Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - andkon

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13
Open Board / Re: Introduction
« on: January 06, 2015, 09:32:20 PM »
I think the reason so many "closet cases" hate man to man sexuality is they have a superstitious belief that any indulgence in this activity will transform a masculine man into a fairy queen.

Oh yeah, there's definitely that too! Same-sex sex for many means feminine. Hence why in the same graph I shunt off gay as its own category.

Instead, being around masculinity does the opposite -- it generates more masculinity. Like begats like. I have spent some time in straight, blue collar watering holes in my life and I can certainly attest to the fact that it brings out more masculinity. Also, I think there are varying degrees of masculinity. Thanks for the opportunity to use this forum as a sounding board.

No problem.

Open Board / Re: Introduction
« on: January 06, 2015, 04:02:11 PM »
Thanks for the praise. The graph I think you're referring to is in the video page for 0040: Kinsey Scale + Gender Scale:

2. Heterosexual men who have never participated in any activity with another male but have always wanted to. This is where most of the haters come from.

I have always wondered, "why so much hatred?" Religion cannot be blamed for all of this. My answer is that those "heterosexual" men want to fly under the radar and continue to do what has been done since the dawn of man.

The other question is: if not religion, where does the hatred from men in group #2 come from? If same-sex sex was socially-acceptable, those men could easily have sex thus no frustration and lashing out. It's culture that prohibits that and most of the anti-same-sex-sex has traditionally come from Christianity in the West.

Open Board / Re: Johnny Rapid Interviews Rocco Reed
« on: December 23, 2014, 11:46:26 PM »
So andkon, is Rocco Reed a Grero then?

Well, he's masculine and has sex with other often masculine men so YES :-)

Open Board / Re: bisexual potential
« on: December 23, 2014, 11:44:52 PM »
Well, what do you mean bisexual? Historically speaking, most men had no problems having sex with men. Culture has shifted so few men today have sex with other men.

Why do you say MOST men historically had no problems having sex with men?

I should rephrase that. In some cultures, most men had no problems. See the book and references. From that we can see the issue is culture not some biological innateness since there isn't much genetic difference between difference cultures.

But what about shaving the sides of their pubes? You know, the hair growing beyond the panty line.

I'm looking at my own pubes right now and there's no clear demarcation between leg hair and pubic hair. I suppose if you trimmed the pubes that'd still match.

Der Eigene (Blog + Video) / Re: 0048: Grero on Gaybros
« on: October 28, 2014, 12:28:17 AM »
And which guys are these? The gay ones or the straight on the surface ones but not quite straight in reality?

The latter, the ones that appear straight but would want to try something more perhaps.

No problems? So you like your men au naturelle?

Sure. Most men have enough hair on their legs anyways that shaving just pubes looks weird.

"So how much of homosexual exclusivity is due to the hetero-majority's bigotry that segregates gays, for example?"

So you're basically saying that homophobia wiped out our potential or existing bisexuality and hardened our straightness/gayness?


I think Speedo thing became an issue in the 90's. You'll notice now that it is mostly middle aged men and older who wear Speedos.

In America or Europe?

Speedos are sexy but they're said to be TMI and then there's the pubic hair poking out!

I see no problems there ;-)

Open Board / Re: bisexual potential
« on: September 27, 2014, 05:31:46 PM »
would you say that most men are to some degree bisexual?

Well, what do you mean bisexual? Historically speaking, most men had no problems having sex with men. Culture has shifted so few men today have sex with other men.


I wrote a free book specifically on the sexual fluidity of males. In ancient Greece and Rome (but elsewhere too), men had sex with other men. Not 3% of men, not 5%, but a much larger number. They weren't merely tolerant of the few people who were same-sex oriented but the culture itself was oriented in that manner. No polls are available, but we know that of the first twenty Roman emperors, eighteen (or 90%) were reported to have had sex with other men. Other cultures around the world reported similar experiences between men. So what happened that 95% of men would say they're exclusively heterosexual now? Christianity. Same-sex was forbidden starting in the 300's and almost everyone is raised to feel that same-sex sex is gross or for just effeminate men.

Think of how uncomfortable most men are wearing speedos at least here in America. Well, in Europe when I was growing up, everyone was wearing them so no big deal. Sexuality is just like speedos: It's just social pressure and expectations. Innate sexual orientation, my ass.

Right, so we can all just turn straight by force of will?

Not necessarily.

My book is mostly about how most straight men cannot have been born straight. This has to be the case if we see that in the ancient world, most men it would appear had no(ne of our*) qualms about same-sex sex. Genes/hormones/whatever do not change in a few centuries. Culture can and did. That culture "makes" people straight does not mean that straight men can by force of will change their sexual habits. It does mean that for "straight" men who are already open-minded or curious, informing them that they're not really born straight could perhaps lead to a greater incidence same-sex sex.

Where does that leave the gays or homosexuality? Well, the problem is that there is no one thing called homosexuality. If you just browse the table of contents of Homosexualities by Stephen O. Murray, you'll see that there have been multiple types of homosexualities, plural. In some cultures, you had relationships between men of same rank or males of a different, both masculine though. In North America, you had berdaches who were feminine men used like women; the top in this relationship wasn't considered different from other males. Under the modern nomenclature, all of these people would be considered "homosexual" now. So... can some of these people change? Well, maybe.

I've never understood how some gay men can have sex with dozens or hundreds of men of varying quality, yet if a vagina is attached, "Eww, no thanks." Really, that's the deal breaker? A lot of gay men are effeminate and end up with other effeminate gay men... but if there's a vagina attached, "Eww, no thanks." Those in stable relationships (gay and straight): would you ditch your partner if they magically sprouted genitalia contrary to their biological sex all the sudden? So how much of homosexual exclusivity is due to the hetero-majority's bigotry that segregates gays, for example?

*There were sexual taboos in Rome. A freeman being penetrated was looked down upon, although no doubt many did it.

Open Board / Re: UK diver Tom Daley
« on: August 08, 2014, 04:47:03 PM »
andkon, I wish I could talk to you about this one on one.


I CAN'T post in that Ian Thorpe thread! The reply button isn't there! Why is that?

In the Q/A forum, anyone can start a thread but only I and the original poster can respond. Feel free to start a new thread here on Ian Thorpe, or ask me below in this thread.

Open Board / Re: UK diver Tom Daley
« on: August 07, 2014, 12:02:52 PM »
Johan, that idea was very well defended in the book.  That was its point - that "grero" is a slap in the face of all that people want to believe.  "I'm gay" is individual; grero is global

Yes, gay tells us about the individual. Grero is to look at least to the past and say, "This many people cannot possibly be exclusively heterosexual now."

Open Board / Re: Ian Thorpe
« on: August 07, 2014, 12:01:28 PM »
Either he's gay and not comfortable with it or he's not gay but not straight either. The current system does not allow for much nuance, so it'll be interesting to check back on him in a few months or years.

Der Eigene (Blog + Video) / Re: 0048: Grero on Gaybros
« on: May 22, 2014, 11:00:11 PM »
Sorry for not getting back sooner.

"thus driving away those who are really masculine. What a shame."

What do you mean by that?

Oftentimes, straight-acting gay just means "not as feminine as other gays." But they're still feminine. This is a problem because I'm quite sure that lots of guys don't want to be with other guys because they don't want to be seen as feminine. So if gay was recognized as feminine AND that it's not the only way to like other men, masculine men would be more likely to consider same-sex relationships.

Der Eigene (Blog + Video) / Re: 0048: Grero on Gaybros
« on: April 28, 2014, 10:37:25 PM »
I think these gaybros are fake. Gays with a huge inferiority complex about being gay and about the image of gays and try to make themselves feel better by imitating straight guys fully.

Imagine them still addressing each other as BROS in their fifties? Sheesh!

Yeah, unfortunately, they go out of their way to be politically correct and NOT define what exactly gaybros is. In the sidebar:

Don't ask "What is a Gaybro?" No single answer can satisfy the question.

So it's just another term for straight-acting gay, attracting men who aren't quite masculine thus confirming that gay is feminine thus driving away those who are really masculine. What a shame.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13