A question for the collective…

[Syzoth]

First, if this has been discussed before I don’t seem to find anything on the subject.

Second, this question may enter the LGTBQIA+ community (I think I that have all the letters) and I have no experience in that arena. So, if I say something that may be offensive, it is absolutely not out of spite, but out of my own ignorance. Please be patient and help educate me with that so I can better myself.

I am working on my second story, well…revising and re-writing. It isn’t necessarily about an embarrassed nude male, but more of a nervous nude male. The thought occurred to me that a woman who may flash her breasts or even her genitalia in public, may be seen by some as daring, risqué, or maybe brazen. But a man that engages in the same behavior (genitalia), will almost always be seen as sick, perverted, or deviant. Two lesbians who share a sensual loving kiss (not fiery passionate, but with a little tongue) in public are usually seen as “acceptable”, but two gay men doing the same thing are usually seen as “abhorrent”.

Why does it seem that the same behaviors and/or actions by men and women are seen as nearly polar opposites? Why does it seem that lesbians are higher on the “socially acceptable” chart than gay men? Especially from the “straight “ community perspective, or am I assuming too much?

And more for my education, if the word lesbian refers to gay women (is gay women the correct terminology?), then is there a word for gay men? And if there isn’t, why?

I guess it all just seems a bit one sided in favor of the women.

Any insight?

t

First, if this has been discussed before I don’t seem to find anything on the subject.

Second, this question may enter the LGTBQIA+ community (I think I that have all the letters) and I have no experience in that arena. So, if I say something that may be offensive, it is absolutely not out of spite, but out of my own ignorance. Please be patient and help educate me with that so I can better myself.

I am working on my second story, well…revising and re-writing. It isn’t necessarily about an embarrassed nude male, but more of a nervous nude male. The thought occurred to me that a woman who may flash her breasts or even her genitalia in public, may be seen by some as daring, risqué, or maybe brazen. But a man that engages in the same behavior (genitalia), will almost always be seen as sick, perverted, or deviant. Two lesbians who share a sensual loving kiss (not fiery passionate, but with a little tongue) in public are usually seen as “acceptable”, but two gay men doing the same thing are usually seen as “abhorrent”.

Why does it seem that the same behaviors and/or actions by men and women are seen as nearly polar opposites? Why does it seem that lesbians are higher on the “socially acceptable” chart than gay men? Especially from the “straight “ community perspective, or am I assuming too much?

And more for my education, if the word lesbian refers to gay women (is gay women the correct terminology?), then is there a word for gay men? And if there isn’t, why?

I guess it all just seems a bit one sided in favor of the women.

Any insight?

My personal thoughts on the matter:

The population that consumes the most porn is heterosexual males. And what are the top sexual fantasies of all heterosexual males? If it's not group sex with 2 females or watching hot lesbians make out then, at worst, they're in the top 5. So, a guy will happily watch 2 attractive females make out, but that same guy will act all appalled when he sees to gay men doing the same thing. You can call it "homophobia" or "machismo", or whatever you want. But it's definitely a double standard.

 

[Cagivagurl]

Perceptions are built through education.
Whilst children are educated to think queer is unnatural and wrong. It will continue to be so.
Not simply schools, but at home, parents, relatives neighbours. They build the background , they colour our lives.
Attitudes are changing, but it is slow...
We still live in times where children are told these things by the people who influence their lives. These perceptions have been built up since the human race developed. Don't expect it to change over night.

Cagivagurl

 

[OldDog_NewTricks]

Some replies just make you wish there was a “thumbs down” dislike button.

@lovecraft68 What makes you assume that when I said “conservative” I was talking about politics? Did I mention politics anywhere in this conversation? What a simplistic, knee jerk, low brow assumption. I know I’m the FNG here in the forums, and not so much a “known quantity”, but I do know how to use the word conservative in a non-political sense. Conservative as in traditional, old-school, conventional, or maybe even repressed. Not as in right wing, myopic, or narrow minded.

With that being said, I believe everyone is entitled to voice their opinion even if I may not agree with it. And if I have misunderstood your intentions in your comments, I apologize. But, if your intentions are to stir the pot, antagonize others and try and derail this thread, then I will respectfully ask you to see your way out of this conversation.

 

[SimonDoom]

Some replies just make you wish there was a “thumbs down” dislike button.

@lovecraft68 What makes you assume that when I said “conservative” I was talking about politics? Did I mention politics anywhere in this conversation? What a simplistic, knee jerk, low brow assumption. I know I’m the FNG here in the forums, and not so much a “known quantity”, but I do know how to use the word conservative in a non-political sense. Conservative as in traditional, old-school, conventional, or maybe even repressed. Not as in right wing, myopic, or narrow minded.

With that being said, I believe everyone is entitled to voice their opinion even if I may not agree with it. And if I have misunderstood your intentions in your comments, I apologize. But, if your intentions are to stir the pot, antagonize others and try and derail this thread, then I will respectfully ask you to see your way out of this conversation.

Don't worry about it. Everybody in this thread but one understood that your comment was not partisan or political. Some people are just itching to interpret things that way and there's nothing you can, or should, do about it.

 

[TheRedChamber]

I wonder if the history of aesthetics comes into it? What was it Guerrilla Girls say? 85% of the nudes in the Met Museum are female. Something like that.

My point is Western Aesthetics hold up the female form as being beautiful and worthy of admiration, especially when nude. Seeing as that probably permeates our education system, I wonder if we're just indoctrinated to find nude women more attractive (and therefore less transgressive/offensive) than nude men.

About ten or twenty years ago the Guardian newspaper ran an article by a female columnist pontificating at great and pretentious length about how, during a trip round some exhibition of classical sculpture she's come to the realization that the male nude form was way more aesthetically pleasing and a more suitable form for artists to recreate than the female form. She then listed about ten reasons backed up with specific examples which I've now forgotten.

The first comment on the article was 'So, in summary, heterosexual person prefers the bodies of the opposite gender'

 

[THBGato]

About ten or twenty years ago the Guardian newspaper ran an article by a female columnist pontificating at great and pretentious length about how, during a trip round some exhibition of classical sculpture she's come to the realization that the male nude form was way more aesthetically pleasing and a more suitable form for artists to recreate than the female form. She then listed about ten reasons backed up with specific examples which I've now forgotten.

The first comment on the article was 'So, in summary, heterosexual person prefers the bodies of the opposite gender'

If it was in the Grauniad then I probably read it, being a card-carrying member of the tofu-eating wokerati.

Okay, fair point. However, art collections are dominated by male artists, especially those art collections that lean heavily towards more classical styles. Again, I'm turning to Guerrilla Girls' claim that only 5% of the artists in the NY Met Museum are female, yet 85% of the nudes are female.

Stands to reason, right? If most of the artists are male, most are heterosexual, and heterosexuals prefer the bodies of the opposite gender, then most of the nudes will be female.

It's not just the male artists either. An ex-girlfriend's mother is an artist in the more traditional mode. She's painted a ton of nudes - all of women - even though she herself is straight. Why? Because the buyers of art are mostly straight men. The art market wants female nudes, not male nudes. (Which is why The Sun and The Star had page 3 girls rather than page 3 guys - most of the buyers of newspapers were male.)

Thus our generations (the silent generation and younger) are far more used to seeing female nudes on display than male nudes. (Which is why David is such a draw in Florence: quite apart from the artistry, there's a novelty value to the work.) Thus we are less shocked by public displays of female nudity than of male nudity. We are just more used to seeing it.

That's my thesis anyway.

 

[TheLobster]

About ten or twenty years ago the Guardian newspaper ran an article by a female columnist pontificating at great and pretentious length about how, during a trip round some exhibition of classical sculpture she's come to the realization that the male nude form was way more aesthetically pleasing and a more suitable form for artists to recreate than the female form.

That's almost as dumb as that infamous article in Guardian (where else?) that cities are sexist because skyscrapers are "upward-thrusting buildings ejaculating into the sky."

Granted, it was a book review, but IIRC it wasn't exactly a scathing one.

 

[KeithD]

I

Okay, fair point. However, art collections are dominated by male artists, especially those art collections that lean heavily towards more classical styles. Again, I'm turning to Guerrilla Girls' claim that only 5% of the artists in the NY Met Museum are female, yet 85% of the nudes are female.

Stands to reason, right? If most of the artists are male, most are heterosexual, and heterosexuals prefer the bodies of the opposite gender, then most of the nudes will be female.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that most male artists are gay and/or bi. I think it's quite evident that a greater percentage of artists are gay than the percentage of gays in the general population.

 

[lovecraft68]

Where are you seeing this in the discussion above? I've reread all the posts before yours and I can't figure out what you're responding to.

The only thing I can see before your post that could be taken as a mention of left/right politics was OP's "it’s just the response I see here in the rather conservative rural Midwest". Which still isn't anywhere near "nobody on the left is homophobic".

Religion is always associated with 'The right" and there's certainly truth to that and you're way to smart to pretend you don't know that's why I'm saying it. Conservative people tend to have that type of background and a fixed set of ideals, one of which, to many, is homosexuality is a 'sin'

However, I know plenty, including my parents who are downright holy rollers, who may think its a sin, but have LGBTQ friends and are kind to everyone because that's what they think Christ would want. Many are like that, but many also use it to spew their own ignorance. I concede that with no issue.

But...the counter side to that is anyone liberal in their views "The left" are the purist of people, so accepting, so tolerant, all respecting gay and women's rights and so on and so forth. The crowd telling the right that they are judgmental are the most judgmental intolerant and add self righteous. I'll refrain from pointing out that they are also sexist, racist, and homophobic in their own selfish condescending way.

But my main point is playing into "all of X is bad," and all of X is good will get people hurt.

"Oh, its okay, honey, you can get in that strange man's car, he has a Biden/Harris bumper sticker! He can't be a rapist! He would never call someone a 'fag' they obviously are so much better people.

Its like the people who talk about LW trolls and saying they're all rightwing or Chrisitan moralists. Here's a newsflash, I've seen many non-religious non rightwing, non-conservative, men beat women and spew their hatred at them, and gay folks, and black folks etc...

Ignorance is imbued in the human race across the board, and the people who pretend it's only "one side" are lying to themselves, and to others.

Trust needs to be earned on every level by every individual you meet in life, and you need to earn theirs. Everything else is dangerous and unfounded generalization and misinformation.

That's my point, but as is often the case, I'm simply posting what others may be thinking. There's a reason Malcolm X said to beware the white liberal. Part of why he was killed.

 

[StillStunned]

Religion is always associated with 'The right" and there's certainly truth to that and you're way to smart to pretend you don't know that's why I'm saying it. Conservative people tend to have that type of background and a fixed set of ideals, one of which, to many, is homosexuality is a 'sin'

But...the counter side to that is anyone liberal in their views "The left" are the purist of people, so accepting, so tolerant, all respecting gay and women's rights and so on and so forth. The crowd telling the right that they are judgmental are the most judgmental intolerant and add self righteous. I'll refrain from pointing out that they are also sexist, racist, and homophobic in their own selfish condescending way.

But my main point is playing into "all of X is bad," and all of X is good will get people hurt.

You're the only one who's been saying "All these people do this, and all those people say that." Everyone else has been quite nuanced in their replies.

 

[OldDog_NewTricks]

Even though I don’t agree with lovecraft68’s opinions he actually has stated a couple of things that I can agree with. I’m not sure how to snip quotes out of a post so I’ll just CCP them…

“But my main point is playing into "all of X is bad," and all of X is good will get people hurt.”

This I can agree with. Even though in the two paragraphs above that, he shows where he really stands on this. He concedes that there are conservatives on both sides of the argument but then groups ALL liberals together as bad and only being on one side of the argument, thereby nullifying his own argument.

“Ignorance is imbued in the human race across the board, and the people who pretend it's only "one side" are lying to themselves, and to others.”

I also agree with this. But I can admit that it applies to both camps.

“Trust needs to be earned on every level by every individual you meet in life, and you need to earn theirs. Everything else is dangerous and unfounded generalization and misinformation.”

I agree with this also. But isn’t making blanket statements about a particular group of people you don’t agree with basically promoting “dangerous and unfounded generalizations and misinformation” ? Again, nullifying his own argument?

 

[OldDog_NewTricks]

I had a much longer reply but after reading it, I realized that all I was doing was feeding the ego of someone whose self esteem must be so low, that the only way he can feel good is to make himself the center of attention. Like a spoiled child who craves attention, even if it’s bad attention.

My thoughts are to respect and listen to his opinions, because like I said above, he does make some good statements, but not respond. I would rather do that than feed his attention seeking.

If anyone wants to continue this conversation, I’d be interested in hearing more. This has been interesting and educational for me, and I hope for others.

 

[KeithD]

It would be best to take this aspect of the discussion to the political board rather than continue it here, I think--if it needs to be addressed on an erotica story site at all.

 

[OldDog_NewTricks]

Agreed.

I hope everyone knows I was talking about continuing our ORIGINAL discussion about the apparent double standard, not the side tracked conversation this has morphed into.