Ground ZER0 in the "UNgay" Paradigm Shift!

NATURAL AFFECTION:

Quick Links:

Intro (reopens site)
G0Y? Eh?
No-Apology
God Hates:
I Believe
Beautiful-Hide
G0YDAR
Male|Mail
Links!
0ur Groups
Literature
Peripheral View
Support Us
It Happens
Prejudices
UNvirgins
The 'LINE':
Flame
'n Fags
Head's up Dad!
GYM-g0ys!
Make'n L
0ve
Pedastery?
Peeps 101
Terr0rists
BrokeBack
'Da 'Scene'
Aesthetics 101
Empathy is G0Y

 

 






Many guys who discover this website have a basic question that they've had for a long time: "How come I like some guys so much?".  It seems a dilemma in a society so terrified of "homos".  After all - "homo" has historically been a term that is the king of the insults  - so having same gender affections must be a grave weakness & character flaw, right?  Actually - it's a completely normal response to deepening male/male bonding impulses.  Denying the WIDESPREAD NATURE of these feelings is a giant social deception! And denying the WIDESPREAD NATURE of these feelings is a giant social deception! And did I mention that: "Denying the WIDESPREAD NATURE of these feelings is a giant social deception."?  Why repeat myself? It's because most guys have been brainwashed over a period of years decades to believe that liking the physical component of your own gender is a minority experience. +63% of the population is NOT a "MINORITY", however.  Overcome the mind-fuck! If you are a guy who likes guys/too -- then you are in the MAJORITY. The MAJORITY! Not a "minority"; -but the MAJORITY!  You have been lied to on massive scale by a society that doesn't know SHIT about sexuality! It is the MAJORITY, NATURAL male experience to like guys, too!  Repeat it until it sinks in.  Most people are AmBIsexual (often called "BIsexuality" it's more like being AmBIdextrous).  However -- most of these same AmBisexual men do NOT identify with the cultural-thingy called the "gay-community" - for a number of great reasons.     


To repeat: The astonishing irony is that most guys experience same gender affections toward certain other guys.  Did I say "most"? I actually meant, "MOST". 

Check it out on this chart:

If you subtract 38% (the percentage reporting themselves as totally straight) from 100%, - you find that you are left with 62%.  Last time I checked, 62% was not a minority. So then: almost 2/3rds of everyone who may hurl the "fag" slur is doing it as camouflage! How's that for a mind job?!

The real question I think most people should ask is why everybody isn't selectively "Bi". 

Men experiencing love with men (IS)  the general condition of being a guy -- not the exception.  Boys often have male heroes. They don't desire to be conquered or dominated by their male hero, -- but to BOND with their heroes; - to become great friends with a "connection".     

A man who is comfortable with his own body and not put-off by a healthy male physique usually discovers by the age of 13 that prolonged physical contact with his buddies can  produce a good feeling (empathetic/sexual response).  This response is the majority male reaction to close contact with either gender; -- & men who follow thru with the natural inclinations with their peers end up bonding very tightly to the guys whom they respect, admire & appreciate the physical attributes of.  The innate desire to bond with strong role-model peers & be in sync with the most masculine guys is a natural bonding attribute of being male. It is a natural part of being a guy and the guys who don't experience this to some degree are outside of the statistical norm!  

And what happens to them (guys outside the statistical norm)?  It doesn't look good.  What functional segment of the population lacks normal emotional bonds with other people? Sociopaths.  Anyone else? Yes: Men who are same-sex attracted & buy into the lie that they're part of some odd "minority".  And a number of those "guys" were also gender-non-conforming in some respect early on (the exception - not the rule).  They ARE a minority (not because of who they 'love' but because Ken wants to be Barbie in the worst way)!  Most people find it nearly impossible to separate the components of this clusterphuck because of some of the 'common' traits.  And the most common trait (that few presume is common), --is that men by their nature want to bond with other men --and seek very deep levels of bonding with a select few.  Failure to recognize that statistically-supported-fact has plunged modern society into a form of self-imposed social purgatory.      

The fact is: Men seek to bond physically with men.  It has always been.  It will always be.  How does this bonding manifest?  Sexually - (whether acted on or suppressed).  This is the reason why it's so important for guys to have role models with honest, empathetic & gentle emotional centers.  Natural sexual response to other guys is one way this manifests itself -- and the bonding that takes place is intimate & rarely spoken openly about.  It does not naturally involve AnalSex and most of these very same men find that notion to be repulsive.  And rightly so.  

The masculinity-debasing "gay spectre" has caused many men to be more discrete than ever.  Men of good conscience (who would never bitch-a bro) do not want to be associated with the arse-phukk crowd.  And (to add more confusion), -- guys outside of the peer group are generally clueless as to what goes on within it. And those within it aren't talking. So, are they hypocrites? Why not just announce their "gayness" to the world?  Because they're not "gay".  These guys REJECT the fundamental stereotypes, spectacles & stigmas that society overall associates with the word "gay".  The "gay" community continually & loudly associates itself with the intersexed & transexuals (GLIT is the acronym).  And the "gay" community is on a quest to debase masculinity by putting men in skinny-jeans, and high-heels.  This is self evident at ANY ANY ANY event hosted by the so-called "GAY" community.  Most men of good conscience find those traits to range from distasteful to absolutely morally-repugnant.      

Effeminate or sissy guys are often excluded from the bonding that occurs within groups of "tough guys" -- so while a "sissy boy" with male/male attractions is led to believe that he's part of some "minority" -- the fact is that the number of guys rubbing cocks is far greater than sissy-boy is clued into.  Sissy boy is excluded from group activities - not because he's into guys ... but because he's a "spineless bitch-be".  His lack of social-balls excludes him from rubbing his with other guys.  And so he joins the "gay-support-club" & decries the "homophobia" of the "jocks" (absolutely & ironically clueless as to what lots of the jocks do in private with other jocks)!  

The fact is: Most jocks aren't homophobic. They're "freak-o-phobic"; --And "gay-little Colon" wagging his "penetrated gay'd colon" in everyone's face represents the reason WHY the jocks don't welcome his type.  And society generally doesn't perceive the dynamic -- and women simply don't understand the masculine-mindset at all.  And, since "little-gay-Colon" is welcome to hang out with the girlths; --Their collective bitchy-voices resonate through society denouncing the homophobia & hypocrisy of all the "jock-o men" who reject 'little-twisted-gay-Colon" because he's really a "nice person" (even though he's part of a group bent of debasing masculinity & dipping it in disrespect & a flood of diseases).  

There IS something seriously wrong with "twisted-little-gay-Colon". It's not that he likes guys. It's because he's a freak. And - political-correctness be screwed: Everyone knows that "twisted little Colon" is fukk'd-up!  He failed masculinity 101 and has morphed -what should have been the general-androgenizing effects of testosterone -- into a faux-femininity & an endless series of passive-aggressive personality spikes that make such a "man" into a vindictive, irrational bitch'be:  A 24/7/365 case of self-aggrandizing, flamboyantly-faux-feminine PMS.  And he wonders why "the guys" don't want to hang out with him!      

Meanwhile - in the core group of guys - there are various levels of sexual expression going on all the time.  Everything from story telling (accounts of the hott date) to "circle jerks" to 1-on-1 cock-rubs when privacy allows it.  Group dynamics often vary based on who the  leader-type personalities are & how close their ideals match the unspoken needs of the group.  If the group leaders ignore/dismiss sexual needs among the guys -- then a 2nd layer of bonding happens and the main group often is oblivious to the hookups occurring in private between buddies.  These dynamics are reasons why men who occupied different social strata within a group of guys have vastly different perceptions about group interactions.  However - the facts are that over 33% of the guys are interacting sexually with other guys regularly.  And amazingly - almost everyone pretends like such things would NEVER HAPPEN (which is precisely what guys not part of such a core group -believe)! 

It's a mind job built on misinformation and the fear of admitting the truth is the fear of being associated with the sissy ... the girlie-boy ... twisted-little-gay-Colon (due to modern social broadcasts)!  And over the last 30 years -- this fear of association with any social force that would effeminize masculinity has escalated to levels that threaten the fabric of young men's socializations practices.  After all -- when peer-empathy, tenderness & physical affection become the signals of the "queer", - what is left for men to build interpersonal relationships on?  Violence.

"It's astonishing - the lengths some men will go to in order to hide the fact that their dicks have been 'hard' w. other guy/s!"

The universal truth & the universal unspoken need of virtually every guy entering puberty is to be able to get close & cuddle with the buddy of choice.  They want the wrestling match to turn tender.  There - male aggression is privately mutated into male tenderness & shared intimacy.  It's often the very-core of the most extreme friendships. Men who cannot relate to these feelings are among a MINORITY of men.  The statistics are clear & well established since the late 1940's with the publication of Kinsey's research. 


EDITORIAL CONTRIBUTION:

I had a neighbor named "Don" - who was about 4 years younger than me.  When he hit puberty - he began to hang out more with us "older guys" - probably because he had an aggressive-friendly personality that we all liked.  He was fun to wrestle with & actually fit into the group well considering his age difference was outside of the 1-2 year span that most guys in our clique occupied.  Well - I was almost 18 & Donny was 14 when a wrestling match in my bedroom turned into me subduing Donny's thrashing with a body massage that quieted him down over a 10 minute span of responding to his holds & punches with firm rubb'n on his bod.  He had quite a body for his age - muscular little studmuff'n. Once I got him subdued - it was easy to get him undressed with the massage leading the charge.  First the shirt -- then the socks, & finally pants.  He wore these snug size 28 jock-briefs that contoured pretty good to him & left little to the imagination.  After I'd been rubb'n on him for a half hour or so - I pulled my shirt off (because it was warm) & stripped down to my briefs.  I cuddled up beside Don & wrapped him up in my arms & nibbled on his neck some which made him laugh & thrash around a little bit -- while I continued the massage.  Some more time passed & I eventually got positioned where I could see his sexy undies.  It was unmistakable - the material hugged the contours of an erection & the material was dark at the tip of his penis - where he'd been leaking precum.  I pretended not to pay any attention - but I moved the focus of the massage down onto his lower abs & inner thighs -- making sure to gently brush by his balls when working his upper legs & grazing the tip of his erect penis with the heel of my hand when slowly rubbing his abs.  Pretty soon, Don was so erect that his penis was pushing hard against the fine waistband of his jock-briefs.  He was so turned on that he was shaking some.  I said - "This is gonna feel really good.", as I gently began to stroke him up & down the length of his erection - thru his jock.  I'll never forget his gasp & red faced groaning-sigh as he reflexively arched his back & his overwhelmed penis began to convulse into orgasm beneath my stroking fingertips - pumping Donny spunk through the thin material of the briefs & out onto his upper thigh in a translucent, slick pool of manhood-initiation.  Our friendship was made cock-solid that day.  Don & I usually ended up wrestling when we'd get together.  After that 1st time -- Donny would always have a raging hardon visible in his shorts as soon as his pants came off.  The briefs soon came off too. Donny - like most guys had an interest in women & eventually got hitched.  However - he learned early - as have lots of guys - that having a close friend that unconditionally accepts & loves you - can have  tremendous sexual benefits without any x-gender confusion of compromised masculinity; -- while mutually providing very fulfilling sexual releases - that men need to regularly have.  Anal-sex never entered our minds.  That would have been massively disrespectful.

I eventually found an article on the art of the jack-off -& Don - who was slightly naive - read it in amazement. 
I mention this because the article:
1) Noted that most guys enjoy the jack-off & do it regularly.
2) But somehow - Don thought that jack'n was something GENERALLY SHARED with another guy!

Now - among his peer-group, Donny was a natural leader.  He also liked females - & they liked him - so nobody had cause to question his 'sexuality'.  I found out 3 years later that Donny had introduced every one of his close friends to mutual JO!  This guy had 12 friends who considered jack'n off with a buddy to be just one bro giv'n another a helping hand at the self-service pumps!  12 - works out to one new initiation every 4 months for 3 years - on average.  That would have been easy for Don's personality to achieve. 
None considered himself "gay" -- but many talked about maybe being "Bi" after they began to suspect that guys in general -probably weren't jack'n with their buddies quite as much as Donny had originally promoted.  But why stop?
Nobody did anal (Anal was considered the thing that made a guy into a raging flaming fag).

The entire group is a curiosity because a strong positive role model (Donny) had initiated 12 "str8" buddies who regularly stroked each other off (in numerous contexts) & considered it to be part of what best friendships partly consisted of!  As a peer group - they stayed much tighter after high school graduation than most people would suspect.  When their friend Shawn came back from the Middle-East in a box (Operation Enrich Halliburton) - I saw 1st-hand the extreme sense of loss these guys had for their buddy.  The "get together" turned into an informal memorial service where over beers & tears the guys recounted good times & personal history with the departed.  The loss was felt so deeply because these guys had a history with Shawn (the departed) in a way more personal & intimate than what most people think guys share in their friendships.  It wasn't crying hysterics -- but the pain of each guy ran so deep that it forced it's way to the surface & out -despite 'manly-efforts' to continually suppress it. Unlike the superficial backslaps called "friendship" in many circles; --These guys had gentle, intimate memories about their departed buddy -- from the feel of his skin & hair -- to how he reacted when tickled or how the rapture of ejaculating shaped his orgasm.  They KNEW each other.  They had a depth of honesty that bonded them - from the elation of the winning score, -- to having a buddy you could really meld into & cry your heart out to when life kicked you in the balls beyond the breaking point.  

Of course - anecdotes - no matter how true they happen to be - always raise the eyebrows of certain skeptics.  Well -- let's filter the critics.  First -- discredit all women.  They have ZER0 experience with male sexuality from our perspective. What do you care what a woman thinks about how men experience sexual motivation?  Tell aunt Tillie to go to hell.  From what I can tell: Woman constitute about 51% of the perceptual problem about bringing up boys.
Now - discredit all clergy that take the "celibacy vow".  Doing so single handedly eliminates the largest group of self motivated hypocrites & liars.  You could tell them to go to hell; -- but they're already on their way.

Next - we need to set the "way-back machine" to Greece - about 3000 years ago.  300 decades ago in Greece - Greek society was under the notion that the male body was the very peak of artistic expression & nobody in his right mind would resist the sexual advances of a Greek teenage stud.  Yeah -- any guy who didn't want to do the naked nuzzle with a hot buddy was seen as 'odd'.  Oh, and anal-sex was ILLEGAL.
What we refer to as "G0Y"
- was the cultural practice of the day! 
Question: Do you think that men have changed very much in 30 centuries? Me neither; --Which is why ancient Greek culture stands as the big exposť of modern follies about male sexuality!  Guys were hooking up with guys. Everybody knew it. Most ended up getting married (to women) eventually - but still pursued the occasional roll in the hay with Alexander.
The Greeks of that period simply understood & openly lived what was generally recognized as truth in matters of male/male sexuality.  People who suggest that it was "cultural" miss the bigger point.  "Culture" doesn't determine which way my erection points.  And the existence of that Greek time period & the art they left behind -- stands as a testimony to the notion that: IF  men in that period found the virile male physique erotic ... then the truth is that men everywhere (in every time-period) likely find the male physique erotic - all 'cultural edicts' aside!  The ancient Greeks 'let the cat out of the bag' and many societies have been trying to 'herd it back in' ever since!

The Arabs have a saying: "Woman are for marriage; -- Guys are for fun!".  I suspect that saying predates Islam by about 3200 years.  However -- Canaanite law goes back 4000+ years and specifically forbids anal-sex (M/F & M/M). 

What kind of "fun" do you suppose Arab guys were having with each other 3000+ years ago?  Perhaps the Greeks have already given us the answer!  Could it have been ... g0y?  I know so thanks to the history of Greek civilization! And even to this day - Turkish wrestling is massively popular in nations in the Mediterranean region - & beyond.   Turkish wrestling gives men with the motive, the method to positively identify other guys who like guys - all done in plain sight under the guise of sports.  In the process of grappling - it is common practice to reach into the oiled kipsets (pants) to gain leverage. Of course - the spoken rule is that you never grab a man's privates while down there. And guys who have zero interest in other guys follow the "rule". Collisions do occur between palms & penises and such events are considered inevitable due to the nature of the sport.  And therein lies the "exploitable gray area".  And men who love men learn very quickly how to gage another guys interest in more private encounters by the state of his opponents arousal during the brief encounter in the "gray area".  Openly nobody would ever admit to such a thing.  Even the suggestion is scoffed at. But lots of guys know it goes on and lots of guys who have out-aged the games know it goes on -- which is another reason why the sport is sooo popular.  If you are wrestling with a guy whom you discover has a raging erection; - reaching into his kipset to get "leverage" no longer involves his inner legs, - but has everything to do with stealthily using your oily grip around his engorged penis to steer him into a "convenient 30-90 second pin" (that appears to mostly immobilize him to the spectators) while your hand (firmly wrapped around his slickened manhood) coaxes him to ejaculate.  Bust'n a nutt - right on the athletic field with nobody the wiser except the 2 wrestlers and anyone who has been in similar circumstances.  Each wrestler keeps a straight <pun> face and simply moves along in the proceedings -- generally after making a mental note of what guy/s he'd like to help soap/shower the oil off after the event.  Of course - this scenario plays out much more during "practices" then actual events.  You get to know the guys you practice with.  During competition - reputations are on the line & men are more likely to wrestle for that goal.  But it's a great opportunity to make new "friends".  The behavior is g0y. lslam places a death-sentence on analsex but other forms of male/male sexual activity are generally overlooked unless made obvious by those participating.  And even then the "punishment" is not death. However - the intrusion of the "gAy" male community into Arabic nations combined with the very PRESUMPTION that "Gay=AnalSex" now threatens ALL male/male expressions of affection because society historically has an inclination to overreact to one vice by outlawing anything that resembles it on the surface.  And then organized crime infiltrates government and makes it lucrative to keep the ban in effect while making money as the politically created "black-market" fills the demand for all the outlawed activities without discernment.  This scam, pulled by politician-sociopaths for MILLENNIA, always seems to elude the masses while turning those who lack discernment into enemies of men of good conscience who end up being lumped together with those who's practices destroy nations.  G0YS is proud to be a movement that draws the line where it needs to be drawn - right at the border of where specific acts cause disease & death.     

Identifying the cause of confusion/s:

So why is modern society so "phuckingly inconsistent" with the use of terminology.  I believe it's ignorance from extremely poor public education systems at large.  Sexuality is commonly broken into (2) or (3) classifications: Straight, Bi & Gay.   However, it is common to see behavior that is CLEARLY BIsexual to be labeled as "GAY". WTF! BrokeBack Mountain is but one example of this gross misapplication of terminology. 

"Have you ever noticed how the guys who are most likely to 'talk-shit' are also the ones most likely to play in it?" - Gimmel Yod

It is IMPOSSIBLE to understand any principle where the defining language is inconsistent, uncertain or "slang based"; -- Which is precisely why sexuality is such an incomprehensible mental-clusterphuck.  So, let's eliminate the modern attempts to define it in (3) bullshit categories; -- & then return to a time when there was NO MYSTERY:  3000 years ago in Greece.

In ancient Greece it was common knowledge that "almost everyone" drooled over the thought of doing the naked nuzzle with a virile Greek buddy.  It was also common knowledge that most of these same guys - who wanted to hook up with their hott Greek buddies were generally presumed to want to hook up with hott Greek women eventually.  In other words: If you were male -- everyone presumed that BIsexuality was the rule (because it was ... and still IS).

However, there were men who - for whatever reasons of nature/nurture were either SOLELY fixated on women -OR- on men alone.  The latter group - were considered eunuchs (born that way).  What set them apart was their lack of having any desire for women (not because they desired men -- because almost all men loved men).  However, an "intact' eunuch could function with social-pride within Greek Culture -because externally -- there was no visible difference between a eunuch or any other guy.  And so (to cite a Hebrew story) - Potterphar rises to the head of the temple guard; -- An example of eunuchs in high places trusted with lofty matters. Often - such men would marry - but only for appearance's sake. As Emperor Justinian said: "When a eunuch takes a wife - a satire is not difficult to imagine".  The "CLOSET", was not for men who loved men; -- but for men who did not love women!  (Are we thinking yet?)

Additionally, there was another attribute that was often associated with certain eunuchs: Over-the-top, effeminate behavior - even to the point where such men feigned being women (offering their arses to take the place of proper female anatomy).  In Greece (as in many other cultures) - analsex was grossly illegal. These eunuchs - a group of men that might be considered "TRANNY IDENTIFIED" today - were the brunt of public scorn, ridicule & generally outcast -considered NON-men (literally).  The shape of the shame generated by the Greek equivalent of the modern term "queer" - would not have been that a guy loved guys (everyone did), -but a "queer" in Greek thinking was a "man" who played the female role.  Again - the issue was not that certain "girlie-men" happened to love men.  In their case - they were detested because they resembled (by looks &/or actions) female frauds.  Such men were seen as dishonorable -often presumed criminal because of the bizarre behaviors involving female impersonation (possibly being mistaken for being an actual woman -- especially by drunken men) & complicity w. the act of analsex. It was that group - more than any other that motivated society to define a "MAN" as "one being able to copulate with women".  This explains why many eunuchs of honorable dispositions married women -- if only to escape being classified by implication with the gender-bending, butt-phuck, criminally associated class of misfits (the ancient equivalent of the early 20st century use of the term "queer").  Such persons today are the basis & core of "gay stigmas", -but because society has lost it's  mind, -sexual attraction for one's own gender is now lumped into the stigmas against "gays".  How it could be that humanity is so phuck'd up in the 20/21st centuries about sexual classifications is a long story - mostly involving the cultural effects of sloppy religious theology over the last few centuries + the loss of understanding the term "eunuch" & the various kinds.
In Greece, when people discussed the "problem of men who had "sex" with men", - what was SPECIFICALLY being discussed was always ANALsex.  Physical relationships between men that did not involve ANAL-penetration were simply NOT considered "sex".  You must remember this distinction whenever you read ancient Greek commentary on the issue of "SEX" between men.  That (ANAL) was ILLEGAL.  However, the mutual JO or frottage --even 0ral were NOT considered "SEX" per'se.  Otherwise, reading Greek cultural excerpts about M2M intimacy will seem schizophrenic!  

Yeah, society can forget a lot in 3000 years. Especially when powerful, organized religious forces that drive crusades, persecution, torture & executions - change thousands of years of common law practice (ancient beliefs that named the likes of analsex as a perilous tort) & make new 'laws' that instead, name mere "same-sex affections" as the capital offense.  Ironically, the very "Scriptures" that the giant Roman-Catholic church claimed to esteem, -predicted their precise folly; --Condemned the murderous behaviors of "crusades"; --& called such "religion" a 'doctrine of demons' - that would actually destroy it's followers!  Scripture wasn't the source of the problem/s. Those who misrepresented it, were!  Got history lessons?  

If you only consider the crusades by themselves in light of historical facts about the atrocities committed by the "Catholic Church", - the fact that there is a Catholic Church today - tells us the sad truth that people (overall) will not use moral-measures to condemn a tradition of barbarism -- but will instead attempt to canonize the hypocrisy.  In other words: No matter how many people were hurt or killed by the "movement" -- those remaining in the "movement" will generally attempt to justify it & hope forgetfulness/ignorance will eventually cover the atrocities committed by "the movement" with an ignorance of the facts!   Again, the same Scriptures given lip service by such "churches", -when examined: actually name & condemn such behaviors!  Jesus himself described the actions of such men "men dressed so nicely & respectably" & taught that Hellfire awaits them (the real fagots)!  God, it turns out,  is no respecter of Noble Titles - but weighs each man by the same scales of justice & demands repentance by all -especially religious leaders!

Ironically, it's only been within the last 500 years or so that this religious assault on same-gender-affection has taken place and the last century where it has escalated.  Prior to that & within the records of the Catholic Church itself is evidence of same-sex unions!  Imagine that!  You don't hear that reported on the evening news, do you?  EWTN? TBN? CBN? Not a chance!

So, what is the truth? The truth is simply what it is. The Greeks knew it 3000 years ago.  Men generally love both genders. Because of physiological & emotional differences -- loving men differs from loving women.  Analsex is a tort - regardless of gender because of the extreme perils (both physical & pathological) involved.  Physical intimacy with women can produce children & therefore, from a legal standpoint (& moral) is a much more binding form of relationship.  

The "modern GAY MALE" movement today is generally controlled & represented by the types of (intact) eunuchs that ancient Greek culture (& others) would consider shameful, complicit w. criminal behavior & dishonorable for a man to be a part of.  And this is precisely why so many men shun the "gay logo" today.  A "prejudice" that keeps a man out of a wild hyena pack (even though he saw a tame-one, once) is not a bad thing.

G0YS is a movement of thoughtful men who have decided to stand apart because we've seen what the "gay male community" represents itself as; -- & other than same-gender-attractions, -G0YS find that we have little in common with "gAy", -& we have just as much against many of the things that "gAy" embraces, extols & actively promotes.  G0YS know & accept what the Greeks did 3000 years ago: It is natural to love other guys without casting your ethos to the wind, - nor making the scarab into a role-model. 

What's the whole point? What am I trying to get across?  Well -- I'm attempting to get the reader to realize what that chart on the page top means.  It means that society is living one big astigmatic lie about sexuality! You don't need to believe it too!


THE TRUTH IS:

MOST GUYS FIND ATTRACTIVE PEOPLE OF BOTH GENDERS TO BE SEXUALLY DESIRABLE TO VARIOUS DEGREES!  AMBI(bi)SEXUALITY IS THE NORM! TOTALLY 'GAY' & TOTALLY 'STRAIGHT' GUYS CONSTITUTE A MINORITY - EVEN WHEN THEIR NUMBERS ARE ADDED TOGETHER! 
IF YOU'RE A GUY WHO WOULD LIKE TO CUDDLE WITH HIS STUD-BUDDY; -- YOU'RE MORE 'NORMAL' THAN THE DUDE WHO PLAYS IT 100% STRAIGHT! (AND ODDS ARE 3:1 THAT 'STR8-BOY' IS HIDING AN OCCASIONAL BUDDY-LUV'N FEEL'N!) 


TRY REALITY - IT'S FRESH!