LivingnLA

That's what makes a good actor! You're quite right. He makes it look convincing, probably with coaching and help from the director, script, etc.

Why? Acting as a profession is precisely that set of skills and abilities that enable a good actor to transform into whatever character they are asked to play. Most actors have defined ranges or limits of how much they can transform and remain believable, but the truly great ones are chameleons. I've dealt with a handful of actors over the years and attended a few classes when I was asked to observe. It's fascinating to see how malleable our outward presentations or personas are in real life. Most people go through life blissfully ignorant of how performative their "role" truly is in life. I believe the hetero/homo cultural dichotomy is largely constructed. There's far more overlap than many people are willing to comfortably admit. More fundamentally, what is "GAY" about his performance? Is it the way he expressed tenderness or affection or the heat in his eyes when they were about to have sex? The erotic tension? All I saw on the screen was two people who were magnetically drawn to each other and how that played out. Actors are trained differently and I don't know who his teachers were, but I'd wager he was using powerful memories from his life (probably his first love) to create his emotive expressions and channel those feelings into his performance. What you saw as "GAY" was probably a witnessing of the first time he fell in love in real life and how it felt for him as expressed through the lenses of the script and character he was asked to create. Also, remember, what we see on screen has been carefully constructed by a director, cinematographer, and editor to name just three of the key players. Again, styles vary, but sometimes many takes of a scene are required before the key players believe they "got it" for that scene. It's only in the editing and post-production work that all of those "got it" scenes are stitched together to create the movie we see. We have no idea if or how many times he may have been told to "give more passion!"

Sigh. Yet another poor combination of words. I sometimes wonder why I bother trying to capture my streams of thought in text. I always miss something. What I tried to say there was that a 100% straight guy (a Kinsey 0) would not be able to get hard for same-sex activity without "medical assistance." Topping is about a set of skills that aren't dependent on "medical assistance," if that makes sense. I believe it's entirely possible to top well with or without "medical assistance." My point was that a 100% straight man may be repulsed by such activity or not be able to perform such activity. But, as I said in an earlier post, Kinsey 0's are relatively rare. Hmm. I feel like I'm rambling again, so I'm going to stop. I'm exhausted after a long day and I suspect I'm muddying the waters, not clearing / filtering them. I'll check in tomorrow or Sunday to see if I can decipher my train of thought when I'm rested. Sorry

It's not a "plain old lie" to say Millennial men have experimented more than earlier generations. That's clear in the data. But, thank you for catching that mistaken word choice on my part. I write these posts quickly and frequently when I'm multitasking and/or tired. Mistakes happens. You're correct. It isn't a majority, it's just more common for Millennials than it was for earlier generations. Though, some data suggests it may actually be regional changes that are driving the significant increase in same-sex activity for Millennials. Here's an article about one such study: http://www.vocativ.com/324378/same-sex-flings/index.html What really gets interesting, is when you compare the trends for number of "partners" between generations. Interestingly, Millennials have significantly fewer sex partners, which suggests they are less promiscuous even if they're more adventurous with a smaller group of "friends." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/05/06/why-millennials-have-sex-with-fewer-partners-than-their-parents-did/

I try to be detailed when discussing complex topics. It's difficult to adequately cover the nuances of these topics in online forums because of the lack of contextual clues to decipher the meaning behind our posts. The distinction you made between "Straight guy" and "Straight identified" seems to be conflating a few different things in a way that I believe is offending multiple forum members. I may be wrong, it happens far more than I'd like, especially when trying to communicate purely via text. But, let me see if I have it... My sense from your distinction is that "Straight guy" is the "real" straight guy--for sake of clarity, say a Kinsey 1 or 2--while a "Straight identified" guy would be a Kinsey 3, 4, or 5. Note, I did not include a Kinsey 0 as such a man would be unable to engage in same-sex activity at all and would likely be emotionally/physically/psychologically repulsed by such activity. It's conceivable that a Kinsey 0 could engage in a purely non-sexual but erotic "worship scene" as the man being worshiped, but that would be about it. Now, based on the decades of data we have about human sexuality and activity, it's okay to say generally speaking, human beings are biologically bisexual. Think in terms of a normal or Gaussian distribution. Humanity within +/- 2 standard deviations of the mean are biologically bisexual. In other words, 95% of humanity is biologically bisexual. So, in Kinseyan terms, 95% of humanity would be a Kinsey 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5. That means 2.5% for Kinsey 0 (100% hetero) and 2.5% for Kinsey 6 (100% homo). That's biologically speaking, but as we know, human sexuality and activity are heavily influenced by environmental factors. From when specific hormones and their amounts are released in uetro to things like formative experiences in infancy, childhood, or even teenage years. This is where may "fundamentalist" heteros and homos get mad because it suggests an element of choice, but that's an uninformed misreading of the reality. Our genes are remarkably adaptable and seem to adjust to various environmental factors. We don't understand all of it, yet. I hope we get there in my lifetime, but I doubt it. I've droned on about all of this to say, your distinctions seem kind of meaningless to me. I believe I understand what you're saying, but I push back on "essentialism" around human sexuality and activity. That's probably why I think highly of Klein's groundbreaking work on his grid. For me, identity is self-proclaimed because we're not going around with devices and testing people to reveal their "true" Sexual Orientation. Further, cultural norms are different across the world, so what stereotypically "defines" a "real man" in North America may or may not be true in other parts of the world. I guess, to me, it boils down to acting in the sense of how real can the fantasy be when we hire someone? The whole notion of "gaydar" or the ability to "know a real man when we see him" are a combination of biological and cultural constructs based on norms and assumptions in different cultures. And all of that shifts over time. Take Millennials, they tend to be more open sexually than prior generations since the whole hetero/homo binary was created a little over a century ago. If you take a Kinsey 0 Millennial and take him back in time say even just 40 years, he would likely not be seen as a "real man" by many people. In other words, all "straight guys" are "straight identified" because how else are they to be known as "straight" if they do not identify themselves as such? I've met gay men who are completely "straight" in their actions and manners and in some cultures around the world, a "gay man" is indistinguishable in public from a "straight man."

As someone who enjoys taking a soft penis into my mouth and feeling it grow hard as I slowly suck, this presents a challenge. I liked the "100% hard guarantee" someone mentioned above because that might encourage curious clients to ask, which allows you to explain or not. Honestly, as a potential client, I'm not sure how I'd feel about this scenario. Part of me would probably want to pass on hiring, but another part of me knows that "inhuman stamina" is almost always medically created, so it's six of one and half-a-dozen of another.

At the risk of being labeled a broken record and consigned to the forum's dustbin, I shall repeat myself on this topic with a few minor changes. What do you define as "real straight guy" versus "straight identified?" As I have posted multiple times, the research and science on this is in very early days because human sexuality and identity are incredibly complex and surprisingly flexible given a variety of environmental incentives. Research generally seems to see a distinction between Sexual Orientation and Sexual Behavior Orientation. There may even be a Romantic or Affection Orientation. It's dreadfully tricky to "reduce" an organic analog life into neatly discrete categories and labels. Klein--the brilliant bisexual sexologist--did some very interesting work to try and capture a better picture in his "Grid" that is more comprehensive than Kinsey's famous scale. I could go on and on, but the fact remains that identification is a very personal thing and how a person self-identifies is their truth. Unless you're planning to use a penile plethysmograph to measure a man's penile blood flow as a proxy for his sexual arousal to determine what turns him on, then what's the point? As a man with a strong attraction to stereotypically straight men, I am indeed turned on by the thought of sexual activity with a "straight guy" because of such cultural tropes as "the thrill of the hunt" or "obtaining the unobtainable." It's all fantasy, but for me, since my first formative same-sex activities were with guys who were straight, it strongly affixed this kink of mine. What gets really "fun" and interesting about all of this is how it intersects this particular hobby. Understanding the physiological and psychological "limitations" of these labels results in certain realities. For example, a 100% straight-identified man--what Kinsey would've called a zero--would not have any sexual arousal at same-sex porn and might even be physically repulsed by it. Klein would argue that interests change over time as life experiences affect us. Consider "situational sexual behavior" like homosexual activity in prison or the military or even "gay 4 pay" activity. Hmm. I've rambled all over the place. I return to my original question: what is your definition of "real straight guy?" I've had the fun and hot experience three times in my life of being the first man to suck three different guys who identified as straight at the time and still identify as straight. They said I was their best and we enjoyed many hot times where I could worship them and they could enjoy hot head and go home to their girlfriends/wives. However, those types of activities are somewhat rare. Especially now because Millennials are far more open and experimental. I imagine it's becoming more common to find a straight guy in his 20s who has been blown by a male friend and probably blown that friend too. We live in a more open and less restrictive time. In my hiring, when I seek a worship or top scenario, the guy I seek is classically and stereotypically masculine from an American cultural perspective, because that's my kink. Yes, I prefer "straight guys" but a truly 100% straight guy would be unable to top well because he wouldn't be able to get hard without medical assistance. That means, I seek out men who are able to perform with men or women. I like tattoos and body hair. Muscles and that classically "cocky" borderline arrogant/asshole attitude of a confident dominant man who knows what he wants and takes it.

As with many things in life, it depends. There are many "schools of thought" in "therapy." Plus, psychiatry for pharmacological help. Over the years, I've talked to a few professional therapists for various reasons. Finding someone with the right training for your issues is critical as is someone who's personality and therapy style "clicks" with you and how you think/feel/react. I'm a fan of Gestalt. I knew a psychoanalyst many years ago who was amazingly helpful. Though I tend to be far more Jungian than Freudian in my psychoanalytic thinking. I'm also a big believer in biofeedback. It just depends on what's going on in your life and you and your reactions to life. Find a good match for those and you'll probably have a great therapeutic experience. http://www.apa.org/topics/therapy/psychotherapy-approaches.aspx https://www.goodtherapy.org/learn-about-therapy/types

Thank you @MikeBiDude, though even I can laugh now about the mistakes I made and much of what happened! It's in the past now and only serves to make me more careful, so I learned my lessons. @njr47, I'm glad! He's a sexy man with a sultry voice and a magnetic energy when you're face-to-face with him. I know a little of what he's been through over the past couple years. We all have our challenges and issues to deal with in life. That's part of the journey and it's a credit to him that he appears to have come through healthy and back to top form. As I said, I wish him nothing but the best. And I would encourage people to do their research, ask their questions, and book with him if he's "your type." Happy holidays y'all.

Thanks. What's the point in dwelling on a horrible experience? I survived and learned a great deal. Plus, I'd be unbelievably hypocritical to not wish him well because my entire life is built on my life's journey toward ever more compassion and love. "The world doesn't cause us pain by the fact that it exists, but we cause ourselves pain because we attach ourselves to circumstances. When those circumstances are in conflict with what we want or don't want, we experience pain." ~Rama

Unlike many, I had a truly terrible time with TH a couple years ago. It's actually what brought me to this forum. He was my very first hire and it was beyond bad. Regardless, I know many have had great times with him and I know now that he was in a "dark place" when I hired him. I'm glad he's back and seems to be healthy. I hope he stays that way, remains focused on being healthy, and returns to giving amazing times to the people he spends time with in the future.

Your B-I-L is a smart guy. It's not "misguided" though if that's your choice. Again, you are you, and no one can tell you what's the "right way" to honor your life with your wife and how to build your future. It's all up to you and so long as you aren't being self-destructive or committing crimes, who cares? Live your life as you wish and live it well.

My friendly suggestion: have a firm budget when you go to an Adonis event and stick to it. I spent 3x what I planned the last time I went.

The Romans and Greeks had completely different understandings of all this stuff compared to modern thinking. The heterosexual and homosexual binary is only a little over a century old. For the Greeks and Romans, man on man sex had much more to do with class/power dynamics that are probably the roots of modern "machismo" concepts in Latin countries. The Romans were similar in many ways to the Greeks, but the Greeks also engaged in pederasty as their adult men of substance would frequently have a young teen boy who would take a submissive role with them for years in exchange for education, development, mentoring, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greece https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome The expectation that "women lose interest in sex after a bit" is an interesting and complex phenomena. There are some women who seem to have biological reasons for the loss of their libido. And yes, menopause is a powerful change, but many women have wonderful sex lives well into their "golden years." Excluding the cases that seem to have physiological causes, I suspect it's more a reflection on a variety of cultural and psychological issues coupled with your colleagues and their commitments with their women to have healthy and happy sex lives. Relationships take work and keeping sex/intimacy alive and active in a marriage after decades takes time, energy, and commitment by everyone in the marriage. https://www.aarp.org/health/conditions-treatments/info-2017/sexual-desire-declines-with-age-fd.html

Gman, absolutely! There are real life gay human beings. They're not unicorns, though they are special and worth being cherished and loved by anyone lucky enough to know them. They're real and walking among us. That's what's so wonderful about humanity. We have such diversity. I have no doubt you're 100% gay as you say you are because I believe you. The only reason I said what I said to @BasketBaller, was that I detected hints of conflict in his words that suggested he was worried about being gay now if that current self-conception would some-how weaken or make questionable all that he had with his wife. I may have completely misread him, but that was my sense so I felt compelled to respond the way I did.

I remember him from an Adonis party I attended and yes, he's very attractive physically, very well endowed, and pretty damn personable while standing around nude among mostly older clothed guys. I would hire him. I didn't know he escorted. I thought he was "just" a dancer/entertainer. Thanks for the link.

His "4 Freedoms" series, which are what many people think of, especially Freedom from Want, wasn't ever real. They were his romanticized images of these claimed American values. It's much better that they're "gone for good" than people still believing they're real and hating themselves or their families for not measuring up. Though, I really wish his stunning Golden Rule was real life. Our world would be a much kinder, gentler, and more generous place if it were true.

@musclelover, it's a question of culture. In many Latin cultures, machismo is the dominant patriarchal view. In other words, a "real man" may fuck whoever he wishes to fuck and remain a man. Many of these "real men" consider themselves straight, though modern cultural norms have shifted somewhat so bisexual is more frequently used now. That's a gross oversimplification, but it's essentially why so many escorts from Latin cultures list themselves as bisexual. Their understanding of these terms is different from America and many other Western countries. Here's a great paper on all of this, if you're interested. https://www.du.edu/korbel/hrhw/researchdigest/latinamerica2/digest-human rights in latin america vol 2-brazil.pdf If you want more data, here's the latest study I'm aware of for Brazil: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-71822013000500005

@BasketBaller, thank you for sharing so much so thoughtfully. I am proud of you and look forward to hearing more about your journey. I am also glad things went so well with your "B-I-L." One thing I would suggest for your consideration: don't worry too much about labels. Those of us over 30 have been acculturated to really care about labels and categories around identity and sexual orientation. They definitely have some value, but for many of us, they are more "straitjacket" than something that sets us free. Decades of research are beginning to support the notion that we're frequently biologically bisexual but acculturation shapes us into the hetero/homo binary. I have had relations with many women for many years. My marriage is more solid than ever because my wife and I "get each other" and support each other as we try to be the best we can be for each other, our kids, and in our lives. None of that changes my activities or feelings with men. I suspect you may be bisexual, like me, but you may be something else as well. All that matters is how you feel about yourself and your history with your wife along with the future you want to build for yourself. If your sons are anything like my kids, their understanding of sexual orientation and sexual activity is light-years ahead of where we were at their age. They likely won't care as long as they see you're happy, healthy, and well. Given how long it's been since your wife's passing, I imagine they may have wondered why you've been single for so long and haven't even been dating or hooking up (given your "player" history). Have they ever tried to set you up? If not, perhaps they may have some sense about you and they respect you enough to give you time to build the life you want and space to explain when you're ready to do so.

I'm glad others already replied. The two pics in the ad are clearly not the same guy. And as others have already said, image searches confirms they're taken from different sources. BP is much sketchier than other sites. If you're going to use BP, get good at checking the images and doing reverse lookups on the numbers to see what info you can find. If it looks too good to be true, it probably is, so use your gut and some basic background research to check things out.

Because I need trained MTs when I seek out massage since I have some old injuries that require knowledge and care that amatuers rarely possess. The erotic activity is just a nice bonus if it happens. This young man appears to be a trainer who's bolted on bodywork without training. Nothing wrong with that, but it isn't for me.

I have not and probably wouldn't. But, I'd probably give him a shot as a personal trainer or coach if he really did take and pass the CSCS (Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist).

It feels private. Like when I'm with my wife. I apologize, but I'd rather not "SPILL." It's unusual for me. Poly has always been intellectually and philosophically interesting but theoretical. I haven't had time to go over everything and settle my thoughts and feelings, but I suspect this man, who's well over a decade younger and happily engaged to a wonderful woman, means more to me than "just" a fbuddy. It's the strangest and most intimate mentor/mentee relationship I've ever had and I need to navigate all of this carefully.

This is such a wonderful thread. Thank you again for creating it @Lance_Navarro and to everyone for contributing so openly and generously. I imagine it's clear from my post history that I have a "thing" for "straight guys." I've spent years working on my internalized homophobia, racism, and sexism. I've been able to "turn down the volume" on many irrational fears and thoughts developed over my lifetime. I've learned many interesting things about myself and where I come from and I hope that has made me a better father, husband, and man. One of the most challenging issues that I struggle with to this day, is the foundational sexism that underpins homophobia and how that is informed by racism. It's undoubtedly self-absorbed to think so, but I feel as though my emotions are uniquely challenging because I love my wife and the life I've built with her and I also enjoy sex with men. In some ways, I've never felt so free or had such amazing sex as when I'm on my back watching a well built man look down at me as he fucks me. The way it feels to have my legs held open. To want him deeper. The desire to pull him down to kiss him is a very new feeling for me. To realize that my role can be so very different in that situation and what it does to my self-concept and my point of view. I'm rambling some-what, because this profound experience happened this week with a straight guy I've known for many years. I know all of the variables leading up to this experience but I haven't fully processed everything. So you're getting this some-what stream-of-consciousness. I am sorry if it's incoherent. Discoveries frequently are chaotic, accidental, or even tangential. I look forward to processing this recent experience and trying to understand what it means to and for me. All of this, though, I hope will largely be a relic in a generation or two. At least for those privileged enough to have good educations and Internet access. I see it in my kids. My oldest son has a fluidity to his intimacy, physicality, and sexuality that's incredibly challenging for me to understand but as his father, I'm incredibly proud of him. And his siblings are even more complex in some ways. On these topics, I for one, look forward to a brighter future built by the next generation. I hope they consign much of this old baggage to the dustbin of history, where it belongs.

Absolutely! He didn't do anything wrong at all, but as I tried to say above--and clearly failed--something about the tone of the text suggested defensiveness coupled with something else. That's all I was trying to say. I am sorry if I've offended anyone.