Rethinking Gay Sex

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 6:12 PM GMT
    This is from a news article I found.

    http://www.washblade.com/2003/10-10/view/columns/rethink.cfm

    From the article;

    "RECENTLY A NUMBER of gay luminaries, including none other than Harvey Fierstein, have decried rising HIV infection rates and a gay male culture that celebrates being positive.

    Harvey in particular noted that we’ve had, courtesy of the pharmaceutical companies and gay male media, too many “positive gay role models,” and said we needed “negative gay role models” — that is, guys who are happily gay and healthy and HIV-negative.

    Ironically, but seemingly unbeknownst to Harvey and company, there’s a plethora of (HIV) negative gay role models, and for the last three years, I’ve been trying to put them forward as a model for a new gay man.

    Why are these guys happily gay and negative? Because they (and that includes me) don’t do anal sex.

    Instead, we favor phallus-against-phallus sex, for which there are various vernacular terms, but which we usually call “frot” — rhymes with hot, and short for “frottage.”

    Frot has a number of advantages over anal.

    Unlike anal, it’s mutually and simultaneously genital, and highly pleasurable for both partners. And it’s very low risk.

    I WAS IN a relationship with an HIV-positive man for 13 years, had a passionate skin-on-skin sexual life with my lover which was pure frot, and despite his HIV and eventual death from the disease, I remained HIV negative.

    Indeed, in 30 years of being an out, proud, gay man into frot, I’ve never had an STD. Let me repeat that: Despite losing far too many friends and sexual partners to AIDS, I’ve never had an STD.

    Yet in the last three years of trying to put frot forward as an alternative to anal, one that would keep sex hot while stopping HIV cold, I’ve encountered a hailstorm of criticism and resistance.

    I’ve been called homophobic and “erotophobic” and a tool of the religious right. Not so.

    My message is intensely gay-sex-positive, celebrating a type of sex that is unique to gay and bi men, in loving, sexually positive, and indeed ecstatic terms. And religious conservatives dislike my message."

    Knowing that there is definitely a healthy and pleasurable alternative to anal, why do gay men (and religious conservatives) resist the mass acceptance of that fact? Discuss.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Jun 10, 2009 6:14 PM GMT
    "different strokes (no pun meant!) for different folks"! icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 6:18 PM GMT
    I think a better question is why is this site under siege by g0ys...

    I take no issue with the accuracy that frottage is a hell of lot safer than anal. Where I take exception is with the snarky and moralistic tone of this minority within a minority, or the idea that it's somehow more masculine than anal. If you're having it off with another guy, regardless of actual activity, you're still a 'mo (or perhaps bi). You're not some ancient Spartan warrior, you're still just a gay (or bi) guy living in 21st century and having it off with another guy.

    Jeez louise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 6:42 PM GMT
    For the record, I don't think there is anything unmanly about being close/intimate with another guy. After all, you wouldn't call two guy friends "sissies" just because they are friends. would you?

    Try not to project too much of your prejudice into my post, thanks...

  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Jun 10, 2009 7:04 PM GMT
    with the combo of gun oil or eros lube, new condoms and excellent quality poppers, added to a patient, skillfull lover i've never had a problem with anal sex. icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 7:09 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidI think a better question is why is this site under siege by g0ys...

    I take no issue with the accuracy that frottage is a hell of lot safer than anal. Where I take exception is with the snarky and moralistic tone of this minority within a minority, or the idea that it's somehow more masculine than anal. If you're having it off with another guy, regardless of actual activity, you're still a 'mo (or perhaps bi). You're not some ancient Spartan warrior, you're still just a gay (or bi) guy living in 21st century and having it off with another guy.

    Jeez louise.


    Well said.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 7:21 PM GMT
    Ryanreborn is just trying to justify his homosexuality with the out-dated ridiculous biblical restriction of same sex intercourse.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:18 PM GMT
    pfffft which moderator deleted my comment.

    and did a moderator also change the title.

    God, what happened to free speech

    hahahaah I love it.
  • Bunjamon

    Posts: 3161

    Jun 10, 2009 8:29 PM GMT
    What the writer of the article fails to mention is that frottage CAN lead to a number of sexually transmitted infections, like herpes, HPV, crabs, and anything else that is transfered from skin-skin contact. Protected frottage and protected anal have about the same amount of risk (I'm guessing) for STI transmission. So as long as everyone is safe and happy, who cares WHAT they're doing?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:34 PM GMT
    Bunjamon saidWhat the writer of the article fails to mention is that frottage CAN lead to a number of sexually transmitted infections, like herpes, HPV, crabs, and anything else that is transfered from skin-skin contact. Protected frottage and protected anal have about the same amount of risk (I'm guessing) for STI transmission. So as long as everyone is safe and happy, who cares WHAT they're doing?


    i agree, as long as you use a condom your chances of getting an sti are greatly reduced. you can have your anal, oral, or ''frot'', just be safe about it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:35 PM GMT
    Ryan, do you smell like mothballs?
    g0yheadline.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:36 PM GMT
    McGay saidRyan, do you smell like mothballs?
    g0yheadline.jpg



    LMAO! LMAO! LMAO! LMAO!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:37 PM GMT
    Thank you, thank you. I'm here all week, folks.
  • Delivis

    Posts: 2332

    Jun 10, 2009 8:40 PM GMT
    Dear english illiterates, please stop using numbers as substitutes for letters, spelling "goys", whatever the hell that is supposed to be anyway, with a number just makes you seem like a 12 year old video gamer on the internet with the IQ of a squirrel. Thank you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:43 PM GMT
    You had to insult squirrels, huh? Well, at least squirrels have some balls, unlike those freaky g0y b0ys.
    squirrel_with_balls.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:50 PM GMT
    RyanReBoRn saidWhy are these guys happily gay and negative? Because they (and that includes me) don’t do anal sex.

    Instead, we favor phallus-against-phallus sex, for which there are various vernacular terms, but which we usually call “frot” — rhymes with hot, and short for “frottage.”

    What about safe sex? As I have posted here countless times, I lived with a poz partner for 2 years. He topped me with a condom, and I also blew him, likewise with a condom on him. I remain negative.

    Yet I also had a neg BF with whom I lived for a year, and he was very afraid of anal. We mostly did the frot you describe. That was fine with me, we had some great sex that way.

    I'm not opposed to frottage, but to say that protected anal can't be done safely seems a bit extreme to me. I tend to agree with some others here, and will go further, in wondering if this is some g0y or even anti-gay assault on this site, that we're reading more of this lately?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:50 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidI think a better question is why is this site under siege by g0ys...

    I take no issue with the accuracy that frottage is a hell of lot safer than anal. Where I take exception is with the snarky and moralistic tone of this minority within a minority, or the idea that it's somehow more masculine than anal. If you're having it off with another guy, regardless of actual activity, you're still a 'mo (or perhaps bi). You're not some ancient Spartan warrior, you're still just a gay (or bi) guy living in 21st century and having it off with another guy.

    Jeez louise.


    hahaha.... Love it love it love it... I have notice this sudden G0y-attack too.
    what is up with that? I am all about not committing to title and groups or anything for that matter that would limit me. Do what ever it takes to make yourself happy. Just take precaution.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:54 PM GMT
    0y veh. n0t again...

    ;)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 8:57 PM GMT
    Again with homophobic? In what world does the word homophobic apply to guys who have no problem admitting they like getting intimate with other guys?

    At any rate, I expected harshness of these replies. The kind of replies I'm hoping for, however, are the kind that show a little more critical thinking (not there haven't been a few honest attempts).

    Despite your general distaste for the source of this dissent, what exactly do you find wrong with rethinking gay sex?
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Jun 10, 2009 9:06 PM GMT
    Yeah not sure what the point of that article is suppose to be.
    You can still catch a lot of diseases from non-anal sex.
    Frottage is not safe sex, many diseases can be spread that way. If a person happens to be infected with a disease that can spread through skin-to-skin or genital contact, then frotting can spread it.

    It's not just about where infections are located either, it's also about vectors, pathways of transmission. A person can touch an area that has infectious fluids for example and then spread that infection somewhere else on the body or onto another person. So direct contact is not even necessarily needed. It can even happen from person, to object or surface, to person - depending on the type of infection/disease it is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 9:08 PM GMT
    I suppose now the zoo keepers should train the 'gay penguins' in Germany to practice 'frot' as an alternative as well. LMAO!

    p_2534368.jpg

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 9:14 PM GMT
    Delivis saidDear english illiterates, please stop using numbers as substitutes for letters, spelling "goys", whatever the hell that is supposed to be anyway, with a number just makes you seem like a 12 year old video gamer on the internet with the IQ of a squirrel. Thank you.


    If you don't take it up the ass, you are not a real homosexual.

    As some-one who was having unprotected sex in the 70s, when so many unknowingly got infected, even still in the 80's, I had unprotected sex, even after the gay plauge got the name AIDS. I had a few years sexual relationship with a homosexual who failed to inform me he was HIV+. Shit I've had homosexuals wont to touch me since I was 5.

    But still to this day I'm HIV-. Has nothing to to with being a G0Y.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 9:19 PM GMT
    RyanReBoRn saidAgain with homophobic? In what world does the word homophobic apply to guys who have no problem admitting they like getting intimate with other guys?

    At any rate, I expected harshness of these replies. The kind of replies I'm hoping for, however, are the kind that show a little more critical thinking (not there haven't been a few honest attempts).

    Despite your general distaste for the source of this dissent, what exactly do you find wrong with rethinking gay sex?


    there's nothing to rethink. it's not like it's inventing anything new. stuff like that has been practiced since the ancient greek, they would rub their penises between the thighs instead of anal penetration in some cases.

    what people are finding wrong is you presentation that this is the end all be all. it's like the abstinence programs that are being taught in schools. it's echoing the 'if you hold hands you'll get aids'' spoke.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 9:30 PM GMT
    Frott=lame and boring
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2009 9:31 PM GMT
    marsupial saidFrott=lame and boring



    LMAO!