Author Topic: 0004: Commentary on "Mostly Straight, Most of the Time"  (Read 11807 times)

andkon

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile
0004: Commentary on "Mostly Straight, Most of the Time"
« on: February 16, 2013, 09:23:09 PM »

I wanted to share my thoughts on "Mostly Straight, Most of the Time." The article is mostly superb, but I have a minor quibble with the emphasis on "mostly straight." Dillon mentions that he doesn't know if there's a name for what he is. Because there's no name, why would there be many others like him, openly? As such, how do we know that he's mostly straight because he mostly like girls or because there is an absence of available guys? Mostly straight by nature or mostly straight by culture? I talked about this "numbers problems" in Chapter 8:

Quote
Without the word [grero], how does one even overcome the seemingly insurmountable numbers problem? Straight relationships rely on the unseen numbers to work. Basically all the women a man sees are potential mates. Sure, some are ugly, some are taken, some do not like you in return, but the remaining pool of mutually interested candidates is high enough. These days, few men can be assumed to be masculine and like other men. Whereas few women are offended if you show interest, many men can be violent if propositioned.

The authors also mention four subtypes of "mostly straights":

  • Progressive: Some one guys says that "I might have been gay if Iíd been raised differently," and "Arenít we all born bisexual and culture pushes us one way or another?" It's shocking that something like this would come from a progressive. After all the politically-correct ideas over the years that gays are born that way and are 2-10% of the population, we have someone who has no qualms about expressing heresy.
  • The second and third types think guys are hot, some may even want a bit of sex. They like sex without strings, without meaning, says the article. As with the phrase "mostly straight," how do we know this disposition is nature and not environment? With homophobic shame, why would most men be into the more-than-sex aspect of a taboo relationship? A quick fuck is hidden: no public humiliation of holding hands or society at large knowing that you like other men.
  • The fourth type is the one that admits that his feelings are more than sexual, they're romantic. This is ideally what grero should strive for.

bobhall69

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 0004: Commentary on "Mostly Straight, Most of the Time"
« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2013, 06:39:09 PM »
Many men and women  over the last few centuries have fought and died for the rights of this country's citizens. Sexual freedom is just as important as freedom of thought, religeon or any others that people of this country enjoy at the expens of us who served and died.

david_j_stewart

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 0004: Commentary on "Mostly Straight, Most of the Time"
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2013, 09:39:55 PM »
Bingo! This business about allowing for romantic relationships with other guys just tears me up inside. In an ideal world all guys would be flattered to be the object of someone's desire. We would all know what to say and how to act to de-escalate the emotional stakes if two guys don't quite hit it off the way they hoped, and we would all be happy to cuddle and would routinely show affection to each other. Would every embrace lead to sex? Probably not, but simply allowing for the possibility puts you in a mindframe that is itself rewarding.

Where is this place, and why aren't I there already?

andkon

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile
Re: 0004: Commentary on "Mostly Straight, Most of the Time"
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2013, 04:06:43 PM »
Bingo! This business about allowing for romantic relationships with other guys just tears me up inside. In an ideal world all guys would be flattered to be the object of someone's desire. We would all know what to say and how to act to de-escalate the emotional stakes if two guys don't quite hit it off the way they hoped, and we would all be happy to cuddle and would routinely show affection to each other. Would every embrace lead to sex? Probably not, but simply allowing for the possibility puts you in a mindframe that is itself rewarding.

Where is this place, and why aren't I there already?

Because of Theodosius I: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Thessalonica (The mentioned rape is just the Christian exaggeration for any same-sex sex. Everything they don't like is sodomy.)

That was probably the last major uprising against Christian rule and specifically against Christian sexual ethics that contrasted procreative and recreational sex (see Chapter 10). The month after the massacre, all same-sex sex was made illegal: http://pinktriangle.org.uk/lib/hic/lauritsen.html#ref14