664,807 posts

How do gay men get motivated and thrive like straight men if competition for gay sex is minimal?

by should_ | September 21, 2015 | altTRP

6 upvotes

Reddit View

Men have invented the modern world because they have had to compete to become the Best Male in order to get laid...by the hypergamous and selective woman. Let the games begin. And if you get burned, play harder.

While gay men are arguably as disposable as straight men (more disposable if you're thinking discrimination, less disposable if you're thinking gay-worship in the media), getting laid for a gay guy is not the hardest thing nowadays. And we here who know the wisdom of disposing oneitis and not "improving myself for him so he gets interested again" (due to the neuroticism it causes and the lack of practicality of postulating our old flames will rekindle)...we have a leg up on romance, but that might be our falling. We don't compete for sex and we know better than to give our hearts to the first bidder (or any bidder if we can help it), so what's our biological kick to ass-kick?

I figure that the big motivator for gays is often shame. Even if they're not being shamed now that high school's over (it got better!), the feeling is still there, or the personality pattern of achievement and taking the other bitches out of the competition remains. Dad isn't thrilled about your ball-throwing abilities, but he thinks that science fair prize (or standing ovation in a theater) is pretty dank!

After TRP taught me what my oneitis was and why I should cast it aside, I've still had motivation to plunder on in my career and self-analysis, turning new rocks, making new friends, self-discoveries and ideological leaps, but I have recently been struck by the notion that I don't have the "sexual" or "romantic" motivations that so famously drive men to change the world. And coming from our consumerist world-culture, we can look at this and find the audacity to say "hey, I want that."

I suspect masculine-top gays may psych themselves into running more game, out of necessity or because they initiate more, and thus they are constantly in 'competition mode' or 'all in or nothing whether I get rejected or not', thus driving them to become more worthy men, whereas more feminine bottoms may have gone off of their looks and used clumsier game, coming off at best as endearing during flirtations but regardless not finding sex to be a rare commodity.

I've also noticed that high-status men have hit on me and even become romantically interested when I play it right, but I suspect it doesn't have to do with my super-masc-alpha-dude status, nor does their interest affect my status in the male hierarchy. It is like being the female of the group; the status is by no means automatically lower, but the standards are so different that lining up a who's-who hierarchy of males and females is a headache. In courting, the masculine counterpart's status matters but not necessarily the feminine's.

This could entirely be the problem of bottoms. Much like feminism has taught women to go for career and status, when this in fact makes them unsatisfied romantically and sexually, maybe bottoms aren't meant to change the world like their more masculine gay lovers. They play the woman's game sexually/romantically, and therefore their habits and motivations transfer into their life force and motivation.

Now that I've said "life force" humor me with this new age thought: sexually I find the masculine counterpart's horny energy comes from his hips/balls area and projects onto the masculine subject's ass, while the feminine feels a longing in the chest for the masculine counterpart's desire, and the feminine projects 'her' desire onto his sexy upper torso. I very strongly feel that the life force is what's activated when someone is interested in a masculine way, and the feminine desire for the masculine's desire is desire for his outstanding life force, the procreator of life. Interestingly, they say that when a man's balls are literally cut off, he has little motivation in life. Correlation?

How have gays been able to accomplish so much if gay sex competition is minimal?

What is the fire under your ass, or the thing that holds the carrot in front of your face?

What would you say is the chief motivator for most gay men, sex or otherwise? A taste for life, an eye on luxury/harmony/pleasure/kitschiness?

If lack of motivation is more of a bottom's situation, should a bottom aim to become a top in bed in order to achieve, instead of find himself in a life of tying down a beta-bux?

blog


Post Information
Title How do gay men get motivated and thrive like straight men if competition for gay sex is minimal?
Author should_
Upvotes 6
Comments 12
Date 21 September 2015 02:44 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit altTRP
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/163377
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/altTRP/comments/3lt6db/how_do_gay_men_get_motivated_and_thrive_like/
Similar Posts

TRP terms found in post
Click to open them on Dictionary

  • alpha
  • beta
  • hypergamy
  • ons
  • standards
  • 4 more...
Comments

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

While sex occurs often that does not mean that sex is not competitive.

Hypergamy is not dissimilar to the male sex drive when it comes to the 'quantity' of sex. Access to the best partners remains competitive even in highly sexed environments.

Moreover, TRP is not merely the pursuit of pussy. AltRP is no more the pursuit of a fuck.

Sure, that's part of it... But TRP speaks to masculine improvement and competition across all aspects of life.

[–]should_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

OK, it still might be competitive to get sex, but would you say that gay men achieve, subconsciously, for the best mates?

This article also speaks to masculine improvement and competition across all aspects of life; the answer to the question it posits wouldn't bring more sex, it would bring more life achievement because it's talking about "x" (sex or otherwise) as fuel to innovate and achieve.

[–]Raskolnikov18171 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

What makes being a bottom a beta position? And where would versatile guys fall in that?

[–]should_[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

"Beta" doesn't have to mean "this is what you are in every aspect of your life," but being a bottom is at its best hero-worship, and letting a sensitive part of your body be a fuck-cushion for a hot, worthy guy.

When you ask about versatile guys, you're thinking "hierarchy of men in general," but I don't think it works like that. Topping someone for me at its best feels like you own them, or they're an appendage of you, and you're pretty awesome for scoring it. So tops are in touch with that feeling all the time during sex, versatile guys are and also are in touch with the oxytocin-heavy bottoming position of adoring a guy topping them, and bottoms are decided hero-worshippers. I guess we could draw conclusions from there but even greater/lesser are dubious labels.

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

It's not minimal, just less than that of straight men

[–]hoogityboogitiesRIP0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

There's nothing wrong with wanting to be with one guy. It's sad that others opinions can shape one into losing hope and faith in a meeting and finding a happy balance with a new co partner

[–]should_[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

There's still competition even when you're with someone.

And I'm talking about the pattern in men in general; every man has to prove himself in some way in order to be deemed valuable, whether they are consciously competing or not.

[–]hoogityboogitiesRIP0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Prove yourself? That is elementary level 3 conditioning thinking. True happiness and fulfillment, some call it nirvana is realized through self love and compassion; not seeking acceptance through others. Only then can you share yourself that is discovered through that ever present oneness. Stop reading The Red Pill and pickup The Power of Now.

[–]should_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I, too, think that self love and seeing all as one is the road to enlightenment. Most people, shockingly, don't achieve it. I'm not zooming into one guy's life when I make these assessments or writing up a how-to guide with this post; I'm zooming out and observing groups as wholes: what motivates straight guys? And is it the same thing that motivates gay guys? I could observe my apathy and say "I will continue to get more and more enlightened and make it all better," or, I can wonder what the stimulus is that makes my unenlightened gay co-humans kick themselves in the ass, and see how I can go about obtaining that.

If you want to break against the trend, good for you. Investing daily time towards a higher state might make apathy vanish and suddenly you can't stop aiming and achieving. If that works, let me know.

TL;DR this isn't a post about ultimate happiness; it's about causes of motivation and gender/sexuality's role in that.

[–]formlessphilosophy0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I don't actually agree wholeheartedly that males JUST improve themselves to get a better woman. I think that it is very much an ego thing which is unrelated to sex.

I believe ego is the biggest driver for most guys. As much as the theory of self-improvement for sexual strategy combines with evolutionary psychology, I can't help but notice that for a lot of guys, ego is the overwhelming factor.

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

Yeah I see what you're saying. I'm curious what you think about this: that ego relies heavily on the opinion of others, men and women. Status, etc.

[–]formlessphilosophy0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I think the ego is a lot more complex subject than people care to think.

Here is the thing: we as humans try and describe abstract concepts with words - and words often do not really describe things properly.

Confidence, high-self esteem, arrogance, pride, a big ego do NOT describe the same thing. They describe only certain facets of someone's dynamic personality. It's all too tempting to try and put labels on ideas with words. It makes hard ideas easy to refer to, but it certainly stops you defining them further. Think in terms of pictures and illustrations and stories, not so much with words.

As much as I'd like to answer your question with a yes or no, all I can say is that it really depends. My ego and self-worth is very much internally driven, but we don't live in a vacuum. Other people will affect how I think whether I like it or not.

And here's the other thing about me which I guarantee applies to tons of other people and you too: while peoples' poor opinion of me is irrelevant to me, I become proud and my ego blows up when people praise me too much or I get the sense people look up to me. A constant theme in my life is a flux between times of solitude and introspection, and other times where I'm in the centre of the action and people really look up to me.

For most of 2015 I was killing it socially and was going out all the time. I was literally triple booking some evenings because things were so active. People had a high opinion of me and I had a lot of social status. My ego grew accordingly.

Fast forward to now, and at least for the past few months, my circumstances have changed and I'm not doing that anymore out of choice. I've learned that, personally, while I love the social validation, it makes little to no difference to me if I don't have it. So that's nice I suppose.

On the other hand, some people are the opposite. They only hear the bad, and are chronically depressed and negative. Their self-esteem is in the gutter. But they are confident and appear happy. I have no idea what their ego is like.

It's such a complex topic, definitely worth thinking about and talking about. I would say, don't come to conclusions too quickly, there is no black and white when you're discussing psychology.



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

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter