How Often Do Straight Guys Have Gay Sex?

U

 

This is where I find myself, Love my wife, but a little jerkin off or sucking off may not hurt anyone.

 

It is definitely getting more popular for sure.

 

The historian George Chauncey writes in Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World, 1890-1940 (1994):

“The general secretary of the city’s major anti-prostitution society warned in 1918 that opponents of his anti-prostitution campaign might use the “apparent increase of male perversion” during World War I as “evidence to sustain their argument that vice driven out of one form will appear in another.” (The campaign is discussed in chapter 5.) His fear that such reasoning would seem plausible was well founded. One of his own investigators had used it to explain the homosexual liaisons he had observed on the streets surrounding the Brooklyn Navy Yard late one summer night in 1917, when no women were to be found:

The streets and corners were crowded with the sailors all of whom were on a sharp lookout for girls.… It seemed to me that the sailors were sex mad. A number of these sailors were with other men walking arm in arm and on one dark street I saw a sailor and a man kissing each other … It looked like an exhibition of mail [sic] perversion showing itself in the absence of girls or the difficulty of finding them. Some of the sailors told me that they might be able to get a girl if they went ‘up-town’ but it was too far up and they were too drunk to go way up there. ​

The belief that fairies could be substituted for female prostitutes—and were virtually interchangeable with them—was particularly prevalent among men in the bachelor subculture whose opportunities for meeting “respectable” women were limited by the moral codes, gender segregation, or unbalanced sex ratios of their ethnic cultures. Indeed, many of these men found the sexual services of fairies to be both easier and cheaper to secure than those of women. They could be found around the Navy Yard and along the waterfront, on well-known streets and in many saloons frequented by sailors and workingmen, and even in many subway washrooms, where a man could find quick release on the way home from work merely by presenting himself. A finely calibrated map of the sexual geography of the neighborhood was usually part of men’s gender-specific “local knowledge.” Many workingmen knew precisely where to go to find fairies with whom, if they chose, they need not exchange a word to make their wishes clear.

Still, the relative accessibility of fairies to men isolated from women hardly explains the latter’s willingness to turn to them. After all, thousands of women were working as prostitutes in the city, and workingmen often did have recourse to them; the immense number of single men in the city with few other means of meeting women supported the business of prostitution on a scale that would never be repeated after the 1920s. If men had risked being stigmatized as queer on the basis of a single homosexual encounter, most of them would have sought sex exclusively with such women.

But the very character of their sexual relations with prostitutes and other “tough” women made it possible for them to turn to fairies as well. The moral codes governing the sexual practices of many men in the bachelor subculture (as in the larger culture of men) divided the world into “pure women,” with whom men did not expect sexual contact until after marriage, and “impure women” or “whores,” whom men felt free to pursue aggressively for sexual purposes. In the eyes of such men, the simple willingness of a woman to enter the saloons, poolrooms, and other social spaces they dominated was a sign that she was a prostitute. […]

A man might have a close romantic relationship with one woman, whom he hoped to marry and treated with affection and respect, but still feel free to use a prostitute to satisfy his immediate sexual needs. Few men would ever even imagine substituting a fairy for their beloved (although they might develop feelings of affection for some fairies, just as they did for some prostitutes, and might even find it easier to relate to fairies than to prostitutes because they found it easier to relate to men than to women). But many men did find it relatively easy to substitute a fairy for a prostitute, since both offered immediate sexual satisfaction, as well as the pleasures and amusements of bawdy “female” companionship. In a world in which “every woman is just another place to enter,” as one Italian teenager described the attitude of men at his neighborhood pool hall in 1930, the body to enter did not necessarily have to be a woman’s. […]

The very structure of such encounters and the interchangeability of fairies, women, and boys in them highlights the degree to which men were simply using the body of the fairy and sometimes the body of a boy, just as they might use the body of a woman, as a vehicle for phallic satisfaction and manly solidarity. The phallocentric presumption that a man’s sexual satisfaction was more significant than the gender or character of the person who provided that satisfaction allowed gay men to make certain arguments in their approach to “normal” men that would seem utterly incredible in the absence of that presumption. Most commonly, gay men simply offered to perform certain sexual acts, especially fellation, which many straight men enjoyed but many women (even many prostitutes) were loath to perform. In such cases it was the particular phallocentric pleasure, rather than the gender of the person providing the pleasure, that men found appealing, although fairies, who were commonly called “cocksuckers,” were especially known for this service, in part because so many women refused to provide it.

As one gay man observed of the Irish and Italian young men from South Brooklyn with whom he associated in the 1940s and 1950s, they “do not (necessarily) despise fellators—including these ‘nice’ Brooklyn boys. Or especially they. They find the fellator desirable… The same with sailors.” But even though men found the queer man’s services desirable, they also believed that a man lost status if he fellated another man. This was not simply a matter of his losing gender status, however, for women also lost status by performing fellation, which is one reason so many women refused to do it. The act itself—a nonreproductive sexual act whether performed by man or woman and thus “unnatural” by the tenets of a reproductively oriented sexual ideology—was considered perverted for men and women alike to do. Its transgressive character was, indeed, part of its appeal, whether performed by men or women.”


David Dalton writes in his short text Why Straight Guys Love Their Gay Guys: Reviving the Roots of Male Sexuality (2017):

“And just look at what being gay does to our odds. We gay men are now, post-liberation, expected to make our emotional living with only 2 percent (or so) of the male population — to stick to our own kind. To try to make something that difficult possible, we urbanize and ghettoize and sort each other out according to degrees of masculinity and as tops and bottoms (with tops always in short supply, my bottom friends complain). […]

This is a good thought experiment, by the way, to present to straight people to help straight people understand the unworkability of our gay predicament, to help them understand why gay men tend to be so unhappy, and why so many of us kill ourselves: What if 98 percent of the people you are attracted to were off-limits, and you might get your bones broken if you even try? And what if the remaining 2 percent of your own kind, for the most part, don’t have enough of the masculinity (or femininity) that you really want? Do you think that your average straight man or straight woman would settle for a rotten deal like that? […]

As for men, men have much to gain. Once men learn (as tribal men must have known) that male-male sex doesn’t devalue them, doesn’t emasculate them, and doesn’t force a whole new unwelcome identity on them, then look at what they get: eager no-strings sex, sexual variety, better bonding, a superb alternative to masturbation, superior blow jobs, and a form of appreciation and admiration that they probably haven’t been getting. Gay men will worship them and make them feel like gods, not just get them off. Every gay man deserves a calendar guy.”

 

I am a simple creature my dick don’t lie it knows what it’s attracted too I think people over think this stuff.

 

I know I’m not straight I’m bi love women but enjoy sex with men. I enjoy sucking cock, and getting fucked it’s hot, plus I like to make out I enjoy the full sexual experience. A girl once said to me I fuck him or I fuck her whats the difference I’m having sex and having fun. I agree with her now 100%

 

Generally if your a guy fucking a guy I don’t think your heterosexual might be the label you want to use and that’s fine. I use to tell my self I’m straight I just like gay porn once in a while and have fantasy’s about a guy here and there that’s nothing I still think women are hot and like to eat pussy

 

As far as my friends/family & wife are concerned, I'm as straight as can be. I don't have any interest in having a relationship with a man.
Once about every 5-6 months for the last 10 years I seek out a dick to suck. I'd probably do it more if my circumstances were different, but this keeps me satisfied for now.

 

I think the answer hinges on the role that coincidences play in the life of everyone.
It depends on whom you meet and on how often you meet an attractive person who will make you develop an exceptional desire.

 

I found out early on during my curiosity to suck another man's dick that there are more men in relationships/marriages to women out there that are sucking dick behind closed doors. I began acting on my curiosities and could not believe how many other married men (like me) were doing so, it was great. I no longer felt sexually neglected when I was hooking up with other married men for mutual oral sex.

 

Hah, they probably have it more than they're willing to admit to. Is it gay to get a blowjob from a guy? Um, no, even though gay guys are famous/infamous for sucking cock - but it's always been the presumption that it is gay because gay guys do it. Ditto for anal sex; gay guys are famous/infamous for it, but bisexual guys are known to be into it and not just with men. I used to wonder how and why a straight guy would want to get into sucking dick but insist that they're still straight and I admit that it took me a long time to realize that... it's just sex. It's the grown-up version of boys being boys and, yeah, sure, helping a bro out in his time of great need.

I still don't really know the logic behind how straight, married guys decide that when the wife ain't putting out and for any reason, the answer is... suck cock with a guy and/or really find the answer to the question of how it feels to be fucked and have a nut busted in you. Shit, I've been with allegedly straight married guys who are still hitting the pussy hard and often and this whole thing puts M2M sex in a whole different light that isn't necessarily related to sexuality - but it is very much related to just having sex.

And I've had my share of straight guys who were good in bed with me - and still maintained that they were straight. Are they really bisexual but in denial? They could be or, in their minds, it's just sex and sex that, somehow, doesn't have anything to do with sexuality as we kinda/sorta understand it. Now, would a straight guy who's been up to their eyeballs in things M2M admit that they are? I seriously doubt that since it's likely that they'd get slapped with the gay label faster than they can say that they're not gay. I've actually had guys tell me that we can suck each other's dick but if we don't cum, then it's not gay. I've had guys tell me that we can fuck each other but we have to stop and jerk off because if we don't cum in each other, then it's not gay and I'm still thinking - and after all this time - that we can't really know how often straight guys have gay sex because if they admit to it, well, that means they're really gay... right?

Not if homey says it isn't. I've seen 'examples' of straight guys maintaining their heterosexuality because they would never be in a relationship with a guy - and making me ask what the hell does that have to do with anything, but it gives insight to what can go on in a straight guy's mind when he finds himself thinking hard about sucking cock or any of the other stuff two guys can do. But, sure, if a guy wanted to give them a blowjob, they wouldn't be likely to turn it down and it has no effect on their perception that they're very much straight (and in love with women and pussy) and... they might be right about that.

More research is required, and I need to see if I can get into the associated psychology...

 

"Straight" guys having gay sex are not straight guys. They are bi sexual.

 

I wouldn't disagree one bit. A couple of things, though. First, a guy is whatever he says he is. Next, questioning this is considered to be bad form and downright rude and I've never understood how a guy can look like a duck, quack like a duck, but insist that he's a squirrel. We say that actions speak louder than words... except when it comes to this. So, if I tell you that I'm straight but then we get to blowing each other and I insist to you that despite what we just did, I'm still straight, you're supposed to believe what I said over what I did.

How the fuck does that work? Or, as I wrote, it is more "just sex" than even I'm aware of. It has to be proven if a straight guy can have sex with another guy and still be straight and I'll be damned if I know how to do that.

 

I've never questioned how guys label themselves when we are mutually sucking each other. We're enjoying ourselves and pleasuring each other so it's all good.

 

In that moment, however we identify doesn't mean anything, does it? Gay, bi, or straight - you have a dick and I know how to suck one so, hmm, does that sound like something you'd be interested in?

 

Labels are really doing my head in mate. Nut its not just the labels, i dont careless what someone i don't know or thinks of me. Its two things I can't work out properly. Well one i get the other i dont. People will change how they think of you if you change label that's just true. But lets imagine a bi man (i think) one who mostly wants sex with women, common enough, . But loves gay sex more and more he tries. Maybe thinking about it more and more. Perhaps that is most of what he thinks about. Is it possible that that person is still being put off deeper gay relationships due to a remaining homophobia in the world? Possible?

 

I think you could only have gay sex once while proclaiming you are straight because if you engage in it you automatically cross over even if it is a one off. However perhaps it is akin to being a strict vegetarian who tries meat for the first time and it is the only time ( unless you occasionally crave meat and are tempted to consume it again)

 

The "rule" is that if you do it once, eh, you could still be straight. If you do it twice, um, now, some will be looking at you sideways but, sure - you do it again to see if you really liked it the first time or this time is going to be better than that first time; that or you really need to stop drinking and getting high like that. If you do it a third time, your straightness is going to be called into question and declaring that "it's not something you'd do all of the time" isn't an excuse nor does it have any bearing on things because frequency or when you might lie with a man, has nothing to do with it - but the fact that you're in bed with a guy - again - has everything to do with it.

And I've been bi all of my life and having sex with a guy isn't something I do all of the time, either. If you keep having sex with guys - even occasionally - you may still consider yourself straight but you gotta know that no one else is going to believe that you are. This is one of those moments where your actions definitely speak louder than your words.