Author Topic: Introduction  (Read 20063 times)

vincentdigrero

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Introduction
« on: January 06, 2015, 02:40:25 PM »
Thank you andkon for all of you brilliance and thought for the classification of grero. I have read all of the book and will probably re-read it a few time. A new term was desperately needed. I agree with you on may things.

I've maintained that homosexuality is a sliding scale of activity. My scale might coincide with your graph.

SCALE:

1. Heterosexual men who have never participated in any activity with another male and do not want to participate.
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.
3. Heterosexual men who have done something once or twice with another male for experimentation such as high school buddies.
4. Heterosexual men who have done something on an infrequent basis may once or twice a year. This is where bisexuality begins.
5. Bisexual men who have sex frequently such as once or twice a month.
6. Greros or gay men who have sex exclusively with men frequently or infrequently

Masculine men are my forte so I am grero. 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. Blaming gays for all the ills of society of a good way to deflect the attention. It amazes me that we never hear too much about those bisexuals out there who inaccurately fall into the 3 to 5% of LGBT's. We all know this is not correct.

Keep up the good work andkon

andkon

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #1 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: http://grero.com/forum/index.php?topic=87.0

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

vincentdigrero

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2015, 05:00:22 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. 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.

andkon

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #3 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.

Johan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2015, 09:31:09 AM »
"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."


Not completely. If you were in a homophobic setting or any setting where being yourself(gay) was discouraged or could get you into trouble, of course one would tone it down and assimilate.

vincentdigrero

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #5 on: January 13, 2015, 10:17:05 AM »
There's no need for greros to tone it down. We are masculine depending on the degree. Of course, there are heterosexuals out there who have little class. Those who hate the most are they ones who want the male-to-male encounter the most, even if it's just hanging out with the guys for a few brews.

This is a little story: once I knew a southern man who had been in construction all of this life. He was about 45 years old and loved buying drinks for me and talking. He knew the story on me, but he liked me for me. I liked him for him. I'm sure that in the past he had dabbled a bit with other men sexually, but our friendship had to do with mutual respect and admiration. Thanks for your input, Johan.

Johan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #6 on: January 15, 2015, 02:16:18 AM »
1.We are masculine depending on the degree.

2.Those who hate the most are they ones who want the male-to-male encounter the most, even if it's just hanging out with the guys for a few brews.

This is a little story: once I knew a southern man who had been in construction all of this life. He was about 45 years old and loved buying drinks for me and talking. He knew the story on me, but he liked me for me. I liked him for him. I'm sure that in the past he had dabbled a bit with other men sexually, but our friendship had to do with mutual respect and admiration. Thanks for your input, Johan.

1. Who is we? And depending on WHAT degree?

2. That is not 100% true. Yes, some of those are bisexual, gay or mostly straight. The idea that homophobes are just simply gays or one of those is complete bullshit. I mean, if they were, then why would they be homophobic? Why would all of  them be against themselves? Where would this self-hatred come from?


This whole like begets like is true TO A DEGREE in personality development, but not 100%. I know of a gay man who had four brothers and was raised by a homophobic father who repeatedly put him down for his effeminate ways still end up as an effeminate gay man as an adult.

andkon

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2015, 03:33:09 AM »
2. That is not 100% true. Yes, some of those are bisexual, gay or mostly straight. The idea that homophobes are just simply gays or one of those is complete bullshit. I mean, if they were, then why would they be homophobic? Why would all of  them be against themselves? Where would this self-hatred come from?

It's called a reaction formation, it's an old concept in psychology: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/women-who-stray/201405/reaction-formation-against-porn

vincentdigrero

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #8 on: January 15, 2015, 07:25:29 AM »
1.We are masculine depending on the degree.

2.Those who hate the most are they ones who want the male-to-male encounter the most, even if it's just hanging out with the guys for a few brews.

This is a little story: once I knew a southern man who had been in construction all of this life. He was about 45 years old and loved buying drinks for me and talking. He knew the story on me, but he liked me for me. I liked him for him. I'm sure that in the past he had dabbled a bit with other men sexually, but our friendship had to do with mutual respect and admiration. Thanks for your input, Johan.

1. Who is we? And depending on WHAT degree?

2. That is not 100% true. Yes, some of those are bisexual, gay or mostly straight. The idea that homophobes are just simply gays or one of those is complete bullshit. I mean, if they were, then why would they be homophobic? Why would all of  them be against themselves? Where would this self-hatred come from?


This whole like begets like is true TO A DEGREE in personality development, but not 100%. I know of a gay man who had four brothers and was raised by a homophobic father who repeatedly put him down for his effeminate ways still end up as an effeminate gay man as an adult.

1. "We" I am referring to greros. I am masculine. The degree I'm referring to is how we exhibit our maleness in a social setting. There are the Arnold Schwarzneggars, the Brad Pitts, the Rock Hudsons, the Anderson Coopers, to name a few famous personalities I can think of. All of these have a masculine bearing but are different.

Thanks for your input!

Johan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #9 on: January 20, 2015, 09:25:28 AM »
1. "We" I am referring to greros. I am masculine. The degree I'm referring to is how we exhibit our maleness in a social setting. There are the Arnold Schwarzneggars, the Brad Pitts, the Rock Hudsons, the Anderson Coopers, to name a few famous personalities I can think of. All of these have a masculine bearing but are different.

Thanks for your input!

I never see straight men say "I am masculine". You only see gay guys saying that. If I do, they usually don't use those words.


Scott

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #10 on: January 31, 2015, 07:15:04 PM »
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.

Hey Andkon. I'd like to take a crack at answering that, if you don't mind.

It's true that the Romans didn't care if a guy liked to f*ck other guys. They'd mock him, though, if he was the one taking it.

Christianity is based on the Golden Rule (Matt. 7:12, Rom. 9:8-10, 1 John 4:21, etc.): Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you. If Romans didn't want some other guy putting it up *their* ass, then they shouldn't put it up another guy's either. The Church just forbade men from doing what they'd never in a million years let another man do to them. Pretty straight-forward logic (npi).


XPlover

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2016, 08:17:48 AM »
Are you still with us, Scott? Would like to hear more of your meaning here.

IMHO, the big strange tragedy of gay history is that societies seem to have tolerated (or blessed) every possible thing between two males except adult love matches -- unless, of course, they were in line to get killed e.g soldiers.