Hiring straight guys

[Gymowner]

You must not have watched the video early on. Gifford had lots of sex. He even said most "cunstables" kept from enforcing those laws. What he was talking about was the sexual draw from the "elegants" towards straight men's masculinity and that none of the "sisters" ever thought of having sex with each other. That's my point of my post. It wasn't loathing of ones sexuality. Just the opposite of it. To be able in those times to blatantly walk up to straight men and offer them money for sex randomly in a park is far more forward than we have now.

[Jamie21]

14 minutes ago, Gymowner said:

You must not have watched the video early on. Gifford had lots of sex. He even said most "cunstables" kept from enforcing those laws. What he was talking about was the sexual draw from the "elegants" towards straight men's masculinity and that none of the "sisters" ever thought of having sex with each other. That's my point of my post. It wasn't loathing of ones sexuality. Just the opposite of it. To be able in those times to blatantly walk up to straight men and offer them money for sex randomly in a park is far more forward than we have now.

Ah ok although those straight men who accept the park offers aren’t straight! 
Have you been to some London parks on an evening?😂😂😂. 

[Gymowner]

my friend i think again my point was missed. my focus is not on the "straight" men who identify that way, its about the gays that would never have sex with each other. too gay for their sexual interests. thats a point of this thread. hiring "straight" men due to their inherent and perceived masculinity. that is parallel to our dear friend Giffords position of men of london in the 1930's.

Edited January 9, 2023 by Gymowner

[Gymowner]

what i found very interesting about the video was later on. sex therapists started to identify men instead of just "getting on" with other men as more a lifestyle and one way of sexuality so to speak. those that were innate were "inverts" and those that "did it on the side " living normal lives with women etc were considered "perverts". society actually had a sort of feeling sorry for the inverts and repulsion for the perverts. 

maybe thats why so many in the 50's and on got picked on and bullied by heterosexual men. the "straight" guys would easily go and have sex for sex sake yet knew THEY would be the ones as the perverts. hence "let me bully the innate guys so as to not lure me into a hot sex romp" and get all the bad rap. hmmmmm. very interesting.

guys i would definitely watch the video. it may shed quite a bit of light on our gay culture and its norms. 

Edited January 10, 2023 by Gymowner

[pubic_assistance]

On 1/9/2023 at 5:26 AM, Jamie21 said:

You do still see some people who retain that mindset when they say they’re ‘straight acting’…to which I’d ask ‘what is straight acting???’. 

Everyone knows what "straight acting" means.

I am one of those guys who is completely turned off by effeminate/obviously homosexual men. So this definitely spoke to me and how my brain works in terms of sexual attraction.

[Jamie21]

4 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

Everyone knows what "straight acting" means.

I am one of those guys who is completely turned off by effeminate/obviously homosexual men. So this definitely spoke to me and how my brain works in terms of sexual attraction.

So can you be straight and be “gay acting”? That’s what I’m challenging with the questioning of the term “straight acting”. 

[pubic_assistance]

5 hours ago, Jamie21 said:

So can you be straight and be “gay acting”? That’s what I’m challenging with the questioning of the term “straight acting”. 

Absolutely.

In fact I have a brother who is straight yet effeminate to the point where people often assume he is gay.

He was an art student in college and certainly knew plenty of gays but said quite confidently that there was nothing remotely appealing about it to him.

I have no reason to not believe him.

[studchaser]

On 1/9/2023 at 4:36 AM, Gymowner said:

very interesting documentary about being gay in the 1930"s in london. around the 7 minute mark, Gifford was talking about having sex with straight men. he was asked by a "bit of trade" he paid for sex, usually being a working class man or a soldier "why dont you go home with jim, your friend? he is quite elegant." his reply sums it all up here. he said (paraphrasing) "oh dear no. we want real men. we never go home with anyone one of our own. thats like having sex with your sister". Gifford stated it would be absolutely impossible to have sex with another gay man. he wanted "the real thing or nothing".

so it seems quite natural from the start of queer life that gay men were a sisterhood of sorts but only looked at straight men as masculine and attractive enough for having sex with.

now yap all you want on here guys but this instinct seems to be the cornerstone for the gay ideology that so many bitter at this thought process on here call "self loathing". i for one understand Gifford's point perfectly as to the true masculinity of the straight man. hmmmm..... must have been a lot of self loathing like our friend Gifford going around in the 1930's eh?

Gymowner when someone has Gifford's mindset they usually know the difference between a straight guy and a bullshitter. Many ppl(especially on here) always rely on the guys self definition and not much else.

Edited January 29, 2023 by studchaser

[Gymowner]

studchaser. i dont quite understand your reasoning for our modern definition of straight. Gifford's "mindset" was not exclusive or a minority thought of gifford's alone. according to gifford, EVERY gay thought this way. a sort of inherent norm of the "elegants" was to only have sex with straight men. this completed and justified the mental and physical circuit of the gays so to speak. no other gay would be able to fulfill that. think of how much of a "sisterhood" of sorts this would allow towards other gay men. your friends were just that. true friends. no cat fighting, bitchy, manipulative cockblocking going on as it does today to jockey a date or a sexual romp. gays lived their lives with getting sex when needed by random men that totally fulfilled their definitions and needs of the male during sex. and went on with their lives. their "relationships" truly became relationships with their friends.

looking back at my life i sort of lived this lifestyle without knowing of gifford and his ilk. it was inherent. i ran successful businesses for many years with my focus on those businesses. when i wanted sex i usually hired "straight" men as i was drawn to their mannerisms, masculinity and quite honestly their muscular bodies. sex for sex sake, shake hands and go on with my life. it worked well. i dabbled with relationships a few times. when i saw the desire of  gay men to so openly want to cheat, have three ways etc, as if the partner was not good enough to fulfill the sexual needs solely of the gay  i bowed out of the relationships and went on my way. im sure there were many monogamous men at the time but i as well felt that boring. i didnt want to stay home and watch t.v. on a friday night! i was in my early 30's, hot as hell and i wanted the attention that i got on a daily basis in the gay community.

i felt that being true to this way of sexual life was mine and mine alone. and as long as i didnt hurt another life i was good. i understood monogamy as a parallel to a relationship...end stop. my mother was a virgin to my father till the day she died. a religious woman that went to church weekly and had faith and virtue imbedded in every facet of her life. were there some bad times in my parents relationship? sure thing. she could have left my father many times...and probably should have. but her faith and virtue towards her matrimonial vows meant something to her. a trait i highly admire still to this day.

i mean if there is a revolving door of men coming and going in a committed relationship then is it a true relationship per my parents definition? i think not. what it really is is a deep friendship bonded together towards stability and security. hmmm... isnt this what our dear friend gifford was all about. stability within relationships with  friends and going freely to have sex whereever and whenever for sex sake. maybe modern gay "relationships" are really more in tune with the days of old than many gays think.

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Gymowner

[studchaser]

15 hours ago, Gymowner said:

studchaser. i dont quite understand your reasoning for our modern definition of straight. Gifford's "mindset" was not exclusive or a minority thought of gifford's alone. according to gifford, EVERY gay thought this way. a sort of inherent norm of the "elegants" was to only have sex with straight men. this completed and justified the mental and physical circuit of the gays so to speak. no other gay would be able to fulfill that. think of how much of a "sisterhood" of sorts this would allow towards other gay men. your friends were just that. true friends. no cat fighting, bitchy, manipulative cockblocking going on as it does today to jockey a date or a sexual romp. gays lived their lives with getting sex when needed by random men that totally fulfilled their definitions and needs of the male during sex. and went on with their lives. their "relationships" truly became relationships with their friends.

looking back at my life i sort of lived this lifestyle without knowing of gifford and his ilk. it was inherent. i ran successful businesses for many years with my focus on those businesses. when i wanted sex i usually hired "straight" men as i was drawn to their mannerisms, masculinity and quite honestly their muscular bodies. sex for sex sake, shake hands and go on with my life. it worked well. i dabbled with relationships a few times. when i saw the desire of  gay men to so openly want to cheat, have three ways etc, as if the partner was not good enough to fulfill the sexual needs solely of the gay  i bowed out of the relationships and went on my way. im sure there were many monogamous men at the time but i as well felt that boring. i didnt want to stay home and watch t.v. on a friday night! i was in my early 30's, hot as hell and i wanted the attention that i got on a daily basis in the gay community.

i felt that being true to this way of sexual life was mine and mine alone. and as long as i didnt hurt another life i was good. i understood monogamy as a parallel to a relationship...end stop. my mother was a virgin to my father till the day she died. a religious woman that went to church weekly and had faith and virtue imbedded in every facet of her life. were there some bad times in my parents relationship? sure thing. she could have left my father many times...and probably should have. but her faith and virtue towards her matrimonial vows meant something to her. a trait i highly admire still to this day.

i mean if there is a revolving door of men coming and going in a committed relationship then is it a true relationship per my parents definition? i think not. what it really is is a deep friendship bonded together towards stability and security. hmmm... isnt this what our dear friend gifford was all about. stability within relationships with  friends and going freely to have sex whereever and whenever for sex sake. maybe modern gay "relationships" are really more in tune with the days of old than many gays think.

 

Gymowner I dont think we disagree on much. I am saying when you're mind is made up that it's straight or nothing you probably get really good at telling the difference between a real straight guy and straight acting (I belong to this camp). However the modern gay liberation movement had caused many to scorn gays who think like Gifford. I have always said if you have the means and authentic masculinity is your thing go all out and accept no substitutes.

[+ nycman]

On 1/8/2023 at 12:18 PM, ThroatCummer said:

Anyway, just my $0.02.  It's a good read, lol:  Here: https://www.lpsg.com/threads/true-story-fucking-the-ufc-fighter.6137791/

Holy fuck that was a fun and sexy read. 

Thanks so much for sharing @ThroatCummer. I’d love to read the entire novel. Even though it doesn’t end with the two of you in old age watching sunsets in Provincetown, it’s a beautiful story.

I’ve had several “relationships” with straight men. They were all magical and complicated, but I wouldn’t trade them for anything in the world. They helped make me the man I am today and I am thankful for every one of them. 

[+ ThroatCummer]

2 hours ago, nycman said:

Holy fuck that was a fun and sexy read. 

Thanks so much for sharing @ThroatCummer. I’d love to read the entire novel. Even though it doesn’t end with the two of you in old age watching sunsets in Provincetown, it’s a beautiful story.

I’ve had several “relationships” with straight men. They were all magical and complicated, but I wouldn’t trade them for anything in the world. They helped make me the man I am today and I am thankful for every one of them. 

Thank you for reading and saying that. It's beautiful. Life is good.  

[+ Just Sayin]

1 hour ago, ThroatCummer said:

Thank you for reading and saying that. It's beautiful. Life is good.  

I loved the story of you and Mark; the sex was wonderful, of course, but I loved learning about your relationship with each other; the bonding that has taken place has made each of your lives far more richer than it would have been without your friendship

[Enchanted]

I wouldn't risk getting a straight boy because I need to make sure the dollar counts! 🤣

[mike carey]

On 1/9/2023 at 6:18 AM, ThroatCummer said:

Anyway, just my $0.02.  It's a good read, lol:  Here: https://www.lpsg.com/threads/true-story-fucking-the-ufc-fighter.6137791/

A wonderful story, I'm so glad you shared it. Thank you!

[studchaser]

6 hours ago, Enchanted said:

I wouldn't risk getting a straight boy because I need to make sure the dollar counts! 🤣

Because for you sex is about a physical activity standard. Trust me for guys who seek out straight men exclusively it can get deeper than any physical act can provide.

[studchaser]

On 1/9/2023 at 5:52 AM, Jamie21 said:

Ah ok although those straight men who accept the park offers aren’t straight! 
Have you been to some London parks on an evening?😂😂😂. 

Jamie. I think this is from an era where paradigms were much different. Nowadays I woukd agree men hanging out in parks and bathrooms probably would be reliably labeled as gay. However maybe the culture of those times were that working class straight men knew you could make a quick buck at the park with a "fairy" if your baby is home hungry and crying. Some of that culture is present still only difference is alot more misappropriation and cosplaying that causes the cynics to believe they are all gay and pretending. The experts know how to tell the difference.

 

Warning: Do not try to evaluate on your own. Seek the counsel of an experienced straight whisperer.

Edited January 30, 2023 by studchaser

[Playful boy]

The main question is if the guy is straight, would you consider hiring him? (there is many theories and variations but just imagine the guy is actually straight, no question ask)

[newdad]

On 12/15/2022 at 7:17 AM, robberbaron4u said:

Is he Asian? White? Both?

[Gymowner]

40 minutes ago, Playful boy said:

The main question is if the guy is straight, would you consider hiring him? (there is many theories and variations but just imagine the guy is actually straight, no question ask)

i have done so my whole life. everyone that i hired has and is in a relationship with a woman. never a man. doesnt have sex with men. they needed money, horny and loved their cocks sucked. straighter than straight.  nuff said.

[robberbaron4u]

3 hours ago, newdad said:

Is he Asian? White? Both?

Caucasian.

[studchaser]

On 2/3/2023 at 2:48 AM, newdad said:

Is he Asian? White? Both?

I see both but how is it relevant?

[GymGuy]

Three different ones over the last five years.  All okay but not exceptional.  All were strictly bottoms which was not surprising. 

[Whatsupandstuff]

Just my 3 cents here..In my experience str8 men are far less inhibited in the sack. More giving as well. very few of the gay men I have had encounters with were as free and open as the str8 identified men were. 

Back in the day superstar VAL was absolutely the very best. straight but in the bedroom was insatiable. Getting warm just thinking of him . whew.

Same with Tony Mecelli 

[newdad]

1 hour ago, Whatsupandstuff said:

Tony Mecelli

I just googled that guy, and he's a stud. Is he still active in porn and/or providing?