 

On the other hand, he enjoys the masculine form and sometimes masturbates looking at guys in briefs or speedos. I see three clues.

 

Surely the first is that he makes clear he is not interested in total male nudity and has absolutely no interest in seeing a guy's penis. A second is that when masturbating he has no desire to visualise another man's body. He is more interested in thinking how nice it would be if he himself was more attractive to other men.

 

The third in my view is in his teens he never had a crush on a guy, only on girls. Almost all the gay guys I know and have known developed crushes on other guys when at school or in their first year at uni.

 

In my teens and early 20s I tried to convince myself that I had an interest in girls. I went out with a few and occasionally got as far as kissing and cuddling. But I never had any desire for sex. On the other hand I only had crushes on guys at school, had a strong interest in the nude male form and none in the female form, and soon summoned up the courage for sez with a guy whom I liked a lot.

 

I do know one man who decided in his late teens to become asexual. It was a conscious decision even though he knew he had more interest in guys than girls. He kept to that decision until his mid-30s when he met a guy who was to become his lover and life parter.

 

From what I read, I suspect the TS is primarily heterosexual and just needs some encouragement to go as far as to have sex. Reading all his posts, I do not get the feeling that he is deep down (or rather in his brain) a homosexual. If he really wants to move forward, I don't think a prostitute is the answer. He should develop a close relationship with a girl over a short period of time and then just make the first move on initiating sex. In his late 20s, most girls will expect that. If it all works out, great. If it does not, he can either try again or change tack and see if sex with a guy who becomes a friend is any more satisfying. Personally, when it comes to the first experience of sex, I think some form of relationship and deep feeling for the person is important rather than just casual sex.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours 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.

 

I felt one of my hairs splitting with the first response you wrote to my post, that started with "Some historic inaccuracy here. Homosexuality was never discriminated against "since the beginning of times".",  followed by a recount of many old civilizations that accepted homosexuality.  I was surprised: does InBangkok think that I am an uneducated illiterate who does not know already all the history he wrote there?  I thought that the conversations we are having are on a friendly basis.

 

A second hair of mine started splitting when I read in a following post:

 

9 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

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. 

 

You didn't realize that I did bring up Jehovah and the old Testament as a humorous response to your criticism of my "beginning of times"?  I thought that you had some sense of humor.  Instead you accused me of making inaccurate sweeping statements!

 

And finally in the last comment, you accuse me of having conveniently added "only recently".  Where?  I did a search of the page, and the "only recently" found is the one you wrote.

.

 

 

Edited by Steve5380
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours 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.

 

Hi Guest,  I also love Humanities :) 

 

I think that the concept of sexual orientation is quite clear today in spite of being recent.  Not only in the West but also in the East, and here in BW. 

 

Isn't science based on observation and experimentation?  What I observe in myself, and in so many members and guests here whom I consider my gay peers is that being gay is not an occasional characteristic but is the characteristic of our whole life.  To these I add the many gay friends and acquaintances I have had during my long life.  I don't remember any of these who got married later in life to a woman.   I married a woman early in life, but it was not because I was heterosexual.  None of us, that I know, had ever a burning sexual desire to fuck a woman.  Instead, we are full of burning desires to have sex with a man.

 

Further indication that homosexuality is in our essence and not in our fancy is that most of us believe that it is inborn and that we never made a conscious choice to be this way.  I don't think that my convictions here come from hearsay or are cultural, but they are from a long experience of 70+ years of having always been homosexual.  Similarly I always have had brown eyes, and I don't need lengthy discussions over what is meant by color of the eyes. 

 

But discussions about humanities are always interesting :thumb:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

40 minutes agio, Steve 5380 said:

And finally in the last comment, you accuse me of having conveniently added "only recently".  Where?  I did a search of the page, and the "only recently" found is the one you wrote.

 

 

18 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

If not for SEX,  why were we gays so discriminated since the beginning of times until very recently?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wilfgene said:

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?

 

Yes, homosexuality as a sin was probably the easiest way to justify discrimination against gays in the early times. The first human civilizations were probably tribes, with their wise patriarchs and feared witch men (or prophets if you like :) ). And there were exceptions, like the matriarchal Amazons.

 

Also in the early days the difference between macho men and sissy men must have been more pronounced.  Reproduction was very important, and domineering men were absolutists. I hate to think what it was then to be gay...

 

The more recent ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Chinese had civilizations that were advanced in contrast,  and it is perfectly logical if some powerful man was also gay that he would have made sure that homosexuality was not only accepted but celebrated.  But this did not mean that homosexuals were treated as equals throughout the entire population.

 

This view of the antiquity should reinforce our satisfaction of having come to life in this our time.  We should realize the steady progress in equality for women and LGBTQs.  One reason to be optimistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

tenor.gif

 

My admiration for your restraint in just watching silently, and resist your urge to jump right in the middle of it.

Practice makes perfect!  Try to do this always here at BW  :D

 

---------  Next: why some strange behavior trying to quote a post from InBangkok?  I had to copy and post the following -------

 

  Quote

40 minutes agio, Steve 5380 said:

And finally in the last comment, you accuse me of having conveniently added "only recently".  Where?  I did a search of the page, and the "only recently" found is the one you wrote.

 

  19 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

If not for SEX,  why were we gays so discriminated since the beginning of times until very recently?

 
I am sure that you have plenty of education to notice the difference between "only recently" and "until very recently"  :).  One is singularity, the other is time frame.
 
In another context I could have written:  "There have been so much poverty and hunger until very recently".   This does not exclude that there were plenty of ultra rich people with full tummies throughout history.  This is very different from saying "There have been so much poverty and hunger only recently"
.
Edited by Steve5380
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, singalion said:

 

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).

 

Well agree to disagree as I always say.

 

For me it is not about the academic or historically references of what it is supposed to mean or most would look at it. I take my context of how I see it being perceived and used in present day, like how some folk use it here in relation to their comments or stories of relationship seekers, sexual romping misalignment and the sad part is, it's becoming somewhat misuse, wrongly perceived and by that token has led to problems and sad tales of un-relinquished love or lust. heh

 

For myself, I've  drawn a line in the sand and promote an opinion looking at it from a more 'logical'(?) approach if anything, be fair, co-exist more civil and not add further confusion trying to shove a square object into an oval shape hole.

 

SEX is SEX. Sex in itself is confusing enough by itself. Google sex and you see the numerous practices and examples that pops out. You see it more black and white. A gay purist? But I see gray. Tons of gray in fact. And calling it Gay Sex is too simplistic when trying to fit it in each unique context. I call it ANAL SEX. I do not call it GAY SEX for example. Trying to box everything up with neatly with labels tags using SEX Preference as primary focus just muddy the water when we have a lot of border-line cases.

 

Smart chap like you, I am certain you navigate all this well enough in life and in BW given what read of your writings. But in the wild, it causes conflicts, division and misinterpretation.

 

BW is an established lighting rod that attracts a huge assortment of sexual creatures and deviants if that has not sunk in. Sometimes BW can give you this impression, there are a huge percentage of gays folks in Singapore. But really, it is just a tiny percentage in a country of 5+ million people?

 

A good portion in BW are not gay. I bet you, could be up to half are not but a wide spectrum 'others'. Look at the multiply thread titles, go in and read what they write or seek..etc It is very, very telling. So when I comment on something I try to keep those people in mind.

 

The gay man will always be the gay man. He knows it, and he needs don't need anyone to tell him in BW. But even there are various kinds of gays guys too including those who do not do anal sex or BJ too. Strange as that may sound.

 

But it's demoralizing when a Bi or some other sexual persuasion comes in seeking pointers, joins a conversation or commentaries and BANG!! What he sometime gets is blatantly JUDGED or told he is too silly to not admit he's gay. Tribalism kicks in. Let people make up their own mind. What do we gain or lose to let those seek their own path, realize their consequences of choice? Don't even attempt any of those gay conversion agenda in BW.  :P Our views all may differ but for me what's more important is playing fair and understanding.

 

Just like our thread starter. He wants to still find a girl and marry, but he still has a yearning for some male-on-male fun (in a specific manner he said). So he is not gay. He has a Kink. Fine. He can have his fun sure.

 

But if he brings a woman into the picture and talk marriage. HE CAN DO THAT, SO LONG he gives up his male fun for life. That is a necessary life choice for any decent human being. Marriage is choosing to commit to A LIFELONG UNION between 2 persons. Sorry but in real life, this is something you can only choose ONE way or no way when it comes to Human Relationship be it Str8 or gay. You can not your cake and eat it by yourself.

 

Our thread starter have to ask some very serious question about his life choice if having a wife and kid(s) is one of his goals. AND beware the consequences THAT'S ON HIM if he chose to be unfaithful with another female or male on the side after marrying. You do not get to play the victim card. Any male here who think he can have it both ways at the same time. You are a sad story that has not come its end yet.

 

So I respect your POV. If anything it serves as a good reminder to me and make me question mine to see if it still stands or I need to change it.

Edited by upshot

** My comments are my own opinion and how I see & learn things. Any issue with that, you have a problem with your own understanding that left you feeling conflicted. Which is good as it motivates you to RETHINK them and find out if still valid, wrong or misguided. Ideals should always be tested and re-tested for it to remain truth, current and help you grow. Agree to disagree. I argue the points not about getting personal, that is, if I choose to argue at all. We can learn something new every day. Myself included. I keep life and things in balance that's how I present views in my commentaries at Blowing Wind. - Updated: June 2020

* Supporting the Strives of the Intellectual Dark Web Community.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, upshot said:

Well agree to disagree as I always say.

SEX is SEX. Sex in itself is confusing enough by itself. Google sex and you see the numerous practices and examples that pops out. You see it more black and white. A gay purist? But I see gray. Tons of gray in fact. And calling it Gay Sex is too simplistic when trying to fit it in each unique context. I call it ANAL SEX. I do not call it GAY SEX for example. Trying to box everything up with neatly with labels tags using SEX Preference as primary focus just muddy the water when we have a lot of border-line cases.

 

So I respect your POV. If anything it serves as a good reminder to me and make me question mine to see if it still stands or I need to change it.

 

Just as a matter of clarification (and I won't go into lengthy replies justifying my point, no worries).

 

I never said or meant to say GAY sex stands for ANAL sex (only). With gay sex I meant sexual activity with another guy. They can do what they want and enjoy.

 

On the history, sorry I belong to the generation that received a general education and did not have the attitude just to learn some subject to pass an exam and then to forget all but to learn for live. History can assist to explain a lot. I would have advised some older man with a funny hairstyle and strange facial tan who is sitting in a colonial building in white colours in the capital Washington to look more into historical events (even into the history of his own country), but I doubt he has the intellect. But he could have taken some lessons.

 

On the labels: Maybe I m not convinced on these labels or creating more and more labels. It is like creating more political directions, just causing fractions in society (and in the end maybe more problems). And some of the labels are even turning to be insults to gays. I m quite outspoken against this "straight curious", just be honest to yourself, you play with guys and enjoy it or find it sexually arousing than you might have a homosexual tendency, you can still enjoy sex with girls if you enjoy both, but don't try to tell me you are straight in such scenario and make it look as if gay is something disgusting.

 

Most people fit very well into the main labels, but as always there are exceptions. I gave my personal view on this issue in previous posts, just read it again. I don't intend to repeat.

 

I still find the TS is confused mainly because of his lack of serious experimentation and lack of sexual experience. Let's resolve the first step before we go into marriage and kids. If he finds out he has no real attraction to girls sexually, he would not need to explore further on this road.

 

No worries, I accept your personal view, life experiences can result in different views on matters of life. I made mine, you made yours. You draw your conclusions, I drew mine. Life is full of lessons and new experiences, don't be shy to step out.

 

Edited by singalion
.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

Singalion presents his personal view on few dangerous assumptions.

 

1. Uncommon for men in their 20s to be virgin. Hello, we are in Singapore, not US.

 

2. OK to have sex with prostitute and strongly recommended. Hello, sex without romance have far-reaching risks, both psychological and physical. It increases the likelihood of non-monogamy later on in life which would risks his relationship with his future partner. Sex with prostitute without romance will form an incomplete picture of how sex should be between two lovers. Incomplete picture will form wrong perception and comprehension of how sex should feel like.


With age, things like sex matter less when you realise life can be fulfilling in other ways. 


Constant self-acceptance and having rewarding relationships are the key. Sex need to be divorced from masculinity, failing to have sex should not be seen as a failure in performing masculinity as a man. Virginity doesn’t mean you don’t desire sex, it is just that you don’t act on the desire until the right time. Having self-control beats those people who doesn’t.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

The average (mean) age that guys lose their virginity is 17.1 in the US and 21.8 in Singapore, there is no stats regarding the median age which can be presumed to be higher. It is also important to highlight that Singapore is generally conservative, so the statistic can be assumed to be sampled from those who are less conservative. We can draw to conclusion that it is baseless for Singalion to claim that most guys would have lost virginity by their 20s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can close your eyes to what is happening around you and ignore certain facts and still live in the yesteryear(s) or running around with the people's mindset of the 1980s .

 

The below article is already from 2016 and I don't think the situation changed for teenagers getting first sexual experiences later in 2020 than it has been the case in 2016.

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Teenagers starting to have sex at a younger age, say social workers

The Straits Times, Published Feb 22, 2016
 

But social workers said they are noticing that some teens are starting to have sex at a younger age and have multiple sexual partners.

 

Dr Carol Balhetchet, senior director for youth services at the Singapore Children's Society, has spent the last 19 years working with young people. She said she has encountered teens these days who became sexually active as young as 12 or 13 years of age, compared with 15 or 16 years old a decade ago.

 

Social workers say teens are starting to have sex at a younger age because they are exposed to sex and sexuality issues online earlier. They also reach puberty earlier.

 

Sexuality education 'helps cut infection rate'

Published Apr 10, 2016
 
The number of teenagers diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection (STI) has plunged, as more young people know how to protect themselves against such diseases.
 

Its spokesman attributed the fall to youth being more aware of how to protect themselves from being infected. This is due to sexuality education programmes in schools.

 

Doctors and social workers say teens are also more aware of using condoms.

 

Doctors interviewed say teens who get tested for an STI usually have at least a few sexual partners.

For girls, their partners are boyfriends or even casual friends. For boys, besides girlfriends, they also could be having sex with a prostitute.

 

Social workers and doctors interviewed also shared another observation: More teens they see these days have multiple sexual partners. Some even change a few partners in just a year.

 

"I find that teens' attitudes towards sex these days are a lot more blase. Some are even having sex with casual friends whom they are not in a relationship with," said Dr Tan. "It's like meeting up to have sex these days is almost as casual as meeting up for a game of tennis."

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  Let's stop cherry picking:

 

There is no way at any of my total posts at BW for having written :

48 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Singalion presents his personal view on few dangerous assumptions.

2. OK to have sex with prostitute and strongly recommended.

 

Hello, sex without romance have far-reaching risks, both psychological and physical. It increases the likelihood of non-monogamy later on in life which would risks his relationship with his future partner. Sex with prostitute without romance will form an incomplete picture of how sex should be between two lovers. Incomplete picture will form wrong perception and comprehension of how sex should feel like.

 

My recommendation in the case of TS was completely based on the exceptional circumstances in TS's case in consideration of his lack of sexual experience, his fetish and his previous inability to stay erected and nothing else

I have explained this in very and sufficient detail.

 

I even clearly pointed out that most girls would want to seek "normal" sex with plenty of romance in my post.

 

Instead of coming up with your allegations, better learn to read the full posts of the TS and mine. 

 

On 9/16/2020 at 10:00 PM, singalion said:

To be honest, you sound quite heterosexual to me.

I know it sounds a bit awkward but in your situation I would even recommend to you to visit a prostitute and just get it done. The reason is: Every girl who will meet you will run away, once she notices you are a greenhorn as to sex. Unless, you want one of those virgins with 35y. But honestly, there aren't many around any longer.

Prostitutes have seen a lot of guys like you and they know how to guide you.

I m just scared a girl in your age or slightly younger will be as shocked as I am, noticing your virginity.

 

On 9/17/2020 at 4:58 PM, singalion said:

My first post last night what I meant to point out is: If you have a certain fetish, you wouldn't probably approach any potential girls at first sight with your fetish. The girl might just run away or in nowadays terms block you instantly on the apps, once you told them. Which means, you must be careful.

If you have girls to test on you sexual likings other than prostitutes, then that would be great. Sure, even in Singapore you would find girls who indulge into some fetish stuff. But note, such girls are not for marriage, ha ha. But you would need to be prepared for many girls categorising you as a "pervert" because your likings or fetish might not be common. Most girls would just want the normal sex with plenty of romance.

I found it easier to approach a prostitute on your issue and maybe even do to some role play and just check for yourself if girls are your thing. That was the reason I suggested it.

 

The recommendation was based purely on the very insular circumstances of TS and nothing else.

I said if he finds a girl somehow else, then even better.

 

Stop taking my recommendations out of the true context I made in my previous posts.

 

And I wasn't too far off as the TS himself stated he already thought of "experimenting" with a prostitute.

 

On 9/16/2020 at 11:28 PM, anon6789 said:

and err, i did toy with the idea of trying with a prostitute but ... with covid and all, i think most of the brothels are not operating. and erm, tbh, im not sure if i would be able to enjoy sex with a prostitute because i'd probably be worrying about STDs and stuff lol. but it did cross my mind... to maybe find a casual one night stand/no strings attached kinda hook-up with a girl.. but i havent gotten around (or know how to get around) finding such girls/going for such an encounter...

 

Another point: You could say watching porn can lead to a wrong perception and comprehension of how sex should feel like.

 

There is no scientific base which concluded for guys having visited prostitutes of being prone to non-monogamous relationships or not being able to have a monogamous relationship/ marriage.

 

There are many guys who had their first sexual encounter with a prostitute. I don't think all of them ended up as lonely weirdos or never encountered any loving relationship/ marriage in their later life. Please stop from overdoing here. 

 

Plenty of the first sexual experiences (gay or straight) are not on a very romantic note, but casual encounters. In that case following your statements most gay or straight casual sex without romance should have a (quote from you:) far-reaching physical and psychological risks. I don't think people with some common sense would agree to your statement or conclusion.

 

And if I look at gay casual sex, (much) romance is in most cases not playing any major factor. A difference might be in case of guys being in a relationship or at the dating phase, romance may be playing a much bigger role in these scenarios. 

 

Please look in detail first, why I came up with my recommendation to the TS instead of cherry picking from my posts leading to wrong assumptions.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol this thread has become so difficult to follow... some posts are so lengthy and convoluted with disparate points being made with sometimes no link between paragraphs and broken (or bad) english... tbh, i lost track and kinda stopped reading seriously already. anyways thanks everyone for the input/advice~~

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest what a joke

Many guys had their first first sexual encounter with a prostitute.”

- clearly a bias assumption made by you, even if it is true, “many” does not necessarily means “majority”.

 

“Teenagers starting to have sex at a younger age, say social workers“

- I believe this does not necessarily represents the majority since social workers tend to work with a fraction of teenagers - commonly termed as at-risk. Clearly the tone of these articles is to raise awareness and the need for education. This can be taken to mean that such a trend is alarming and concerning. Therefore instead of encouraging such a trend to continue, it should be discouraged. Just as the interviewed doctor said, “attitudes towards sex these days are more a lot more blase”, I believe this suggest that such an attitude is negative instead of positive.

 

I believe what TS wants is to move forward positively instead of negatively. Your recommendations may have the potential to do more harm than good. We can suggest TS to ask any non-materialistic female friends if they prefer a virgin boyfriend/ husband or a boyfriend/ husband who has visited prostitutes before.

 

Lastly, just answer a simple one-word “yes” or “no” to the following question. Do you assume all heterosexual man can be aroused purely by physical sex (and by that, disregard the factor of intimacy/ romance)? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, anon6789 said:

lol this thread has become so difficult to follow... some posts are so lengthy and convoluted with disparate points being made with sometimes no link between paragraphs and broken (or bad) english... tbh, i lost track and kinda stopped reading seriously already. anyways thanks everyone for the input/advice~~

 

That's the best thing you can do!

 

Wish you all the best in your future, happiness and a fulfilled life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never I would dare to make any biased assumptions...

 

PS.: I never spoke out against romance, love and a romantic relationship, I m happy for everyone experiencing love and romance and wish everyone will do. But I shouldn't close my eyes against reality and real life scenarios and should be prepared to accept the reality.

 

--------------------------------

Allure of paid sex for teenage boys

The Straits Times Published, Apr 10, 2016,

 

Not having a girlfriend and watching porn often are key reasons for turning to prostitutes: Study

Never having had a girlfriend, or one who is sexually active, and watching pornography frequently are the two strongest reasons why teenage boys turn to prostitutes, according to the first study here on teens who pay for sex.

 

Other reasons that some boys are more likely than others to visit prostitutes include the fact that they started having sex before the age of 16, said Associate Professor Wong Mee Lian of the Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health at the National University of Singapore, who led the study.

 

They could have reached puberty earlier and tend to have older friends who exposed them to behaviour that included smoking, drinking and sex with prostitutes, she said.

 

Their research, published in the science and medical journal PLOS One in January, found that 39 per cent of the boys polled said they had sex with prostitutes - a figure that Prof Wong described as high.

 

According to the study, of the boys who visited prostitutes:
• The median age was 16.
• It was the first sexual experience for 38 per cent of them.
• They had a median number of 4.5 sexual partners, including girlfriends or casual friends they slept with, by the time they were interviewed by Prof Wong's team.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 7:30 PM, 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

Homophobic spy detected!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 3:38 PM, 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.

I have no attraction towards females. There is no way i can have any cognitive conditioning towards them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, yoyo74 said:

Homophobic spy detected!!!

 

He is surely not the only one around BW.

 

2 hours ago, yoyo74 said:

I have no attraction towards females. There is no way i can have any cognitive conditioning towards them.

 

Yes, if we make a fact check on what "Guest Fact checker" wrote, we conclude that it is mostly nonsense. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
8 hours ago, anon6789 said:

lol this thread has become so difficult to follow... some posts are so lengthy and convoluted with disparate points being made with sometimes no link between paragraphs and broken (or bad) english... tbh, i lost track and kinda stopped reading seriously already. anyways thanks everyone for the input/advice~~

 

Exactly ... the moment those troll members like @singalion comes in, the thread went to the dumps. But I hope you gathered enough information for yourself by then. Good luck and enjoy the journey. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest converse not cancel
10 hours ago, yoyo74 said:

Homophobic spy detected!!!


All things equal, as a gay myself, I don’t disagree with him. It is common for people to be bias, what he said isn’t entirely wrong.
 

We should change our petty and overly sensitive mindset. We need to stop labelling anyone who disagree with us or have different views from us. We focus on the one step forward annually in June but neglect the two steps back that happens very so often.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Guest converse not cancel said:


All things equal, as a gay myself, I don’t disagree with him. It is common for people to be bias, what he said isn’t entirely wrong.
 

We should change our petty and overly sensitive mindset. We need to stop labelling anyone who disagree with us or have different views from us. We focus on the one step forward annually in June but neglect the two steps back that happens very so often.

its also quite common for another homophobic person who say he himself is a gay to help another homophobic guy lol but only God knows the truth

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Guest converse not cancel said:


All things equal, as a gay myself, I don’t disagree with him. It is common for people to be bias, what he said isn’t entirely wrong.
 

We should change our petty and overly sensitive mindset. We need to stop labelling anyone who disagree with us or have different views from us. We focus on the one step forward annually in June but neglect the two steps back that happens very so often.

 

Like you,  I also don't have any problems with straights and even those who are homophobic to post here.  If their posts bash LGBTQs, they will get some good answers that will contradict them.  I think that the majority of us have our positions well thought out and not any challenger will surprise us.  If they become too abusive, the Moderator will be on our side and will throw their  nasty stuff into the Flaming Room,  and if it becomes too stinky he may simply delete it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Donedeal

Hi !  I'm frustrated myself because I'm not exactly straight, bi or gay.  I'm periodically one of these.  I could be straight for a period of half a year or so, then got interested in man for a while and then swing back.  I notice that in "normal" times, I'm straight.  But once in a while, I get into a project and fully dedicate my time with a group of male colleagues, or I go on a trip with my colleague, I would start to like guys.  Sort of putting me in a such situations.  It's like those prisoners type of situation.  But I don't just want to release but I think I do actually like the person.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MiddleGround
1 hour ago, Guest Donedeal said:

Hi !  I'm frustrated myself because I'm not exactly straight, bi or gay.  I'm periodically one of these.  I could be straight for a period of half a year or so, then got interested in man for a while and then swing back.  I notice that in "normal" times, I'm straight.  But once in a while, I get into a project and fully dedicate my time with a group of male colleagues, or I go on a trip with my colleague, I would start to like guys.  Sort of putting me in a such situations.  It's like those prisoners type of situation.  But I don't just want to release but I think I do actually like the person.  


This is why the ancient China’s concept better understood same sex attraction than today’s westerners. Back then, the same sex relationship between two guys are taken as a variation of relationship - a special kind of bond between two person, it is seasonal and the feelings come and go. These concepts are incompatible with today’s western concept which defines a person based on some fleeting feelings and giving them endless labels. Every now and then I learn new labels and with it, its definition, concept and studies of it... all by westerners. 
 

I am not saying having same sex lust is wrong. It is the way and our concept of understanding it that is deeply flawed and giving rise to polarised views.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Guest MiddleGround said:


This is why the ancient China’s concept better understood same sex attraction than today’s westerners. Back then, the same sex relationship between two guys are taken as a variation of relationship - a special kind of bond between two person, it is seasonal and the feelings come and go. These concepts are incompatible with today’s western concept which defines a person based on some fleeting feelings and giving them endless labels. Every now and then I learn new labels and with it, its definition, concept and studies of it... all by westerners. 
 

I am not saying having same sex lust is wrong. It is the way and our concept of understanding it that is deeply flawed and giving rise to polarised views.

 

No.

 

With all respect for the Chinese,  sexual orientation is not what you wrote about what the ancient Chinese wrote about.  My homosexuality and that of many others is NOT "a variation of relationship".  It is NOT seasonal, and does not come and go.  It is not based on fleeting feelings , and ... it is NOT deeply flawed!  :angry:

 

Your last phrase raises suspicion that you are one of the homophobic troll, and a Chinese feeling resentment for westerners.

 

Westerners have done a much deeper research of sexuality, sexual orientation, than what any ancient Chinese did, and their work is accepted worldwide, not only by westerners.  Like western iphones are accepted worldwide.

 

But maybe you have the sexual insecurities that the TS and Guest Donedeal have,  and it is fine if you consider yourself a bisexual.  But don't blame your problems on the westerners and on whatever labels circulate around.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...
counter