Why are straight guys, even RP ones, so pathetically pussy-blind?

Reddit View
October 20, 2014

I keep waiting for someone to ask the obvious but forbidden question here, but no one has yet. So I will.

Why do straight guys, no matter how Red Pill they are, fall for the pussy monopoly? Ours is the only culture I know of, anthropologically or historically, in which male/male sex is not merely strictly, but cruelly, stigmatized. It's so stigmatized that adolescent boys hang themselves rather than face the stigma. What the fuck?? Greeks, Romans, Celts, ancient Asian cultures, any number of so-called primitive cultures — in all of them men had a LOT of sex with other men.

I totally get that straight men PREFER pussy and that they will always WANT pussy. But the pussy monopoly is, 100 percent, a product of the puritanizing effect of Christianity in our culture. Like other shitty components of western culture, it is contagious and has spread around the globe, though some of the stronger cultures have resisted it.

If straight RP guys would apply a bit of the sharp insight they love to brag and swagger about, then they would quickly see how rejecting the stigma on male/male sex would instantly alter the sexual economy to their extreme advantage. Nothing would bring the price of pussy crashing down as fast as the ready availability of casual sex between men — all men. The paradox is that if guys also have sex with guys, they also get MORE PUSSY because the price of pussy is so cheap. The ancients knew this, which is why they had more and better sex than we do. Puritanism and the myth of Romantic love (also a western innovation) all surreptitiously serve the interests of women and drive up the price of pussy to the point that smart men (RP men) are finally rebelling.

Please keep in mind that it's our culture that is the strange one. Men having sex with other men is the human norm. We gay guys are probably 2 or 2.5 percent of the population. We could debate this, but I agree with scholars like E.O. Wilson. We gay guys are a product of evolution. We evolved because we served a purpose in our tribes and families. In normal human cultures (ours is not normal!) we gay guys weren't obliged to have sex only with other gay guys. We had sex with the straight guys (and the straight guys also had sex with each other, but we gay guys obviously are particularly good at it). It was the combination of urbanization and Christianization that drove us into ghettos in the cities where we could "stick to our own kind." We did not evolve that way. All men like sex with other men the same way they like sex with their right hands, even if they prefer pussy.

I cringe whenever another gay guy expresses the belief that it is somehow wrong or dangerous for us to want — and yes, expect — sex with straight guys. We do have sex with straight guys, of course — ever so secretly. But we'd do it much, much more if the puritan stigma was torn down. We all know the joke about the magic in six beers.

RP guys do seem to get the importance of male/male bonding. It's a tiny step from there to the possibility of sex. That would be a huge step for mankind. However, 2,000 years of Christian anti-sex horse shit stands in the way.

Every time a gay guy has sex with a straight guy, or two straight guys jack each other off, that is human progress, and a bright new star appears in the sky. It would lead us back to a world in which everyone is sexually happier (women too, probably). The tools and devices that women use to control and monopolize men would vanish.

It takes balls to see this, and believe it or not I know some straight guys who see it. But I submit that most of the guys in TRP are not just pussy-blind, they're homophobic pussies. Ask a Roman legionnaire. Or a couple of Celtic warriors, who fucked each other so heartily that even the Greeks were impressed.

Post Information
Title Why are straight guys, even RP ones, so pathetically pussy-blind?
Author contrafagotto
Upvotes 6
Comments 14
Date 20 October 2014 12:24 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit altTRP
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/163348
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/altTRP/comments/2js1g0/why_are_straight_guys_even_rp_ones_so/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
the red pill

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

I'd certainly be an interesting world if straight men engaged more freely in sexual relations with other men. I agree that it would play havoc on the female SMV. I can't say I totally understand the cultural and psychological conditions that led to msm (male/male sex) being so prevalent in the past. I, like everyone else, am a product of our current culture and see a couple of reasons why it isn't so common now.

Primarily the issue is one of labeling things. Creating the dichotomy of straight/gay has forced everyone into picking one or the other and created the fear of crossing that boundary. Of course its a silly distinction to make, but increasingly its a distinction being reinforced by the gay community. We do it to ourselves.

Being gay is a knock on your masculinity now-a-days. With the likes of glee and queer eye we've fashioned the gay man into a woman. Men spend a lot of time bolstering their masculinity and rebuff any perception of weakness or femininity. Unfortunately this stigma of femininity has been around much longer than just our day and age. Even the Greeks and Romans who partook in msm considered the receiving partner to be weaker. Men had a very limited way in which they could explore msm.

Lastly its a matter of developed tastes. I know that in some parts of the world almost all the boys and young men find themselves a nice goat to fuck before they move on to women. It's not that hard to imagine msm being more common place if it were acceptable. But it would have to be acceptable from the start and widely so. Boys today don't venture down the path. They have no innate reason to do so and since they're told its wrong they certainly don't question it.

I cringe whenever another gay guy expresses the belief that it is somehow wrong or dangerous for us to want — and yes, expect — sex with straight guys.

I've said it in a couple of places that I think this is a bad idea. I'll explain my reasoning here again. Gay guys need to respect the boundaries of straight men because failing to do so eliminated our ability to have non-sexual relations with men.

Most gay guys I've met have no male friends. This is because relationships between gay men are almost always sexual in nature and straight men shy away from gay males for fear of the same.

For better or worse most straight guys really do not want to have sex with other men. Straight men will not feel comfortable forming that close bond they have with other straight men if there is a constant fear of sexual approach.

Its fine if they initiate, but thats rare in my experience. Some users on here have it happen to them more commonly. Either way, I don't condone initiating sexual contact with straight men.

In conclusion, the new gay agenda is to teach all young boys to have gay sex. We will bring about utopia.

[–]contrafagotto[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I totally agree that the creation of the gay/straight identity is the biggest backfire in our history. Old guys testify that (in the military, etc.) before they were aware of the identity thing, casual sexual contact was a regular thing. Guys jacked off together, jacked each other off, etc. Apparently they really did have circle jacks. One old guy once told me, "We didn't think it was gay. We just thought it was fun." The gay identity put an end to anything so casual.

One can argue that the gay identity was necessary for the 60 years or so of progress we have made. But that progress came at a cost.

You are right that the Romans stigmatized sexual receptivity. With the Greeks I think it was a little more complicated and subtle than that. However, I don't see Roman sexuality as an ideal. The Romans were really fucked up in lots of ways. Slaves and prostitutes provided much if not most of the MM sex. Other cultures, particularly the Celtic culture that the Romans so efficiently wiped out, were not so squeamish.

I do not agree at all that most straight guys really do not want to have sex with other men. They don't want MM sex the same intense way they want sex with females, and they don't want the same kind of sex with males that they want with females. But in secret, and in the absence of stigma and unwanted complications, I think that the vast majority of straight guys would go for casual MM sex when they're horny as readily as they jack off.

Of course gay guys need to respect the boundaries of straight men, the same way all people should respect everyone's boundaries. But boundaries are not made of stone. Boundaries vary according to all sorts of variable circumstances. The same straight guy who feels the urge to floor a gay guy who approaches him in a straight bar may eagerly unzip his pants for a blow job in secret. In many cases, boundaries change as guys get to know and trust each other. Boundaries are to be lowered by the person who owns the boundary, of course, rather than to be violated by others.

I also don't agree that straight men will not feel comfortable forming close bonds if there is a "constant fear" of sexual approach. Fear? There's a lot of truth in the saying that homophobia is the irrational fear that a gay guy will treat you the same way you treat women. This fear that straight guys are reputed to have when another guy finds them sexually attractive is rapidly going out of fashion. Most straight guys now find it flattering. Urban men (I lived in San Francisco for 18 years) have pretty much got this figured out. In San Francisco, as a matter of fact, any straight guy who doesn't have gay friends (or admirers) is a little suspect. It is not stigmatized. A straight guy can go to lunch with a gay admirer with no eyebrows being raised.

"Initiate" is a hard word. I would never advocate laying a hand on another person without permission or negotiation. For the past five years, I have been having an intense and intimate relationship with a straight guy that is based on our mutual interests and all-around compatibility. He knew that I was gay from day 1. I never meant to fall in love with him, but I did. That eventually came out, of course, and he was very kind about it. He knows I want sex, and he is not offended by that. We have certainly talked about the possibility of sex. He has mentioned two reservations. The first is that he does not want to have to deal with the matter of identity. That is, he doesn't want to have to think of himself even as "bi," not to mention gay. He identifies as straight and that's that. The second reservation is that women won't understand and that it will lower his market value with women. The reservation that he does not state is that he's afraid it will change our relationship, that it will fuck up my expectations, that sex will overshadow the rest of our relationship. It's my job to prove that I can handle sex without fucking up our relationship. I believe we are in the testing stage now, in which he needs time to feel sure that my being in love with him and wanting sex won't fuck things up. He recently went on a trip and has been away for several months. He "accidentally" left several of his used running shirts at my place. He knows I love the way he smells. He may or may not be fully conscious of why he left something intimate and sexual with me. But given that girlfriends have been known to leave panties with him, I think he gets it. Far from wishing that my sexual attraction to him would go away, he wants to sustain it. Straight guys can be awfully sweet with other guys.

As for teaching young men to have gay sex, there was an item in the media a few months ago about how, in a British study, 93 percent of younger straight guys acknowledged having slept with or cuddled with other guys. I have no idea if that was a valid study or whether it really reflects the way things are now in the U.K. But things are definitely changing. I think that most young Europeans are way ahead of most young Americans on this, but even in the U.S. this is changing. Straight guys are changing, and we gay guys need to change along with them. It's not 1959 anymore, or even 1979 or 1989. Something is in the air, and I'm daring to hope that the straight/gay dichotomy is weakening.

TRP is one of the leading edges of the way guys are rethinking and changing. I think we should call them out when they swaggeringly flaunt the supposedly binary nature of their straightness. Anyone who's been intimate with a few straight guys knows that it's horse shit.

[–]narcissus882 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Most of it doesn't have to do with the stuff you mentioned directly (Puritanism, Christianity), but the end of working class culture. Middle class boys generally don't do this, for a number of reasons. SWPL's still less. If you go to Latin America there's a lot more experimentation.

One thing you're leaving out is that straight guys have always had sex for money or gifts with gay guys. Prostitution (even if nominal prostitution) was the default arrangement. That still takes place in much of the world. You have to think it through, especially for a handsome straight guy, even if he enjoyed it somewhat, why wouldn't he charge money? But again in the modern West this has for the most part stopped.

I've written on TRP and here before and generally agree with you, but there are some important details you're leaving out. In particular things recently aren't changing for the better. The increasing effeminacy (and feminism) of SWPL's is leading them to gay-like behaviors, but it's not the old style of doing things returning. It's something very bad, and which gives me no pleasure.

[–]contrafagotto[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

You make some interesting points, but when you refer to working class culture, I think you're not going back in history as far as I am. I'm an essentialist, I guess. In my view, straight guys have their own natural, essential motivations toward same-sex sex that are as old as our species, though social constructions appropriate to the period may be layered on top of those natural motivations. For social reasons, today's straight guys are going to need rationalizations for same-sex sex that make sense to them within today's culture. Rationalizations that made sense to men 75 years ago aren't going to work very well anymore. New rationalizations must be found.

Any time I know a straight guy well enough, I ask him whether, since puberty, he ever found himself in a sexual situation with another guy, whether he followed through or not. Granted my sample is small, but it seems to me that straight guys getting into sexual situations with each other is universal. They may be wrestling, camping, or sleeping over. Or, when they're a bit older, drinking may be involved. They learn about the stigma early on, though, and the stigma is very effective in preventing boys from doing what they otherwise would naturally do.

For example, one straight friend told me that, around the age of 17, he and his best friend were wrestling (as they often did), and they had been drinking. His best friend proposed that they make out. My friend declined. When they were college age, another sexual situation came up with his same friend, again while they were drinking, but this time my friend's rejection hurt his best friend's feelings. He now regrets the way he handled this, because he believes that this friend will no longer confide in him the way he once did. He implied that he wishes that he gone along with his friend sexually. After all, how would that have hurt him?

My theory is that if, say, guys like James Franco and Josh Hutcherson started talking about the fun of guy-on-guy sex and articulated some rationalizations for it that made sense in the context of today's culture, suddenly 92 percent of straight guys would be up for getting it on with each other. Though I'm sure I am as appalled as you are by feminism's effect on today's young men, I still think that we all benefit from any factor that gets guys to loosen up about having sex with each other, starving the factors that feed into homophobia.

[–]narcissus882 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Modern SWPL guys often have a lisp and other gay mannerisms. This isn't progress or something to be celebrated, and it's also a real turnoff. I like seducing straight guys because they don't have these qualities but what do when so many "straight" guys in the USA today do? I have to go abroad for it.

James Franco is not as extreme but also a turnoff by the way.

[–]Nitrobroom0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You have a point, but the concept would apply only if the population were bisexual, not homosexual.

[–]dicklord_airplane0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

i don't know about other men, but my sexual orientation is not a choice. i have never felt any sexual attraction towards men whatsoever. i was brought up in a liberal, completely non-religious family, and i was not indoctrinated towards any particular sexual orientation. my family made it clear that they would love me whatever my sexual orientation, so my total straightness is not learned. to me, the thought of sex with another man is like the thought of sex with an animal. i feel no interest, only revulsion. not all men would enjoy sex with other men, just like not all women would enjoy sex with women.

trust me, if i could choose to have sex with men and enjoy it, I would! I'm actually envious of gay and bi men. friendships with men are easy and fulfilling, and if i could choose to get sexual fulfillment with men as well, then I'd have started at puberty.

this is something i've thought about for a long time. what if all people actually had the power to choose their sexual orientation? why would any guys choose to pursue women? women would have to provide more to convince men to pursue them, and they would have to provide a shit load of incentive to get men to commit.

I think you're on to something, though. sexual orientation can certainly be affected by our experiences while growing up. i've read studies that show that people are more likely to develop homosexual tendencies if they are exposed to it in the formative years, so maybe western culture will look more like ancient Greece and Rome as kids get more exposure to homosexuality and it becomes less stigmatized among adults. I also wish that more men were free from the all-encompassing power of pussy, myself included, and that pussy didn't have such a massive, irrational influence over the trajectory of culture and civilization. but alas, i just can't do dudes. blech.

[–]contrafagotto[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Homosexual behavior (what an ugly phrase) comes in multiple flavors. Of course your sexual orientation is not a choice. No reasonable person would question that you are exclusively attracted to women.

But are you sexually attracted to your right hand? How much sex have you had with your right hand?

In cultures in which homosexuality is not stigmatized, to straight men it is just an alternative and secondary way of getting off. It also comes with some fringe benefits, because it promotes male bonding in the absence of stigma.

For example, I have read (sorry I can't give a source -- it's been a while) that, at least a decade or two ago, homosexual behavior was so unstigmatized in native North American culture (including Mexico) that, when a male work group left home for a while to make money, a gay guy would go along with them. Going on the road to work was not regarded as a suitable role for females, who were expected to stay home. The gay guy would cook for the workers, keep house for them, and provide sexual services -- a good deal all around, sort of like Paleolithic hunting parties.

Stigma prevents this kind of thing in our Christianized cultures. But in the absence of stigma, if you were horny and did not have access to a female, and if you had a choice between an expert and eager blow job or your right hand, most men, including probably you, would pick the blow job.

Anthropologically, it seems very likely that that's the kind of no-stigma environment in which homosexuality evolved (see E.O. White). Our anthropological histories taught our genes that societies and families are stronger when about 2 percent of the males take on third-sex roles that benefit both the men and the women. I'll let you Google some literature on this if you're interested rather than trying to summarize it myself. Nature is smart. Homosexuality is not a defect. It's a part of the human sexual and reproductive ecology, which is social. If this seems strange, think of bee colonies, in which the hordes of worker bees never reproduce. Yet the colony can't survive without them.

[–]Whisper0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

We do have sex with straight guys, of course — ever so secretly.

No you don't. You have sex with closeted gay guys in denial. And bisexual guys.

Straight guys don't have sex with guys because we CAN'T. You can't play pool using a rope for a cue.

And you don't get to have it both ways. You can't call it homophobia when people expect you to have sex with women, AND homophobia when straight men don't have sex with men.

[–]Redpillc0re2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

You 'd be surprised. Ask your gay friends. Search the science literature. Men are horny beasts, that's a fact. A hole is a hole, that's another fact. Ergo, sex. That simple. In cultures that actually oppress women (e.g. muslim) sex between men is even more prevalent and despite what you hear nobody raises an eyebrow about it.

What you just did is fall into a trap of shaming men into "not being straight". Your culture probably instilled that to you, but u should know it's nowhere near what is normal in other cultures.

[–]contrafagotto[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

That is one of the biggest horse-shit memes out there — argument by the definition of "straight." I assure you that straight guys have sex with guys all the time. I also assure you (though it should be self-evident) that we gay guys know a great deal more about this than you do. People like you would be the last to know about it.

I've often thought that this is related to why so many people want to ostracize gay people and keep them silent and in the closet — we know the secrets of straight society.

[–]GC0W300 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I'm on board, since my female LTR bailed out I've been on dates with 6 women, 1 guy, and have 1 more guy scheduled for tomorrow night.

My biggest reason for getting interested in guys and then losing interest for a decade+, which I did, is that I had weak social skills and men are deceptive and emotionally abusive in order to get sex at a level that women just aren't. Both genders are terrible, but it takes a complete female whore to play the same kind of short con that the average man runs in order to get laid.

After that, I'm going with HIV risk, which I know is rude as all fuck to say, but that was another part of my nexting men for a decade.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

play the same kind of short con that the average man runs in order to get laid.

Can you give us an example of this sort of behavior?

[–]GC0W301 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Neglecting to mention a co-residential boyfriend during the pickup phase and not mentioning him until AFTER the second time you've had sex in one evening.... while you're at their shared apartment... is the first one that comes to mind.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter