By David Futrelle
Last year, weirdo online pastor “Coach” Dave Daubenmire caused a bit of a stir after he warned men not to give in to the devilish temptation of masturbation, because when a man jerks himself off he’s, well, jerking off a man, and even though that man is himself, it’s still totally gay.
Turns out he’s not the only one who feels this way. One NoFap Redditor — one who has posted in detail on his own efforts to cure what he considers a fierce masturbation addiction — made a similar declaration last summer in the UnpopularOpinions subreddit, where his views did indeed turn out to be quite unpopular.
“Masturbation is gay,” announced asdasdasdasdfff44. “You’re jerking off a penis and a man is jerking you off.”
This particular Redditor — let’s just call him Asdas for short — wasn’t the first Redditor to have this thought, but while most of those who’ve posted on the subject seem to have be joking. Asdas clearly wasn’t.
He set out his arguments one by one, starting with the most anatomically difficult — but also, he thinks, the most obviously gay — example he could imagine. (His examples only apply to cis men, though presumably he thinks cis women who masturbate are gay too.)
Autofellatio. That’s sucking your own dick. Yes, it can be done and you can likely do it too with determination and flexibility training. Ask just about anyone and you will be told it’s gay as fuck, you’re literally sucking dick. They’d be correct. You probably know it’s gay as fuck too, no need to ask others.
Actually, judging from some other Reddit discussions of this particular form of self-pleasure, there doesn’t seem to be a consensus on this issue. While some Redditors think it’s “hella gay,” a larger number seem to be envious of any guy who can pull off this particular stunt, and don’t consider it gay at all. “As long as you tell yourself ‘no homo’ in the mirror beforehand you’re good to go,” joked one Redditor in a SettleThisForMe subreddit discussion. It’s only gay “if you make eye contac,” joked another.
But Asdas didn’t consider any possible objections, and quickly moved on.
“I’m thinking about a woman so it’s not gay”. You may be thinking about a woman when you’re fucking a goat too, that doesn’t mean you’re not fucking a goat. Ultimately a man is jerking you during masturbation and you’re stroking a cock.. that happens to be yours. Notice how that’s gay as fuck.
This raises so many questions. What if you’re thinking about a goat when you’re fucking a woman? What if a goat is thinking about you?
Asdas continued:
“It’s not someone else’s cock”. Ok then, grab a realistic dildo and stroke it rigorously and sensually or whatever you do when you masturbate. Yes, stroking a dick. Notice how that’s gay as fuck.
I don’t know how many guys stroke dildos when they masturbate. But guys certainly fuck a lot of inanimate objects, and I feel I could use more guidance from Asdas on this subject. What if you fuck an apple pie? Not gay, right? How about if you fuck a GAY WEDDING CAKE!?
Alas, Asdas offered no answers on any other inanimate objects beyond dildoes, and instead moved on to his final argument:
When masturbating, you get 10% the sensation of penetrating a real vagina and 100% the sensation of stroking a real penis.
Huh. I have heard rumors that there are numerous heterosexual sex acts that do not involve a penis penetrating a vagina at all. Are they all gay too?
Once again, no answers from Asdas, who wrapped up his post with a bold challenge:
If you think masturbation is not gay, you have an obligation to suck your own dick too in order to be consistent.
Asdas was stunned when a large number of the commenters informed him that they, and most other men, would be happy to do this if only they “could bend that far.”
“No,” Asdas declared, in evident horror, “most would be horribly disturbed by such an idea.”
“Are you new to the internet?” his interlocutor replied. “Or just to like, people in general?”
Good questions, both. Had Asdas done any research on the internet at all, he would learned, among other things, that many if not most men have tried to suck their own dicks, a feat only a few men are capable of pulling off, and that there’s a big subculture of dudes who not only think jerking themselves off isn’t gay, but also that jerking off next to other dudes jerking off isn’t gay either. Because sexuality is weird and complicated and people draw lines between gay and straight in all sorts of places, or don’t draw clear lines at all.
Because in the end, whether a sexual act is gay or straight, or neither, or something else entirely, is less about what goes on with the body than it is about what’s going on in the mind.
And one thing that seems abundantly clear is that what’s going on in Asdas’ mind when it comes to sex isn’t really doing him or anyone else much good. Homophobia and toxic masculinity are two terrible tates that taste worse together.
We Hunted the Mammoth is independent and ad-free, and relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!
@ Ambrose
Your writing reads like Lewis Binford ethnoarchaeology paper. Which is the work that’s going to turn me into an alcoholic. I know Vexing is a real word but what time period are you from? 1880’s! Your talking to a real, 20 year old human woman okay. You don’t have to sound like your composing an dissertation. Seriously, if you talk like this in everyday conversation I’m going to imagine you wearing a monocle and top hat.
Yes thank you grandpa Jim. I am fully capable of reading the warnings on the bottles for myself.
DA, my dude.
From the time stamps, you’ve been refreshing and commenting for over an hour.
I’ve given this advice to people I like a LOT better than you, so don’t take this as an “I hate your guts and want you to shut up” but…
If you want to have folks believe you actually want to have a debate, instead of assuming you just want to sit IN the punchbowl at the party, you need to slow down.
Edit, consider if what you want to say NEEDS to be said, or it you’re doing it just to try and take a stick to the figurative eye of the folks who have figuratively been poking you with a stick.
Actually make short posts focused on the topic that are well thought out. Actually read and respond to CONTENT of people’s replies, instead of just lashing out at their tone.
Make fewer posts.
Ignore the people baiting you, because chances are they’re literally taking bets and cooking popcorn, just waiting for you start (figuratively) yelling “YOU COVEN OF HARPIES” like you’ve done in the past when challenged.
I’d tell you what my bet is, but then it’d be invalid.
Cool, we agree on something. Then surely we will agree that “enforced monogamy” is a bad idea, to understate.
Well, I was going to ask if you’ve seen a doctor about that; but, since you “enjoy being needlessly prolix”. . . .
Um, yeah, I think that’s safe to say.
Hey, friend, pal, buddy, homeslice, bud
How can’t you read the room here?
You’re being laughed at, not with, it’s true
Is this somehow unclear?
You’re no threat, but a fly ain’t,
We’d be happy if you disappear
Hey, Desperate Ambrose,
Know the door ain’t locked!
You know that you’re not welcome
So why do you remain?
Does the deluge of annoyance
Translate to you as pain?
So are you really happy
Or do you think that you’ve slain?
Desperate Ambrose,
head without a thought!
Good I will give you points for not being like the last guy on here that blamed me for my own rape and abuse. Though that’s sad that there is a bar set at that point.
@cornychips
Steele? You mean the troll who, when unmasked, turned out to be MRAL? Is MRAL our only actual troll? He had a sock here recently. It’s kind of sad, if you think about it.
@Mabret, you might be confusing DA with Criannon who appeared at the same time.
Criannon got banned for being a victim blaming arse who loved Peterson’s ideas far more than is likely healthy and was convinced men work with their hands and women work with their reproductive system.
DA’s the “but what is toxic masculinity?” and “I know victims of the war on men but none of the patriarchy!” type.
Oh ghawd, I out-prolixed you!
Prolixity is not the sort of thing about which one sees a doctor, neighbour.
Tell me, I pray thee, what might induce a man to suggest “enforced monogamy”? I shall answer for you: he thinks to solve a problem of mass murders by incels. My next question for you, neighbour, is: Why would Jordan Bucko Peterson suggest this, rather than any other solution, e.g., one which treats women as humans, rather than as a public good?
Answer also, I pray thee, Why would Jordan Bucko Peterson lament that he cannot solve disputes with women violently, as he supposes that he can with men? This shall be the last one; I swear it: Why, as a solution to harassment in the workplace, would Jordan Bucko Peterson suggest forbidding makeup?
@contrapangloss
You are right, but I have since learned of it, and I have a s0op3r-s33kr1t plan.
@kupo
How do you find these amazing links?? Im so jealous. Ive been reading since about 2011 and i can never find “that one thread” when i need.
contrapangloss ~ Strange as it may seem to you, I actually appreciate your feedback.
Actually, there have been several posts I would’ve like to edit. Unfortunately, by the time they appear on my screen, the time limit has elapsed. Not quite sure why.
I’m used to message boards that are more like a conversation. Rapid-fire back-and-forth is nothing unusual, so that explains my style to some extent.
I do try to avoid whinging on in any given post, but sometimes more detail is needed to avoid being cryptic (there’s that word again).
When I see content, I make every effort to respond. Unfortunately, I’ve seen more than my share of posts that are more tone than content.
I hope you can see in this thread that I’ve made an effort to do that. And, just for the sake of clarification, I welcome being challenged. I do not, however, suffer being attacked gladly.
Again, my sincere thanks for your advice.
“do try to avoid whinging on”
Oh dearie me, that’s rich
But it sure seems to all of us
You’re digging your own ditch
Waiting on the ticking clock
For when you’ll cry out ‘witch!’
Desperate Ambrose,
gotta say, tick-tock!
And funny that you argue
About tonal natures sewn in
Is it my notes? Perhaps our votes
Are what you find forebodin’?
Nonetheless, I most confess
Here I need more than Vicodin
To translate Desperate Ambrose,
laughingstock!
@cornychips
I just do a Google search for site:https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com and the search term. In this case, my search term was Steele. Also found a thread that demonstrates the prolixity that I assume is what made you think our desperate friend was him.
I would still like to discuss that matter of toxic masculinity, if I can do so without being attacked.
Now, wait a minute, I don’t believe that’s what I said. I recall saying that I’ve met quite a few guys who were casualties of the “gender wars”, but I don’t think I ever said, or even implied, that women have no legitimate grievances whatsoever.
@kupo
Thank you so much for the advice!
It makes me a bit sad to see old threads and see old favorite commenters. I hope everyone is doing well, fighting the good fight.
OK, now I need to conduct a poll. Who here thinks that I actually need to start adding “*SARCASM ALERT!*” when I am about to say something sarcastic?
Trolls (especially the really pathetic ones that keep coming back under new socks) generally think
1) If they engage with me I’m disrupting them and I win!
2) If they ignore me then they can’t handle me and I win!
3) If they ban me that proves they have to silence me and I win!!
And then the high wears off and they go on leading the same empty little lives they were leading before they started trolling, and they have to come back to lather rinse repeat.
They think they loom large in our lives, that we think about them day and night they way they think about us. They’ve tied themselves so closely to us that they essentially can’t exist independently of us.
Without us they have no purpose, no meaning.
Of course, to us the trolls are more like roadside litter. A certain amount is inevitable. Litter (and trolls) might be eye catching or marginally interesting for a while. In the end it’s only trash.
Scildfreja: thank you
*SARCASM ALERT!* And here I thought it was because he couldn’t get laid.
Hmm. Because he’s a swine?
My guess: He is not only a swine, but a swine with a very limited imagination.
*SARCASM ALERT!*Again, conjecture: Because makeup is only appropriate in the workplace if 1) your workplace happens to be a brothel, or 2) You are a gold-digger just looking to marry a fat wallet, get out of the workplace, and eat bon-bons and watch soaps the rest of your life.
But I may be wrong.
OK, if I don’t hit the rack, here, our Aussie Cattle Dog will get all kindsa grouchy because I made him move over and make room in the bed for me.
‘Night, all.
@contrapangloss:
to be fair, I said some things that clearly weren’t meant to engage Desperate Ambrose on substance, but I didn’t do this because I was baiting DA to go off topic and reveal trollish tendencies.
I did this because trollish tendencies had already become obvious and I had lost any faith that DA would actually engage substantively. The worst of the worst is when someone actually spends the time necessary to type
No. You’re responsible for your own typing. If you have the time to yell at others about how you can’t possibly say anything on topic, then yes, you actually have time to say something on topic.
I always assume that what you spend your time doing ***IS BY DEFINITION*** your priority. If you want to talk about how mean everyone is, then clearly you don’t want to talk about other things that you are neglecting – from world peace and peach cobbler recipes to definitions of toxic masculinity.
Your agenda is judged based on what you actually say and how much time you choose to spend saying it. If you spend more time trolling and talking about how people are mean instead of substance, then clearly substance is not a priority for you and whether I say anything on the substance or not is irrelevant.
Thus, when I choose to humorously sum up, it’s not to bait someone off topic. We already know what that person’s topics are by how they spend their time.
As for popcorn popping, sure. I’ll cop to that. I try to make my posts entertaining when I’m not trying to make them substantive – and sometimes even when I am trying to make them substantive. But I have no desire to drag someone off topic. If anything, my humorous summation of DA’s repeated insistence that someone provide DA a definition of toxic masculinity in that other thread were shaped in small part that DA would realize how silly it looked to complain about a lack of definitions when definitions had been provided and thus be cajoled into saying something of substance.
But mostly, yeah, trying to entertain. I’d given up at that point.
@Desperate Ambrose:
I didn’t need it. I understood the sarcasm and did not think you’d failed to understand the word “prolix”. It is originally a latin word after all.
On the other hand, if I were thou, I would have assumed that Mabret was merely running with the metaphor rather than speaking from a sincere belief in my ignorance of the definition of prolixity & related terms. Quoting the dictionary in the process of declaring
would seem to be a sarcasm tag in Mabret’s writing that you might have missed.
Perhaps instead of worrying about whether or not people see you as intelligent, you could just focus on substance, say insightful things that are well evidenced, lay out solid reasoning, and not only convince people of your argument but also prove yourself intelligent as a side benefit?
In other words, snapping back at Mabret for quoting a definition in a way that might – in some contexts – imply Mabret believes you don’t know the definition, you could just assume we’re all in the know and then if Mabret wasn’t thinking you understood the term, it would be Mabret that wasn’t getting things, and you’ve already moved on with your points. For Mabret to bring it up at that point Mabret would have to admit to misreading the situation and bringing it up could only be seen as petty defensiveness on Mabret’s part.
Instead, you’re the one who seems petty and defensive. This particular incident is only a very small indication of pettiness and defensiveness it’s true, but with your “I can’t sociology but look at these latin words you don’t know that I do!” history, the larger context makes this take on a more petty and defensive appearance than your defense of your understanding of prolix would on its own.
At any time (I assume), you could make your next comment substantive and insightful. But this rarely seems to be your choice.
When I choose not to be insightful, I try to add some fun to the thread. At my best, I can be all three: substantive, insightful and fun – though it’s up to others to determine how often I actually achieve that. But shooting for 2 of the 3 on most comments is probably a good idea.
Asking, “Do I need sarcasm tags?” is practical, and maybe you feel its a necessary question. However, it’s neither substantive, nor insightful, nor fun.
If you want others to believe you’re making a positive contribution to the thread – rather than asking the thread to make a positive contribution to you – “I understand the definition of prolix,” and “Do I need sarcasm tags?” are probably the wrong way to go.
Up to you, though. I’m always up for a substantive discussion, but I think I’ve proved I can happily enjoy mocking you if I’m convinced there isn’t going to be any substance in a thread anyway.
It’s up to you to pick what you want to write about, and however much you might prefer otherwise, you’re going to have no control over how others react.
So why not think about what your priorities really are and make sure your comments conform to them?
I come back clean onto the scene
Perhaps not from a long soak
And here I see the purple quilt man
Attempting to provoke
Under sarcasm smokescreen, but your word choice–
think us Slowpokes?
Desperate Ambrose,
racin’ ‘gainst the clock!
We’ve long figured out you’re not for us
And for damn good reason
Looking past no hourglass
To tap into the season
You ain’t one of us
And although I won’t call it treason
Desperate Ambrose,
God, you’re still a crock!