Shot of Love

Honestly, that sounds almost like a sleazy term in this day & age. But I think that's more of a function of how it's often applied in common speech -rather than what it means among men who are genuinely friends. You see, it's often applied to mixed gender couples who have a sexual component, to what is otherwise a friendly relationship. I won't go into the long drawn out philosophical discussions as to whether men & women who are sexual w. each other - can actually BE "Friends". I tend to think that those situations tend to outgrow mere friendships too quickly - often, for at least one of the members & then the imbalance seeks to bring the other up to the next level. And I can't express how serious the situation instantly becomes the moment a pregnancy occurs.  I am staunchly pro-life and because the entire g0ys movement came into existence from my pen, - I will not compromise on what is a self evident, immovable moral truth. Human life begins at the beginning. "Pro-choice" people value personal convenience over the right to even question IF another person exists at conception. G0YS have no place among us for sociopaths...

And, with those permutations out of the way; -What about men who discover that their love for a buddy goes beyond Philadelphia & into Eros? In other words, when friendship between men takes on an aesthetic appreciation of the male physique & causes sexual reflexes - what then? This happenstance is tremendously common. Most guys are selectively amBIsexual & what is news to most men is how common this occurrence is (+63% of the male population). The "gay male community" wants to debase this reflex by putting it in high-heels & injecting it with estrogen. Well, to hell with that! G0YS are grounded in the reality of what things are: We're men who love masculinity & have no desire to debase it! Love happens. And when it happens to you in a culture that wants men who love men to be in high-heels; - Then you want SANE answers. Glad you're here!

So, let me help you with the one component that Buds w. bens is most in need of: Mutual interest. In other words: It takes (2) to tango. If you want your buddy to notice you then you need to work on your physique. Supplements, gym, workouts & time. Men, generally recognize & deeply appreciate strong masculine cues. This is why bodybuilding mags have lots of pictures. Men generally like the aesthetics of sexy men.  The attraction is different than the attraction generated by sexy women. But it can be a strong force of attraction. Once you start working out - men will comment, "Hey, you been working out?". Strong, masculine cues are attractive to most men. Compare that approach with the gay-male community that is preoccupied with "drag". Their attempt is to confuse the mind-brain system of another man & get into bed based on projecting false female cues & affectations. This is why gay men disrespectfully refer to other men as "bitch", "queen", etc. It's a bunch of social losers trying to "get a real man" by pretending to be a women. Those interactions are built on gigantic lies; -Never on equal footing & they tend to end harshly when somebody with functional testicles gets sober. The entire GLITQ_ETC thin'gus is seriously fucked up from the get-go. NOT G0Y! Simply read our mail!

It's been my experience that lots of guys become sexually active at 12-14 years of age. It usually starts with an intense friendship with another guy. And it's generally NEVER "AnalSex". There are exceptions and this usually involves mentally toxic exposure to "gay porn". However, for the vast majority of men - the 1st time they ever empty their nuts - it's balls to balls with another guy. Thanks to the g0ys movement, men now have a +3000-year historical context for this and can rest assured in the understanding that it's a totally normal "guy thing"; - Not a "gay thing" (thus NOT requiring some bizarre set of gender-bending rituals)! In other words: Cock2cock cuddl'n with a buddy does NOT mean you need to embrace genderfuck, ass-sex, nor friendships with men who want to emulate their creepy aunts. And it fuck'n matters! As one guy said: "I'm only into guys. However, I have NEVER been with a guy who self-identified as 'gay'. Guys who identified as 'gay' always seems to be insecure in their identity as normal men or insist that being a man includes men who seem to lack any effect of testosterone whatsoever. That's damn UNattractive. The guys I shared the proverbial bed with were always friends - masculine guys that I really loved & admired. It was never cheap, nor casual, nor sleazy, nor a 1-nite-stand. Yeah, it took time to break down inhibitions - but it was always worth it. And it was always ultra discreet: 'Hey Bro ... feel like hanging out this weekend?', sorta thing. Nobody stopped being "a guy"! There were no attempts to emulate the androgynous affectations of some multi-letter mind-job "minority". 'Plans to hang out', was code speech for a weekend of fun w. lots of slow, gentle, touching, cuddling & respectful M2M climaxing without anyone ever being b!tched! Once a buddy knows that he's gonna get off with you without risking his public masculine self-image nor his reputation - the anticipation of the event shifts his nuts into overdrive & max's out his semen production until the 'event'. And that's freak'n hott!  And up until about 8-centuries ago - (wrecked by a cult run by men who dress like women & call themselves "father" while molesting children) being a guy with a guy was considered completely "normal" because most guys are "BI"!

"Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd." -
Exodus 23:2 Torah (NIV English translation)

The image above is an actual photo that I restored - taken during world war 2 in Nazi-occupied Germany. Every person in this crowd is giving a salute in support of the Hitler regime; - Except the man shown in color. Taking a stand against the crowd is always a difficult thing to do & always done by the man who has a well developed character. Sometimes it seems that such men are standing alone - but history has a way of discovering those who said "NO!" to the vox vulgaris, & a few others join them as they point out the better path. But the "popular crowd" forever remains a mob with ever shifting faces. Which one of those men will history remember you as being like and why? Shallow people will make comments like: "I would NEVER be a Nazi", - forgetting that the Nazi Party only got it's bad reputation AFTER the horrors its leaders committed had been made widely known. Before the damning press-releases, the "Nazis" were simply like ANY political party. And I might argue that they were simply like EVERY political party.