Straight Pornagraphy is Gay / Eradication of the gay fetish

You don't look at your penis, you feel a penis. The only real and accurate body part you feel during jerking off is not a vagina, a breast etc, it is a penis. A warm, erect penis. Instead of feeling female body parts during sex and associating them with sexual gratification, you associate sexual gratification with a penis.

That is the root cause of homosexuality and hocd.

 

This kind of ridiculous BS is giving NoFap a bad name. It's interesting to me that Rustcan45 and ultrafabber are not refuting any of the dissenting points, only responding to posts that reinforce their beliefs. Let me shift the conversation from Psychology 101 to History and Biology. You guys do know that homosexuality existed before large volumes of porn existed right? Poseidon pointed this out as well. Are any of you familiar with antiquity?

Biologically speaking, we see instances of homosexuality in many other mammals. Some don't masturbate at all, and they're definitely not watching porn! There are so many great reasons to abstain from PMO, but "it might turn you gay" it's not one of them. The original NoFap philosophy is rooted in science. I know of no study that suggest homosexuality has ANYTHING to do with porn or masturbation. Many people discover they are gay even before entering puberty. Anecdotally, those who are gay often state "they knew" from an early age.

 

I've been ignoring them mostly because i've covered them in other topics and it's becoming redundant at this point. I guess i should make a topic covering all of them so that i can link to it whenever this conversation starts again.

To cover your points specifically:

No, having a penis is not gay. Nor is interacting with that penis in a non-sexual manner gay. Washing it, scratching it etc. However, being able to manipulate said penis while sexually aroused without a drop in arousal is gay. On top of that, manipulating a penis with the intention of getting, staying sexually aroused and climaxing IS gay.

The penis itself does not care but you are more than a penis. What you interact with does matter, that's why you don't get an erection if you'd be presented with your mother or sister in a sexual way just because they are women and that's why you don't get an erection when presented with a willing goat just because it has a vagina. There are multiple conditions that need to be met so that you get a greenlight to erection and sex. A basic condition for a true heterosexual would be that he does not feel a penis, however during masturbation he does feel a penis, therefore any man that can masturbate and gets sexual arousal that way is not a true heterosexual but rather bisexual or homosexual.

That is correct, homosexuality existed long before porn. However, homosexuality was extremely, extremely rare, nowhere near the levels it is now. On top of that, homosexuality consisted in sexual relations between old men and young boys. When they grew up, those boys would go and start a family. Most of those relationships were not true homosexual relations because the men were largely bisexuals and the boys would grow up and have families. Exclusive homosexuality was even rarer than homosexuality was. What has increased in the last decades was masturbation behavior and along with it, homosexual behavior.

This is a common held belief but it is wrong. There is absolutely no EXCLUSIVE homosexuality in nature. The extremely rare cases that present homosexual behavior are in fact bisexual animals. Those animals go on and have offspring or at the very least manifest interest in the opposite sex. On top of that, the cases of homosexual behavior (read BIsexual) in animals are extremely, extremely few. On a very crass approximation, 99.99% of animals never display homosexual behavior. If you count insects too, that number jumps to 99.999999%

The sad truth is that many homosexuals, or at the very least a disproportionate number of homosexuals when compared to heterosexuals have been molested as children. Studies show a ratio ranging from 3:1 up to 30:1 when compared to heterosexuals. Connecting the dots it is rather obvious that many homosexuals ended up so because of molestation. A little known fact is that most pedophiles (as ratio) are gay.

 

Everybody is bi then lol

 

Nothing can turn you gay, you are either gay,bi or straight, trust me. Obviously there are a lot of grey areas, but generally speaking it’s very hard to change one’s sexual orientation and only could be done with the help of meds and psychologists.( I’m not talking about the gay conversion therapy cuz it doesn’t work whatsoever, I’m talking about the rewiring one’s brain on a deep level)

 

In my case, my tastes haven’t escalated to the point of watching gay porn( I have tried watching it and I just cannot get hard no matter what), but my attraction to women is pretty much gone and nothing seems pleasurable anymore

 

Totall bs there is quite a few gay people who have never been raped or anything like that. Furthermore, there is quite a few maps, who were sexually abused as kids, but didn’t become gay or gay maps. Idk y u people hate on gays I just don’t get it.

 

Btw, Hocd isn’t mostly porn induced, I think what you are referring to is more of a porn escalation rather than hocd cuz in my case the doubting disease about my sexuality started cuz of a gay men who told me that he had became gay at the drop of a hat. What is more, I cannot get aroused by males no matter what, tho my attraction to women is pretty much gone.

 

Nice, I guess we can just change definitions of words whenever we want. Ok from now on I will define a rapist as someone with > 1000 posts on this site and no profile pic. Therefore, you are a rapist.

Guys, don't listen to ultrafabber, he's a rapist.

 

Isn’t he the dude who always says that jerking off is gay af cuz u stroke ur dick?

 

I don't know, but that's some middle school logic. There's a lot of us on this site who are into transwomen and are not gay. Personally I'd do a lot of stuff with someone else's dick and I'm still straight at the end of the day. To quote Alex Jones:

"I like women, not men. But if I liked men I'd be proud of it, and I'd have a lot of them. But I ain't ever been in bed with no man... I've been in bed with probably about 300 women."

 

Are u attracted to dicks?

 

I guess it depends on who they're attached to. Mostly in the context of transwoman/futa stuff. I'm repulsed by looking at a guy's dick. That's why I hate straight/gay porn. But I think dicks are capable of looking aesthetically arousing to me, sure.

 

First of all, I read this entire thread before commenting myself. I always make a point to do that. Second, the title of your post begins with "Straight Pornography is Gay." What is anyone reading this supposed to think? Your opening doesn't make it clear at all that you're referencing a fetish only, not homosexuality induced by porn. I didn't even know there was such a thing as a "gay fetish." That doesn't really make sense, as a fetish is usually associated with an object or specific sexual act, not one's sexuality. Any man with a preference for gay porn is either in denial about their sexuality, or is going through an experimental phase. The very definition of gay is attraction to someone of the same sex, and if you're turned on by sex acts between men, you have gay/bi tendencies at the very minimum. It has nothing to do with a penis, and everything to do with the gender you're attracted to. Porn could be amplifying those desires, but it's hard for me to believe those making the jump from straight to gay porn had no interest at all in men beforehand. I could be wrong though!

You call me arrogant, but you're the one creating a post with your own observations laid out as facts. It's like you've taken one pysch class and now you have all the answers. That is how you come across in this post. Little you've said in this entire thread is based on factual evidence, and that is exactly my point. A true study would make an observation and hypothesis, then use actual data to confirm. Where is your data? You even go as far as making a conclusion. That is about as arrogant as it gets IMO.

There are many confused people on NoFap, and you're not helping by introducing your hypothesis as fact in the initial post. It might help to make it clear from the beginning that this is only your opinion. To be fair, you did say later in the thread this is just your hypothesis. I'm refuting this so hard because this community is taken less seriously by the day... it's already scrutinized by a lack of scientific evidence, and posts like these aren't helping NoFap's image.

If you do want to debate, my first question is there any proof that a gay fetish even exists?

 

I've responded to each of your assertions below:

You are flat out wrong in the assertion that manipulating one's own penis for sexual gratification is gay. Before I ever knew what porn was, I was masturbating while fantasizing about GIRLS. How is that gay? Before that, I masturbated solely because it felt good. There are arguments to be made that masturbation by itself is harmless and beneficial in many cases. Masturbating excessively and/or with porn is typically where most of us ran into trouble. You are focusing on the penis itself which is just a tool.

You're contradicting yourself here by mentioning intentions while you previously focused on the penis alone. That is my point; intention and acting on that intention is what decides one's sexuality. Any sexual act done alone, regardless of sexuality, is neutral. Sexual organs are completely independent of one's sexuality. In any sex act, you "feel" a penis, less it would not be pleasurable. Your brain knows, but your penis doesn't care.

Where are your facts on this? In the past (and in some countries currently), homosexuality was/is criminalized. They would not likely be openly gay out of fear of persecution. As homosexuality has become more widely accepted, the numbers would increase as there's no need to keep it hidden. I would expect men of the past to grow up and have families out of necessity and independent from their sexuality; reasons for marriage/children are much different now.

My point wasn't about exclusive homosexuality in nature, it was to state that many animals engage in homosexual behavior without porn or other external stimuli.

This is new information for me. I did a bit of research though, and what you're stating seems to be true. That is quite sad, especially since no one seems to talk about it in mainstream culture.

 

The only problem with your theory is every man responds to stimuli differently. Maybe from your own experience you've had gay tendencies, maybe downloaded some gay porn yourself but not all men associate women being fucked with penis fetishes.
In fact most you'll find associate it with dominance of the female which would later result in BDSM fetishes or depending on the relationship with their mothers, submissive ie: femdom. Furthermore, most porn addict hetro guys would become overly obsessed with the shape of the female body where they start to fixate on asses and legs and feet and tits and progress from one to the other and back again which means the male anatomy is the furthermost from their minds.

 

You're basing on intention only to define the type of sex you have. Using that logic, and i have made this point before, having sex with a goat should be considered heterosexual porn as long as you are thinking about a woman and ignore the goat. Of course that makes no sense because you can not disconnect the physical interaction from the mental image. Therefore, jerking off can not be a heterosexual act just because you think about a woman. You think about a woman but you're stroking a penis, which is not a heterosexual act but a homosexual act.

Last but not least, even if your penis doesn't care (it does), your hand is directly interacting with a penis and this can not be escaped. More so, if you check the sensory homunculus, there is a far greater % of brain power dedicated to sensory inputs from hands than from genitals. Which gives the inputs from the hands priority over inputs from genitals.

There are no facts to show that the numbers of homosexuals were high in the past either, even if they were hiding. It's just assumptions. However we do know that in some tribes they didn't even have a word for it and didn't even understand how it worked. So we know that a part of it is learned behavior at the very least.

Your point was to normalize homosexuality based on nature. However when you look at nature, you get the opposite: looking at nature proves that homosexuality is by all metrics abnormal and extremely rare. More so, exclusive homosexuality, like i said, does not even exist, which is a very strong argument against the normality of human homosexuality. Last but not least, just because an extremely extremely rare % of BIsexuality exists in nature does not allow for extrapolation on a general population. What that means in general terms is that you can not use an exception to prove a general rule. That's like saying "because some people won the lottery, winning the lottery is normal/common".

That's just the tip of the iceberg. There are so many skeletons in the homosexuality/transgender closet your head would blow up if you'd know all about it. That is why i oppose it's normalization.

 

There are/were African and Native American tribes that required young boys to perform oral sex and ingest the semen of grown men as a rite of manhood.

Wrong. Lack of exclusive homosexuality in chimps/gorillas/whales/plants/aliens does not mean that it is abnormal (=unnatural) in humans. In fact, humans do exhibit exclusive sexuality - just ask a gay person.

Exactly, and just because there is no evidence of exclusive homosexuality in nature (= other species) does not mean that you can extrapolate those findings onto humans.

Nice job. I wonder if the rest of the iceberg contains any real arguments, because the tip was certainly disappointing. By the way, I also have a time travel device and every Sunday I go back 100 million years and ride on dinosaurs - your head would explode if you knew about it.

 

The point was that some tribes don't even know what homosexuality is. If it was a natural/normal behavior it would be seen across all societies. But it's not.

Since humans are animals, it does, unless you believe in creationism etc. Humans are just a different kind of animals.

Yes you can since humans are also animals. More than that, you are not dealing with an exception in this case, you are dealing with a rule. Exclusive homosexuality not existing is a rule.

Go sh!tpost somewhere else. If you don't stick to arguments we are done with this conversation.