An Apology, And Questions About Sex And Dignity

[Andrew Calimach]

I just signed up, though I posted here a couple of times before, just to let people know about my articles when they were done. Please forgive me, I am not from Singapore, I divide my time between Europe and New York. Why am I here? I believe Singapore is an exceptionally civilized and aware society. I believe it is the ideal place to explore how we have evloved to this point as men who love other males, and how we can continue to evolve.

 

I have been writing about love between males for close to twenty years now. You can find many of my writings here: https://independent.academia.edu/AndrewCalimach and you can download a free pdf of my book on the gay Greek myths. The stories are very beautiful, I hope you will like them. Also, I will be glad to send a free case of books to any organization that would like them for its members. Don't worry, I'll pay for shipping too.

 

Am I gay? I have always loved other males, since elementary school, but I am not comfortable with the term, I do not identify with the culture. I think I was born either a couple of hundred years too late, or a couple of hundred years too soon. I'm not interested in sex without friendship, and I am perfectly OK with friendship without sex as long as it is real friendship. I also draw the line at what I will and will not do in bed, as will be clear from my writings.

 

I do not mean to tell anyone how to live, that is none of my business. Nevertheless I do want to explore what I consider to be the instinctive boundaries of male sexuality. I believe they exist, perhaps in our chromosomes. In my readings about male love in the past I have encountered a significant difference between our culture and theirs. In the past there often was structure and limits. I see it in the Shinto culture of ancient Japan, it is clearly present in the honorable love of teenagers of ancient Greece, and it can be found in other places as well, though it is difficult to uncover the evidence because people have had such a hard time discussing this.

 

The most important limit I have encountered is the barrier against anal sex. I will not go into detail here, I have written enough about it elsewhere. Enough to say that is was considered abusive of the person penetrated. It was also seen as undignified. It is THIS that I would like to explore, if anyone here is interested. From my readings, and my own feelings, I am beginning to suspect that there is such a thing as "natural dignity." Not only humans have that, so do most intelligent creatures. I also suspect that anal penetration is intrinsically at odds with that natural dignity, and that is why it has been seen that way for so long and in so many places all over the world.

 

What do you think? Is there such a thing as intrinsic human dignity, and is anal sex an affront against that dignity even when both partners agree?

[Guest Guest]

What is "natural" dignity? In nature, natural dignity is stripping off all your clothes and walk around naked. Putting on a shred of clothing may encourage others to attack you as an outsider. But in human society, it is exactly the reverse. So why are we still referring to "natural" dignity when we, as human beings, have pride ourselves in being more evolved than "nature"? Having sex in nature, in any form, is a matter of pleasure and animalistic relief. Having babies is not a burden for the male to bear in baby. Let's all go back there in this time and age, shall we?

 

If anal sex is against "natural dignity", why don't you go finger the pussy of a lioness/tigress and see what happens to you.

 

However, if what you refer to as "intrinsic human dignity" is the dignity of what a baby has when he is born, then maybe we can only say that all babies are born with an aversion to pain. So maybe anal sex (and in fact, vagina sex too) should be banned. However, if you are talking about "human dignity", than it really depends on culture to culture, civilization to civilization.

 

This is basic. You mean the Europeans/NYers didn't tell you this?

 

 

[Guest Guest]

Andrew, you have not been reading all the other threads. From a homosexual point of view, SIngapore is not an exceptionally aware society.  Oh certainly SIngaporeans are aware of homosexuality but the lawmakers are certainly very backward in addressing gay rights.

 

Also, you talk about being not comfortable with the term gay, you equate being gay with "sex without friendship".  Hello? Thats a very narrow definition of being gay. It sounds like you do not have gay friends. It is also interesting that you hone in on anal sex referring to it as being an affront but you do not talk about oral sex which can also be considered penetrative.

 

So, I think you need to examine your own values. For a person who travels a lot and who writes, you have a narrow mind and you have old fashioned ideas.

 

And why am I posting like this? I dont know why but your post annoys me - it almost makes me think that you are straight trying to garner gay reaction to your thoughts.

[Guest Guest]

You guys aren't getting it. I pity the poor OP getting flamed like this.

Perhaps try asking Gay SG confessions if you wanna receive more sophisticsted answers, OP.

[Andrew Calimach]

This is not "flaming." On the contrary! I am glad to have met here intelligent people who have raised important points. First of all, regarding being an OP, thank you, I consider that a compliment. Bear in mind that youth is the price you have to pay in order to reach old age.

 

As for Singapore not being very aware, that is not so certain. What you can say is that politically Singapore may not be very fashionable, as far as gay fashion goes. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? It is true I have not read all the other threads. Send me some links and I will look at them. It is also true that the present concept of how males should love each other is an artificial construct that exists in this moment in time. Your children will certainly have a very different view of it, as did your parents and grandparents, as each generation has its own outlook in these times of rapid changes. At some point we will reach stability. When, and what that will look like, is anyone's guess, but I suspect it will not be what we have now.

 

I do not think of "gay" as being "sex without friendship." I do think of "gay" as being a conformist position, often expressed in form of dress, haircuts, ornaments, behaviors, and mentality. I believe it turns most men off to male love, and from all I have seen of the past, and of the human heart in the present, male love belongs to all males, not just a minority. Am I straight? I am a man, with the feelings of a man. I have been to bed with females and it was delightful, I have been to bed with males and it was even more delightful. I do not put labels on myself.

 

Another guest suggests I go pleasure a lioness, or a tigress. Well, I have, metaphorically speaking, and they moaned and gasped with pleasure. The males do not keep quiet either. I remember one who sang with delight, no particular tune, just the spontaneous music of man experiencing joy. The difference is that woman has to be entered to reach the peak of pleasure, but there is no need to enter the male to reach that level. So if that is not necessary, why risk danger and pain? And maybe indignity?

 

You mention the dignity of a human baby, the dignity of standing naked under the sun. Those are beautiful images. You defend pleasure and animalistic relief. I agree. But we are indeed civilized men, living in a civilized society. There is pleasure and animalistic relief in eating also, but we do not tear raw flesh with our teeth, squatting under a bush. We go to a fine restaurant and eat sophisticated food with sophisticated utensils. And the following day when the body must discard the remains of that food, we do not do it squatting in the street, but in a clean and sanitary environment. Why is sex any different?

 

I suggest to you that sex is different because we are living in the days after times of repression, when male love was not allowed. On one hand we have the exuberance of freedom regained. On the other hand we have the destruction of any old traditions that might have existed before the times of repression. So in effect what you have is wildness and anarchy. Since when is that a good thing? Has Singapore lifted itself to the very top of international society through wildness and anarchy? Has any culture done that? 

 

If not, then I suggest to you that all men have much to gain by fashioning a male love that is more beautiful and more dignified than that which is obtained through pure wildness and abandon. Such traditions did exist once, they can exist again.

[Guest Guest]

Another guest suggests I go pleasure a lioness, or a tigress. Well, I have, metaphorically speaking, and they moaned and gasped with pleasure. The males do not keep quiet either. I remember one who sang with delight, no particular tune, just the spontaneous music of man experiencing joy. The difference is that woman has to be entered to reach the peak of pleasure, but there is no need to enter the male to reach that level. So if that is not necessary, why risk danger and pain? And maybe indignity?

 

You seems to be incapable of holding your own reasoning for more than one post and you seems to be straying away from context. The reason this thread started was because of your statement saying that "The most important limit I have encountered is the barrier against anal sex. ...Enough to say that is was considered abusive of the person penetrated. It was also seen as undignified....I am beginning to suspect that there is such a thing as "natural dignity."

 

Since you implied that vagina sex is a form of "natural dignity" when anal sex isn't, that was why you were challenged to go pleasure an actual lioness/tigress's pussy in nature. If the lioness/tigress eats you alive for playing with it's pussy, does that mean that there is no "natural dignity" in vaginal sex too? But you turned that into a "metaphor".

 

 

You mention the dignity of a human baby, the dignity of standing naked under the sun. Those are beautiful images. You defend pleasure and animalistic relief. I agree. But we are indeed civilized men, living in a civilized society. There is pleasure and animalistic relief in eating also, but we do not tear raw flesh with our teeth, squatting under a bush. We go to a fine restaurant and eat sophisticated food with sophisticated utensils. And the following day when the body must discard the remains of that food, we do not do it squatting in the street, but in a clean and sanitary environment. Why is sex any different?

 

Again, you are out of context. The mention of nudity was to show that "natural dignity" doesn't play much of a part in today's context anymore. And neither does "intrinsic human dignity", and hence the mention of a baby. You spoke about "natural dignity", "intrinsic human dignity" and "human dignity" which are all different matters.

 

Your second post shows that you have either lost the plot, or you are just too stubborn to listen.

 

Anyway, I have said enough. Ciao.

[Andrew Calimach]

I am sorry you are taking such an adversarial position. We are not talking about tigers and lions here, and a person can be dignified nude or dressed, just like he can be undignified one way or the other. The natural dignity I am exploring is not something that we might seek in a nature preserve. It is something we all have wherever we might be, unless we throw it away.

 

It is curious that you equate the vagina and the anus, as if we were comparing the left foot and the right foot. Most women enjoy vaginal sex and abhor anal sex. The pain and disfunction that can ensue are part of the reason, as is the fact thaty they perceive it as filthy, but the degradation and humiliation that many experience also plays a very important role in that distaste. Thus both objectively AND subjectively the two forms of sex have nothing in common. However, your bringing up this comparison does bring into clearer relief precisely that dignity that I am trying to understand better by subjecting it to open debate.

[Guest Guest]

I am sorry you are taking such an adversarial position. We are not talking about tigers and lions here, and a person can be dignified nude or dressed, just like he can be undignified one way or the other. The natural dignity I am exploring is not something that we might seek in a nature preserve. It is something we all have wherever we might be, unless we throw it away.

 

This has been addressed in the "intrinsic human dignity" then. 

 

It is curious that you equate the vagina and the anus, as if we were comparing the left foot and the right foot. Most women enjoy vaginal sex and abhor anal sex. The pain and disfunction that can ensue are part of the reason, as is the fact thaty they perceive it as filthy, but the degradation and humiliation that many experience also plays a very important role in that distaste. Thus both objectively AND subjectively the two forms of sex have nothing in common. However, your bringing up this comparison does bring into clearer relief precisely that dignity that I am trying to understand better by subjecting it to open debate.

 

 Left or right foot, they are still your feet.

 

Your reason that anal sex is an abhorrence simply because it is perceived as "filthy" is an ancient excuse used by homophobes. What others find pleasurable in their bedrooms, regardless filthy or not, is really none of your business. Based on your own reasoning, perhaps oral sex is also a form of "indignity" since man pee out of that same organ too. Hence women who perform oral sex on men are "indignified"?

 

Whether there is degradation or humiliation between the recipients of anal sex is not for YOU to judge. That is for the two consenting participants to judge. Who are YOU to abhor the behaviors of two consenting adults? Who are you to tell another that the behavior is degrading and humiliating when they don't think so? Just because "most women enjoy vaginal sex and abhor anal sex" (in your opinion), does not mean that ALL human beings abhor anal sex. This, again, is basic.

 

Do you sit on the same moral high horse, imposing your own moral values on others, masquerading as a crusader and guardian of "human dignity", all the time?

 

Let me tell you what "human dignity" is:

"Human Dignity" is the dignity to live our lives the way we want, without you imposing your opinion/judgment on us. Comprehendo?

 

 

 

[Guest Guest]

I think some guys here are missing Andrew's point, especially if you perceive homophobia in his statements. But those of us who understand his point, do understand. That doesn't mean we agree, but at least we gotta first understand prior to any meaningful discussion or debate.

[Guest Guest]

I think some guys here are missing Andrew's point, especially if you perceive homophobia in his statements. But those of us who understand his point, do understand. That doesn't mean we agree, but at least we gotta first understand prior to any meaningful discussion or debate.

 

Perhaps you can re-state Andrew's points then.

[Guest JustAGuest]

Andrew, I can tell that you sincerely want to exchange your views and engage in intelligent discussions. You must be rather surprised to have received some brickbats in response here.

From my experience, online discussion is the same everywhere, be it here, Europe or US. Whenever I tried to ask for views, 10 people would give me 11 views. I will share my observations below.

1. People get angry whenever they read a viewpoint that differs from or challenges their own viewpoint. They tend to get personal.

2. Everyone expresses their homosexuality differently. At the end of the day, what's the objective of your discussion here? To find like-minded people? To have a broader view of homosexuality?

3. You are clearly intelligent, rational and calm, as evidenced in the way you wrote the original post and your responses. However, your eloquence still does not mask your confusion or lack of clarity. So what if anal sex is not dignified? So what if anal sex is not undignified? It matters to no one else except yourself.

4. Life for many of us is based on the 4 F instincts. We can discuss everything to death, but it all boils down to at least one of 4 Fs. I just see anal sex as an expression of the big F.

[joshTWjosh]

tl;dr

[Andrew Calimach]

I would like to think that my objective is more freedom and love and happiness for all males. Have the few bought intense physical stimulation for a moment, at the cost of emotional imprisonment for life for the many? It is something that needs to be considered. Can we really say that the popularization of anal sex does not matter? Not if there is a price to be paid, a price that has not been carefully examined.

 

I am sorry if I seem confused and unclear. Maybe we can resolve that, if people are willing. In the mean time, let me post here the end of my long poem on homosexuality, past and present. Maybe it will clarify some of the issues that I am raising, and if it does the opposite, please forgive me.

 

 

......................The Greeks’ own words prove they were not uncouth,

To evil call their love is an untruth.

Against the shadow that man’s lust still casts,

And always will, on many-figured love

Their gentlemanly ways shone a bright ray that lasts.

Where today’s hordes through mire drag, they rose above.

But be no man or woman so naive

As frigid their skilful play believe.

What man with eyes and heart, brain in his head,

Would joy refuse when tender beauty beckons?

No. The very peak of pleasure they assayed

But strode the path of him that honor reckons.

For in that world spun with unpitied pace

In which men’s lives had but a moment’s grace

To win a lasting prize, then through death’s door,

Honor was that one boon all Greeks aspired,

In honor’s quest they steadied shields in war,

Honor the touchstone that tested their love’s fire.

 

“What honor,” jeers the crowd, “have you gone mad?”

“We’re free at last, pile on, join the gay fad.”

The tribe of man has never been less free,

Hobbled by this mindless orgy’s trammel.

Can you not see, by liberating buggery

You’ve splattered everyone, like a pissing camel?

 

There is no freedom nor shall there ever be

Till boy with boy hand in hand can be free.

The few flaunt license, the rest in shame hide.

To say “It gets better” is a sad lie,

See youth after hurt youth leap into suicide,

Their parents want to know, how many more must die?

 

Thus pressed, the ranks of these eclectic

Protest, “The feeling is electric,”

And pledge to Socrates allegiance.

In vain they claim to hang with that Greek cat,

They’re just Romans flying a flag of convenience,

Loath to hoist their own “Asinus asinum fricat.”

Like the feeble who lonely solace find

Beguiled by poppies that entrap the mind

These wights cling fast to thrills they deem a treasure.

The learned trade the pleasant for the good,

And just as reason deems opium a fool's pleasure

The Greeks to shun this folly understood.

Wrath told leads me past anger into sadness

To muse upon the random ways of madness.

How blind belief in this dead end of lust

Has robbed all men of love that might have been.

Instead up rise hard walls of fear and disgust

And young and old esteem the tender touch unclean.

John Quincy naked swam in the Potomac

And friend his head could rest on his friend’s stomach.

I yearn for days like these, freedom innate,

And innocent pristine simplicity.

From boyhood I have sought to find that natural state

And glimpsed in youth a world without duplicity.

The promise of those times was soon betrayed,

Fearing insight, we chose spectacle’s charade.

Nailed shut now stand the doors of perception

While manly love minces in women’s garb.

Grown men costume as wives, in blatant deception,

And tender friendship disfigure with a lurid fard.

 

Sage Aldous must be turning in his grave,

For he was right, this new world is not brave.

To mimic boys gay men now depilate.

You should be proud your hearts yearn for the young,

But lest you rightfully be thought a renegade

Turn wisdom’s river to flush out Augean dung.

A better man would keep anger within,

But I... I would not know where to begin.

Long I’ve laboured ’neath this burden not mine

And paid with loves lost for gay lib’s shrill chant.

It’s too late now to tell where lies the boundary line

Between that which I am, and a prisoner’s rant.

But no one wants to hear this dialectic

Why, my gay pals wax downright apoplectic.

Dear friends, you’ll have no more need of gay pride,

—Look, nor history nor sense offer refuge—

All that you need do is cast your gay shame aside:

Cease drowning mankind under buggery’s deluge.

The lid of time swings shut, the Greeks are gone,

Upon our orb we’re once again alone.

From modern heights we disdain Greeks as rakes

Against whose sins our mores pretend defense.

Yet, in our haste to rise above their mistakes,

We’ve killed what made them great, and saved what gave offense.

 

And therein the irony does lie

Keep the bathwater, let the baby die.

But for this murder we’ll all pay the price.

Male love repressed morphs into brutish need

From glut of couplings mankind multiplies like mice

Till pillaged Nature break beneath the human breed.

Nor ask why leering dawns this new dark age,

This maelstrom of materialistic rage,

When in our hearts this unvoiced void does gape,

When mangled Eros hobbles on one leg,

When man’s reduced to matrimonial ape,

            And his sole destiny? Filthy lucre to beg.

[Guest Guest]

[Guest Guest]

Have the few bought intense physical stimulation for a moment, at the cost of emotional imprisonment for life for the many?

 

Let me see if I interpreted your statement correctly.

Did you just tell us that those few who enjoyed anal sex "for a moment" caused the persecution ("emotional imprisonment") of many homosexuals?

 

If that is not what you mean, I beg to ask what you were trying to imply.

[Andrew Calimach]

Thank you for your question, I think I begin to see where the difficulty lies. I have been immersed for almost twenty years in the filed of male love history. I had the get into the head of the Greeks to be able to work on the myths. I have also studied Japanese wakashudo, the samurai practice of mixing apprenticeship and love. And I have studied many other cultures as well, Central Asian, North Indian, Persian, Arab, the Romans, the Florentines, the Amerindian tribes of North America. All this has so changed my point of view that I have forgotten how I used to think about "homosexuality" before I began. Thus it is difficult sometimes when I talk about such things, because I assume about other people that they too have gone through such a change of consciousness, when of course they haven't.

 

The main point is that what you see in most instances is that male love is something that everybody does, not just 2% of the population, as today. So it is this 98% who have been emotionally imprisoned. Thus "gay freedom" is a big lie, like many other big lies in modern society. What is the role of anal sex in this? That is the question.

 

Consider, in the mean time, that less than a hundred years ago MOST boys fooled around with other boys. (An American study, but probably representative of other lands as well.) You think that is still true today? Think again. It is they who have been imprisoned, and we need to ask why.

Edited October 27, 2014 by Andrew Calimach

[Guest Guest]

So we started the topic with "natural dignity", "intrinsic human dignity" and "human dignity". Then we moved on to some poetry. Now, is the question on where is the line between male friends (maybe even with some sexual exploration) and gay love? Did he lose the plot, or did I? 

 

Either way...

[Andrew Calimach]

Thank you for what you have been able to give. Putting to good use what I have learned here so far, here is the story in a nutshell, even for people too busy to follow long threads.

 

1. The normal human state is that all males fool around with other males.

2. Identifying male love with "being gay" and identifying gay sex with anal sex has killed this passion for over 90% of the population.

3. I think it is because anal sex, for most people, is instinctively repugnant and goes against a natural sense of dignity. I know many do it to women too, but those dynamics are different.

4. This iteration of gay culture has caused tremendous harm to universal love between males, thus this is a valid area of critique.

 

I hope no one will lose the plot now, nor will anyone still claim that that what two people do in private is nobody's business. 

[Guest Guest]

In short, what Andrew Calimach is saying is anal sex, even though it is done in private and is done between 2 consenting gay adults, is causing the decay on the perception of male friendship ("caused tremendous harm to universal love between males"), because anal sex (being "instinctively repugnant and goes against a natural sense of dignity") contaminates the beauty of "male love" ("anal sex has killed this passion for over 90% of the population").

 

So, under all the thin disguises, I guess his end game is to tell all of us not to have anal sex, for the very sake of saving "male love", because what two people do in private is EVERYBODY'S business.

 

 

[Guest guest]

It used to intrigue me how Caucasians/Aryans harped on Greek and Rome. How about pagan Celts drowning the homosexually inclined among them?

Natural? Dignity? Remind me the First Chinese Reporter"s autobiography. When Mao Tze Dong's Hundred Flowers Movement turned out to be nothing but a trap for dissidents, Luu Kang's hands were cuffed behind his back in his own house. He felt the need to shake the dew off the leaves but the cadres simply ignored him. The instant his zipper was pulled down, a drop of tears fell on the hand of his "eldest" son.

Only three days ago, the missionary asked if he could offer any help. I replied "God helps those who help themselves". I have come to assume the key word in this thread is actually MAN. For the sake of your health, that precious anus of yours had better not be tighter than my grip.

So, let me work through my self-delusions of panetrating your physical and metaphysical life, of conquering and therefore possessing you, as well as of stripping you of your dignity.

Just let me be "with" you when your anus contracts on ejaculation, in the name of fulfilling the sense of humour of The Mother Goddess.

As Guang Chen Zi revealed in the chapter of the Yellow Emperor of Lie Zi, these bodies have never been yours or mine.

[Guest Guest]

So we started the topic with "natural dignity", "intrinsic human dignity" and "human dignity". Then we moved on to some poetry. Now, is the question on where is the line between male friends (maybe even with some sexual exploration) and gay love? Did he lose the plot, or did I? 

 

Either way...

Haha, I find your responses well thought out and logical. Super cute. 

[FattChoy]

On 10/24/2014 at 6:04 PM, Andrew Calimach said:

I just signed up, though I posted here a couple of times before, just to let people know about my articles when they were done. Please forgive me, I am not from Singapore, I divide my time between Europe and New York. Why am I here? I believe Singapore is an exceptionally civilized and aware society. I believe it is the ideal place to explore how we have evloved to this point as men who love other males, and how we can continue to evolve.

 

I have been writing about love between males for close to twenty years now. You can find many of my writings here: https://independent.academia.edu/AndrewCalimach and you can download a free pdf of my book on the gay Greek myths. The stories are very beautiful, I hope you will like them. Also, I will be glad to send a free case of books to any organization that would like them for its members. Don't worry, I'll pay for shipping too.

 

Am I gay? I have always loved other males, since elementary school, but I am not comfortable with the term, I do not identify with the culture. I think I was born either a couple of hundred years too late, or a couple of hundred years too soon. I'm not interested in sex without friendship, and I am perfectly OK with friendship without sex as long as it is real friendship. I also draw the line at what I will and will not do in bed, as will be clear from my writings.

 

I do not mean to tell anyone how to live, that is none of my business. Nevertheless I do want to explore what I consider to be the instinctive boundaries of male sexuality. I believe they exist, perhaps in our chromosomes. In my readings about male love in the past I have encountered a significant difference between our culture and theirs. In the past there often was structure and limits. I see it in the Shinto culture of ancient Japan, it is clearly present in the honorable love of teenagers of ancient Greece, and it can be found in other places as well, though it is difficult to uncover the evidence because people have had such a hard time discussing this.

 

The most important limit I have encountered is the barrier against anal sex. I will not go into detail here, I have written enough about it elsewhere. Enough to say that is was considered abusive of the person penetrated. It was also seen as undignified. It is THIS that I would like to explore, if anyone here is interested. From my readings, and my own feelings, I am beginning to suspect that there is such a thing as "natural dignity." Not only humans have that, so do most intelligent creatures. I also suspect that anal penetration is intrinsically at odds with that natural dignity, and that is why it has been seen that way for so long and in so many places all over the world.

 

What do you think? Is there such a thing as intrinsic human dignity, and is anal sex an affront against that dignity even when both partners agree?

 

"Enough to say that is was considered abusive of the person penetrated. It was also seen as undignified. It is THIS that I would like to explore, if anyone here is interested. From my readings, and my own feelings, I am beginning to suspect that there is such a thing as "natural dignity." Not only humans have that, so do most intelligent creatures."

 

You've written a whole book and you think suspect that anal penetration is intrinsically at odds with that natural dignity?  I have a few bottom friends who feel totally undignified when people turn them down.  And they have PhDs.  Lol...

Edited June 14, 2021 by FattChoy