Guys: Think you're confident enough in your masculinity?........

[Badkins21]

That's a very astute observation there, K2_Exotech!

(and dballer, LOL!)

 

[dballer]

OK then let's see....

If you are 100% confident in your sexual ways, you should be able to do this no problem.

You should be able to, just for the hell of it, to prove a point, be able to let another guy lick and suck on your genitals, or have anal intercourse with you. If you're honestly 100% sure you'e not gay, then you wouldn't get an erection at all.

Now you may say that just doing these acts would make you gay period, wether or not you'd get turned on by them, but we know that's really not the case. Simply performing an act means you are acting it out, and may or may not feel the way you are acting. If you actually got aroused by it, then that's a different story, that would definately mean you're gay.

So who here in their heart of hearts can muster up the courage and is confident enough that they can actually do something like this without getting turned on?

It is not worth going to jail over... I will just look at the stupid MAMBLA parade with all of the dying queens... that is all I need.... how could anyone think of such a horrible thing???

 

[Burning_Inside]

You're all afraid.

It's funny the kind of reaction you get from posting the same question on different boards.

Where'd I think of this? There was a skit on Howard Stern i think it was about a bunch of big tough guy italians doing each other but proclaiming they weren't gay by doing so. Plus I was stoned when I heard it and you know how your mind is cranking when you're like that. So i came up with this little question.

It's just a theoretical question just to make you guys think, which I guess some of you just don't like to do, you'd rather lash out to hide your insecurties.. I mean if you really weren't gay then......

As for the stupid horse dick comment, well...let's see, if you see a horses dick and you get aroused, does that mean you're into bestiality....I'd have to say yeah, why else would you get aroused, unless you were in so much of a daze that you totally forgot that it was a horse dick and it reminded you of a human's.

 

[Taps]

I wouldn't let a girl shit in my mouth, does that mean I'm a prude?

Just because you won't do something in bed, doesn't mean you're not secure in your sexuality. It just means that particualr act doesn't turn you on.

Your argument is flawed sir.

 

[Superbabe]

I'm curious as to what masculinty has to do with being gay? Just because you're gay doesn't mean you're not masculine, and just because you straight doesn't mean you aren't the most female wimped out piece of wet cloth ever.....

The two aren't opposites....Burning inside, are you homophobic?

 

[DcupSheepNipples]

At the very least put condems in your sick thread! There is no reason to be spreading STD'S.

 

[Weapon X]

So, to prove that you're straight, you need to be willing to let a guy fuck you in the ass?

 

[Big Wiggs]

What the fuck is going on in your head!!

 

[Weapon X]

I'd hate to see how burning_inside would recommend that we prove we are not pedophiles...

 

[Burning_Inside]

I wouldn't let a girl shit in my mouth, does that mean I'm a prude?

Just because you won't do something in bed, doesn't mean you're not secure in your sexuality. It just means that particualr act doesn't turn you on.

Your argument is flawed sir.

Duh man, how it's so easy to totally go off the boat and try to sound smart. I love these people that try to be champion flawed arguementalists to,, you know the kind that try and pick apart any little nuance of a post and twist and band and go all philosphical and sometmies even political just to make that "you're arguement is flawed sir" comment, god those people are good entertainment.

No taps, see if you don't like a girl to shit in your mouth, it means you don't like to eat shit, doesn't mean that you're prude. That was the most poor pathetic example of trying to twist words around or create alternate scenarios (and one that has nothing at all to do with the original anyway in any sense) to try and make my "arguement flawed". When you come out of 8th grade you'll learn about subjective reasoning, and maybe learn how to keep on target if you're trying to argue a point and not seem like a jackass.

If the act didn't turn you on, then you're not gay. That's all this is about. It's a cut and dry scenario. You'd actually have to perform the action first to see if you were turned on or not though. Stop trying to be mental superman everyone by tossing in other scenarios to try and make this whole thing seem flawed. By doing this you make yourselves seem more insecure.

Bottom line is, if there was a test of sorts you had to undergo to prove if you were gay or not, and this was the way, I bet a lot of you would fail haha. Especially those of you totally avoiding the question or trying to find some kind of allmighty FLAW.