Today, as many of you no doubt know, is Gay Pride Day. Here in Chicago, that means the annual Pride Parade, a celebration of all things LGBTQetc — and a nice aerobic workout for parade participants. (Gyrating on a float for three hours dressed in a leather harness and thong will burn roughly 1000 calories. But beware of chafing!)
Rookh Kshatriya, proprieter of the Anglobitch blog (devoted to the notion that women in the Anglosphere are, well, bitches), has evidently decided to celebrate Pride Weekend by offering us all his theories on gay male sexuality. Which is to say, his theory that there is no such thing as gay male sexuality, and that all those gay men out marching today would much rather be spending their Sunday eating bagels and doing the New York Times crossword puzzle with some comely (non-lesbian) lasses.
Yep, in Rookh’s World, gay men – or, as he puts it, “gay” men — are actually nothing more than exceptionally horny straight men who have been unfairly denied sex-on-demand with women of their choosing.
Let’s let him explain this:
Despite their rhetoric about lifestyles and the contemplation of flowers, gay men are clearly entranced by orgasm to an extent far surpassing that of heterosexual men.
Alas, in our Feminazified world, women sometimes refuse to have sex with men. Deprived a natural outlet for their sexy urges, horny dudes have to, well, improvise a bit. Why try to finagle your way into a vagina assiduously guarded by some dumb lady, when other dudes just as horny as you have holes of their own available for the asking?
As Rookh sees it, these uber-horny dudes really have no other choice.
[A]re most gay men just hyper-sexualized males – a self-selecting group whose priapic urges can only be satisfied by rejecting the relative sexual deprivation inescapably attendant on heterosexuality? The more one considers this possibility, the more plausible it seems. Even some badass with the looks of Apollo, the Game of Roissy and the confidence of a warlord would struggle to enter a nightclub and say: “I want sex NOW!” and expect to get it.
A terrible, terrible injustice. But there is a way out:
Yet homosexual men can enter any gay bath house in any Anglosphere city, say the very same words and expected to be sexually serviced by several men in a matter of minutes! In short, the sexual mismatch between the sexes makes the heterosexual lifestyle a poor option for any hyper-sexualized male – a non-option, in fact, if he wants to fully slake his sexual thirsts. By contrast, adopting homosexuality allows him to instantly indulge his every sexual whim in every manner conceivable.
Unless, of course, these whims involve sex with, you know, women. But lust is apparently stronger than mere sexual orientation. As Rookh sees it, homosexuality is the only rational choice for uber-horny men – even if they’d rather be boning women.
Since sex is so scarce and difficult to acquire in a heterosexual context, it simply makes no sense for an Anglo-American male with priapic urges to remain heterosexual – hence the self-selection of hyper-sexualized males towards homosexual lifestyles, not to mention the hyper-sexualized nature of homosexuality itself.
Is this all a prelude to a touching coming-out announcement by our man Rookh?
No such luck. It’s actually an excuse for, yes, more feminism-bashing. For it is the evil feminists who, in Rookh’s world, have been encouraging the “female sexual ostracism” of poor suffering straight men:
As we all know, women seek to control men by limiting sexual supply, be it representational (pornography) or actual (prostitution) – and that feminism is, essentially, an institution created for that purpose.
And so, in Rookh’s world,
homosexuality has advanced in lock-step with feminism. … [F]eminism – by assailing marital monogamy and allowing women to indulge their primordial attraction to dangerous thugs, moronic bullies and swaggering plutocrats – produced an unwanted ‘rump’ of educated, economically stable but sexually disenfranchised males. Given that gay males are disproportionately intelligent, solvent and educated, it is fairly obvious that members of this group have opted for homosexuality as a means of escaping the living death of involuntary celibacy, that the two phenomena are in fact closely related and that feminism is directly responsible for the advancement of homosexuality across the Anglosphere.
Feminism, by encouraging women to say “no” when they don’t actually want to have sex, may have created modern homosexuality, in Rookh’s view. But that doesn’t mean that feminists actually like gay dudes. No. Ick!
[T]he vast majority of Anglo females detest gay men as vehemently as they hate men in general. … the real link between pan-Anglosphere feminism and homosexuality [is that] the latter is a reaction to the former, which hates it with boundless counter-reactionary zeal.
Yeah, seems to me that the only one here who really “detest[s] gay men” is, well, Rookh, so much so that he’s decided to completely erase gay male sexuality – to put “gay” in scare quotes – in order to give himself another opportunity to run down feminists and women in general.
Now, human sexuality is a weird, messy, complicated, wonderful thing. It may well be that some bisexual men end up having sex with men more often than with women because they find it easier to find male sex partners for casual sex. But guys who are thoroughly gay – who would score a 6 on the famous Kinsey scale – don’t actually want to have sex with women. They really don’t. Drop a beautiful, eligible, horny (straight or mostly straight) woman in the midst of a bunch of Kinsey 6 guys, and this is what you get:
Court’s free!
Not a problem, Sarah. I know all about the new job stress. So much to learn, and so many opportunities to screw something up.
I think you’ve listed the highlights! Tho – the Melbourne Museum is hosting an Egyptian history thing that looks pretty awesome…
oh! Also, David! A friend linked me to this. It’s amazingly repulsive. And it thought you might be interested!
Ok. I can’t make links. Let me try again.
NEVER MIND I FAIL AT LIFE IT’S BED TIME
sarah, just paste in the url, no html needed.
It never fails to surprise me that these types just assume there is a shortage of women who will have sex with them. It’s more that they want to fuck 10s, and there IS, predictably, a shortage of extremely physically attractive people. There is no shortage of willing women, because even the less-than-perfect desire sex (and lots of it). Hell, if even that ain’t enough, that’s what human evolution blessed you with two hands for. — Which is why this explanation MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. If a guy is that horny, (and if all gay sex is just the “jailhouse” desperation to get off driving men to do somethong they would normally find horrible), then it would stand to reason that these so-called gay men would simply be swooping in and making short work of all the average, older, and ugly women in any given scene. Regularly. Or that they’d corner the market on fleshlights and lube. Or anything not requiring the sexual company of other men, if, as the OP claims, there is no such thing as same-sex attraction, and gay men all feel the same uncomfortable arousal/disgust that Rookh does when he thinks of getting it on with another man.
Bit late, but:
“Who knows what they do in their bedrooms?”
According to lesbians/bi women I know, they FUCK.
“Then you think rape is about sex and not about power after all?
Why do they hate them? Difficult question. Maybe we should ask Ruby Thomas, she beat one to death?”
I don’t know what every rape is about. When I was raped the guy wanted sex and I didn’t, and it progressed from there, so I guess it was originally about sex. I don’t really give a fuck why he chose to do what he did, I could spend my life thinking about what I could have done or what his motivations were, but judging by the reaction of him and his friends afterwards, it was obviously some kind of bragging right and not just wanting sex.
Also, you’re ridiculous. By your logic men all hate women because Ted Bundy. Once again, instead of answering a question, you ask another one which isn’t relevant.
“And despite the posturing on this site, almost all the boyfriends mentioned are tall. Bunch of fucking hypocrites.”
My boyfriend is 5’7, I don’t really think about height as a priority but I guess I am attracted to tall guys more often. It just isn’t relevant to me and my boyfriend, we like the same movies and rpgs and we make each other laugh, and we are very attracted to each other. I’m 5’5 and probably your ‘moderately attractive beta’, but when we met I was a good 30lb overweight. Didn’t make a difference to our relationship, nor would anything become any better if my boyfriend grew in height.
He’s shorter than you, and he has had girlfriends before me that I’d consider ‘alphas’. He doesn’t have a problem with his height, and neither does anyone else.
Ami, I’m a bit shy to talk to you as a lurker, but I think you are really pretty and funny and I am jealous of your personality 🙂
It was briefly going to be called Batmania, after its founder: John Batman.
That’s all I got.
:O thank you o: I dunno what to say xD But you shouldn’t be jealous! :] I put my cape on one shoulder at a time, like everybody else :3
also *big big hugs if you want them*
Ack. I work and go to one lakehouse party this weekend, and there’s a shitload of new, creepy/scary stuff. Is that guy in the other thread going off on *me* for doing yoga? I had a hearty lul at that. I wonder if he realizes there’s actually a decent number of dudes who go. Lots of them are older men who spent the better portion of their lives doing either high impact exercise, or high impact, physical work, whose bodies really can’t handle it anymore. Yoga is a way for them to carefully and gently do a little low-impact repair. Or if he realizes that my boyfriend goes with me- he’s a weightliftin’ meathead(sometimes) Marine. I wish we had a forum or an open thread (like Jezebels’ Groupthink. I miss posting there). if I set up an IRC, would people use it?
I partially agree with this. On the one hand, swing dancing is among the most fun things you can do; swingouts are awesome. MRAL, if you like music and movement, try it for some time. Don’t worry about not having a dance partner, most classes rotate and are happy to see new guys. Don’t worry about dancing not being masculine. Don’t worry about being bad at it, most people are at the beginning and its hard, but you’ll improve much faster than you realize, and followers tend to be supportive and friendly. Not starting to dance earlier (due to the reasons I mentioned) is something I regret; don’t be like me.
On the other hand, don’t expect it to solve your problems, or end your celibacy. Depending on what your ‘deficiencies’ are it may help, but it very well might not change anything at all. Do it because its fun, not because you expect anything more from it, because that might very well prevent you from having the fun in the first place.
And a quick remark on the weight thing. In my experience, heavy women (and probably men, but I have less experience with that) occasionally have a more difficult time to get comfortable with the movements, but after that they are amazingly fun to dance with, I assume because they are often really good at building momentum and dynamic. More power to you, I guess.
So essentially, women are EXTRA mean for purposely staying fat to prevent the boners of beta and omega men and keeping those poor sods “involuntarily celebate” by reducing the cock sock pool even further?
I like swing (west coast… Hey ami… I also do various sorts of ballroom dance).
I like swing too, but I found it via contra dancing. I think someone else here mentioned liking contra dancing too… it’s a great way for socially awkward people to get used to interacting with other people and touching them. Low pressure, simple steps, everyone is very friendly and eager to show newbies the ropes. And you get to dance with nearly everybody in the room. And it’s perfectly acceptable for women to take the men’s part in the dance, or vice versa. Some contra dances even supply a box of ties, available for gender-switching or same-sex dance couples, to make it clear who’s taking which role. It’s also acceptable — expected even — to ask strangers to dance all throughout the night, and be accepted. If you can’t get people to dance with you at a contra dance then you either have massive halitosis (and even this doesn’t always stop people, in my experience) or you are a huge jerk (ditto).
There’s often swing dancing or Scandinavian couple dancing, or both, in between sets at a contra dance. This is the best video I could find… I believe it’s from Greenfield, MA.
AJ: You’re on LJ? Me too! Wanta friend???
Ami: Email me sometime–I’d love to talk more and in more private spaces. rrede13 AT yahoo.com!
Comments on food, weight, obesity, social perceptions–one thing totally connected to class is “food deserts”–i.e. if you live in inner city urban neighborhoods or in rural areas or small towns, the food available to you is MUCH different than in wealthier areas. I knew that intellectually but didn’t realize it until I moved to rural Texas and saw what was available in the two grocery stores in town in terms of produce and such. There’s also pricing: one example, look at the cost of fresh fruit vs. fast food (high in carbs, sugars, fat). The system we live in offers vastly different food choices depending on your economic class and income.
I did not keep my resolution to not check in here until this evening. I am bad. So bad.
footnotegirl–Hmmm, I’d have a sort of reflexive negative response to the IPad probably because of the advertising, but you make some EXCELLENT points.
Moves IPad, wireless, to top of list!
Thank you!
Oooh, I absolutely *love* swing dancing! The first boyfriend I ever had was really into swing and ballroom dancing, and I enjoyed it whenever we went to his favorite dancing place. First dude I ever slept with, too.
Kate:
I don’t read a whole lot in the sunlight. When I’m in the sunlight/outside I’m usually doing other things. It probably wouldn’t be great for beach reading, but due to sand+water, I don’t know that any eReader is great for beach/pool reading. Battery life, especially when I’m using the Nook app and can have a black screen with white type, is loooong. 10 hours of continuous use? More?
Ithiliana:
Reflective as I noted above is probably only an issue in direct sunlight. I do most/all of my reading indoors and/or at night. For reading at night (like when my husband is asleep) it’s actually much better, as the backlighting makes it actually possible to read without an attached light. Also, due to personal eye issues (which I recognize most people don’t share) the extra contrast afforded by an actual black on white/white on black screen (as opposed to e-ink readers grey and black) makes it possible for me to read at all.
Also, when trying out the nook and kindle, I found myself no end of frustrated at the time it took to turn pages. Not an issue with the iPad.
I’m pretty much just a lurker, but from what I’ve read, I’d like to dedicate a song to MRAL
(And don’t think I’m automatically calling you an idiot just because of the song title. But this song’s inspired me to get over myself after wasting far too much of my life wallowing in real/imagined woez.)
Mr. Al:
(If you’re still around) I was listening to Terry Gross in the car today, and they had a little tribute to Peter Falk by replaying an interview from 1995. She had him talking about what it was like to grow up with a glass eye for the last several minutes. Thought you might find it interesting, especially his attitude about it.
@ithiliana – you have a new friend! See if you can guess who it is! 😉 And yay! You write LOTRips! *eg* I haven’t been active in almost a year, but I keep telling myself that I’ll come back – I don’t have a permanent account for nothing!
footnotegirl: I cannot be in direct sunlight for long because of heatlh problems, so that’s not an issue–and I’d much prefer white on black for reading ease. I was checking out wifi Ipad today, and plannning on saving up the money over the next few months–they look great. Thank you!
I should have trusted COLBERT!