Men-Only Gyms

[PhoenixLord]

An article popped up recently, where conservative men have decided to open men-only gyms, primarily because they believe there is too much temptation in women going to the gym. The article itself is pretty fucking hilarious, and the quotes are total B.S., but the premise of having a single gender gym exclusively to remove sin and lust sounds like the perfect idea for a Gay Male story, imo.

Men are tired of getting hard-ons at a gym whenever they see a woman in sports bras and yoga pants with no underwear, so they quit their gym. Half a dozen of them congregate in the change rooms and complain, only to realize that all of them are of the same opinion, so they pool their resources and open their own gym, exclusive to men and only men, and they think they've gotten a handle on things. No women, no desires, no chance of getting hard. Over the next few weeks, as they invite other men in their circles to the gym, they begin to notice things (Men walking around shirtless, men touching each other's muscles and arms, offering to spot each other while wearing barely anything). At first, it's harmless, then it starts looking strange, and by the time they realize what's happening, it's too late (There's an orgy in the sauna, a bukkake in the showers, and everyone's working out naked on the gym floor, hard-ons everywhere). A few of them are outraged that their idea has failed, but the majority are nonchalant to the point of not caring that gay sex is happening that eventually, the outrage has died and the one or two homophobes have rage-quit.

 

[UncutinSocal]

You would be more likely to have 2-4 men start curiously playing with each other and it becoming a regular thing for them as opposed to any kind of orgy tbh

 

[TheLobster]

because they believe there is too much temptation in women going to the gym.

Was it really that? Or was it the much more likely case that many women in gyms nowadays fancy themselves influencers who record every minute of their workouts, and men are not thrilled about the prospect of getting caught on camera and shamed on social media as "creeps" just because their exhausted stare happened to linger on some scantily clad girlie?

Because you know, if you want your story to seem realistic, then you should probably go with something that sounds a bit less ridiculous than 'OMG! Those lusty wenches and their *gasp* exposed ankles!'

 

[PhoenixLord]

Was it really that? Or was it the much more likely case that many women in gyms nowadays fancy themselves influencers who record every minute of their workouts, and men are not thrilled about the prospect of getting caught on camera and shamed on social media as "creeps" just because their exhausted stare happened to linger on some scantily clad girlie?

Because you know, if you want your story to seem realistic, then you should probably go with something that sounds a bit less ridiculous than 'OMG! Those lusty wenches and their *gasp* exposed ankles!'

You should read the article, or at the very least, watch the reaction videos of the article. One guy had to quit four gyms saying, "I was tired of all the nakedness shoved in my face every time I walked in the gym to train."

 

[Rob_Royale]

Well, there are ladies-only gyms to avoid the male gaze while working out, so I'm sure the reverse is possible and understandable.

 

[TheLobster]

You should read the article, or at the very least, watch the reaction videos of the article.

That's a bit difficult when you haven't provided any links.

One guy had to quit four gyms saying, "I was tired of all the nakedness shoved in my face every time I walked in the gym to train."

Sports outfits definitely aren't what they used to be

 

[PhoenixLord]

That's a bit difficult when you haven't provided any links.


Sports outfits definitely aren't what they used to be

This is the original article https://baptistnews.com/article/men-only-gyms-seek-to-protect-christian-men-from-lust/

And this is the one that mentions the guy quitting four gyms https://www.boredpanda.com/men-only...ristian-men-from-lust-get-brutally-ridiculed/

 

[TheLobster]

This is the original article https://baptistnews.com/article/men-only-gyms-seek-to-protect-christian-men-from-lust/

And this is the one that mentions the guy quitting four gyms https://www.boredpanda.com/men-only...ristian-men-from-lust-get-brutally-ridiculed/

This is hilarious, even if the article is pretty obviously biased. But hey, if that's what it takes for those guys to follow the 6th and 9th commandments, more power to them.

 

[ChuckWolf]

Was it really that? Or was it the much more likely case that many women in gyms nowadays fancy themselves influencers who record every minute of their workouts, and men are not thrilled about the prospect of getting caught on camera and shamed on social media as "creeps" just because their exhausted stare happened to linger on some scantily clad girlie?

In my experience at the gym, my biggest irritations have not been with women, but with "alpha muscle bro's" - precisely the dopes described in the articles.

Not putting weights away, dicking around on their phones while taking up space on a machine I want to use, setting up shop in a high-traffic open area part of the gym, taking up too much space in the locker and sauna with all their extra bullshit, maxing out the temps on the sauna and steam room only to leave after 2 minutes and so on and so on.

With the woman/influencer thing and whatever, I've never noticed or had an issue with it and, yeah, I'm always checking women out at the gym and then getting caught doing so, but I just shrug my shoulders and smile

 

[PennyThompson]

Some gym bros really like to "help" by giving unsolicited advice on your form or trying to suggest changes to your workout routine or explaining their supplement stack in excruciating detail... I wonder if they'd be compelled to keep doing it in a bros-only environment

"Nice lift bro, but you need to get your shoulders over your hips, like this."

Nick puts his hands on Bobby's lower back and gently nudges his posture.

"Looking good bro, but don't lock your legs."

Adam comes up behind Nick and tickles the backs of his knees.

Soon there is a daisy chain of guys putting their hands on each other to correct their form

 

[Husky_Embrace]

Some gym bros really like to "help" by giving unsolicited advice on your form or trying to suggest changes to your workout routine or explaining their supplement stack in excruciating detail... I wonder if they'd be compelled to keep doing it in a bros-only environment

<...>

It's called mansplaining. We do it to everyone. Not just women.

Just trying to have some sexy time at a house party. Guy walks in on us. "Yo brother. You do it all wrong. This is what she likes," and guy taps in for a round.

On the detailed topic, I'm bouncing around with my opinion. I can fully understand not to want nakedness be thrust upon them. At the same time they say they need it to be strong of body and mind. If you can't go to the gym because there's women there, you obviously fail on the mind part. Then again, avoiding temptation is the best way, so kuddos. Then they suddenly become "warrior kings," two words that individually already was rife with extramarital activity. Together it is practically a given.

What is this gym for!? The story OP asks for writes itself. The rainbows glisten in the sweat on their naked muscles as they hunch down on a machine in the "taking it in the ass" position. They spot each other at the weights, the sauna and the showers. They pump iron, so their buttcheeks are tighter than any pussy, ready to be pumped in turn. They sweat, grunt and bemoan their gains, gobbling white protein left and right.

The only thing out of place in that gym is the wife beater.

 

[PennyThompson]

It's called mansplaining

I didn't want to call it that because some dudes get very triggered by that word, but I'll let you name it

 

[Husky_Embrace]

I didn't want to call it that because some dudes get very triggered by that word, but I'll let you name it

I botched it. I meant it more for the etymology. It is the man doing the explaining. It isn't like mentowomansplaining. Just a man, explaining to anyone or even inanimate objects, how the world truly functions.

Glad to be of service in naming it at least. A man of service. Manservant is already taken. Man aid. Maid? Taken as well!? Man support. Mopport! That's the word. Glad to be a mopport.

Edit: mansistence.

 

[TheLobster]

I didn't want to call it that because some dudes get very triggered by that word, but I'll let you name it

The word is not a problem, it's the implication that it's somehow a bad thing

 

[WhoDunIt77]

I’m kinda surprised a story like this hasn’t come up yet, TBH!

When I read the article a couple weeks back, it kinda gave me a chuckle. Gas me wondering what the ratio of married straight guys just trying to not be tempted by other women to the types of guys, married or not, that crash Grinder during Conservative events to Incels that may lean any direction, sexually speaking, but for some reason deny any of those feelings and lose their shit if anything remotely sexy happens around them…..especially if it turns them on.

 

[PhoenixLord]

I’m kinda surprised a story like this hasn’t come up yet, TBH!

When I read the article a couple weeks back, it kinda gave me a chuckle. Gas me wondering what the ratio of married straight guys just trying to not be tempted by other women to the types of guys, married or not, that crash Grinder during Conservative events to Incels that may lean any direction, sexually speaking, but for some reason deny any of those feelings and lose their shit if anything remotely sexy happens around them…..especially if it turns them on.

More than you're likely to think probably, especially after the events of the Midterms GOP Convention this past week (Hasan Piker's Insta pic).

 

[WhoDunIt77]

More than you're likely to think probably, especially after the events of the Midterms GOP Convention this past week (Hasan Piker's Insta pic).

Funny you mentioned this! I sent a link to something I saw on Reddit to, quite literally my GBF, about the Dallas Grindr crash and this came up too. We both got a good laugh out of how they couldn’t be more obvious with just that alone, then having the typical Grindr crash when Republican men get together pop up a couple days later was just “icing” on the cake.

 

[Britva415]

I didn't want to call it that because some dudes get very triggered by that word, but I'll let you name it

The word is not a problem, it's the implication that it's somehow a bad thing

It isn't like mentowomansplaining.

Except it is, though.

What's bad is when people pretend like it's something men do out of disrespect to women, specifically. It's not. Mansplainers do it to everyone.

See: I just did it to two mans and one woman. Check mate hahaaa!

 

[PennyThompson]

What's bad is when people pretend like it's something men do out of disrespect to women, specifically. It's not. Mansplainers do it to everyone.

I don't like to provide too many details about my real life, but... I work in a somewhat technical field, with a more or less even gender split, meeting regularly with colleagues both one-on-one and in small groups and team meetings.

And I can confidently say that a subset of guys will display this behavior at a woman far more consistently than they will to another man, regardless of the other person's level of knowledge or expertise

 

[Britva415]

I don't like to provide too many details about my real life, but... I work in a somewhat technical field, with a more or less even gender split, meeting regularly with colleagues both one-on-one and in small groups and team meetings.

And I can confidently say that a subset of guys will display this behavior at a woman far more consistently than they will to another man, regardless of the other person's level of knowledge or expertise

I don't doubt it. I do know that this is a thing.

I also know, because of a similar environment and background, that men will get accused of mansplaining the second they talk to one of the woman colleagues the same way they just talked to the men colleagues right in front of her for half an hour before addressing her. No difference in tone, intention, attitude, dumb-downing, at all. The only difference being who is being addressed.

So, I'd call what the guys you're talking about are doing something other than mansplaining. Because it can't mean both, and if mansplaining is going to be used to mean just "men splaining the way men splain to everyone," then "misogynists splaining to women motivated by misogyny" needs a different term.

 

[PennyThompson]

I don't doubt it. I do know that this is a thing.

I also know, because of a similar environment and background, that men will get accused of mansplaining the second they talk to one of the woman colleagues the same way they just talked to the men colleagues right in front of her for half an hour before addressing her. No difference in tone, intention, attitude, dumb-downing, at all. The only difference being who is being addressed.

So, I'd call what the guys you're talking about are doing something other than mansplaining. Because it can't mean both, and if mansplaining is going to be used to mean just "men splaining the way men splain to everyone," then "misogynists splaining to women motivated by misogyny" needs a different term.

I dunno dude, I didn't invent the word, and I didn't use it because this exact "well actually," conversation is pretty much inevitable when someone says "mansplain" in front of a group of guys

 

[TheLobster]

I don't doubt it. I do know that this is a thing. (...)

Right, but the whole term is deeply suspect. To me it seems that all it really does is try to pathologize a very natural, almost instinctual bonding mechanism that men display to one another all the time. In this sense it's eerily similar to another word cut from the same cloth — manspreading — which is basically shaming men for having narrower pelvises than women.

Still, I don't doubt that Penny observes the so-called mansplaining more often when the 'target' is a woman. It is with women, after all, that men like to bond with the most, for rather obvious reasons. And there is also the fact that by her sheer presence among an otherwise male group, she is automatically changing that group's social dynamics; and this makes it much, much less likely that the men will engage socially with each other in male-specific ways.

"misogynists splaining to women motivated by misogyny" needs a different term.

Maybe, assuming it's a common enough behavior that it'd be useful to call it somehow, which I'm not sure about in the slightest. The whole notion is borderline preposterous to me:

Ha! What a dumb bitch! thinks the misogynist man. Her small female brain doesn't even comprehend The Thing. Oh, I'm so gonna explain it to her! Yeah, that'll learn her! That will learn her good...

Like, what? This doesn't make any sense. Perhaps I need to try harder to empathize with the sniveling sexist asshole, but I can't see why he would ever want to assert dominance over the allegedly inferior sex by, uhm — correcting the imagined gaps in her knowledge?... Surely, his superior male intellect could be better used elsewhere

 

[PennyThompson]

I had considered a snarky reply, but then I got a pumpkin spice latte for breakfast and now I'm full of warm cinnamon and nutmeg, and decided to respond in as close to steel-yarding good faith as I can manage and then I'll try to let it go, as this has gotten rather off topic.

Right, but the whole term is deeply suspect. To me it seems that all it really does is try to pathologize a very natural, almost instinctual bonding mechanism that men display to one another all the time. In this sense it's eerily similar to another word cut from the same cloth — manspreading — which is basically shaming men for having narrower pelvises than women.

I don't think I've ever heard anyone use "manspreading," in a serious way IRL, so I think this is probably one of those situations where reactionary media from fifteen years ago decided it was a good thing to get really upset about. Why would I care how wide your pelvis is, take it up with the people who manufacture uncomfortable chairs

That being said, I HAVE been made uncomfortable in places like public transit before, where someone has gotten closer to me than was necessary, took up more space than their physical body really needed, interfered with my personal bubble in a way that wasn't required by the current level of crowdedness, etc. Each time that has happened to me, it was a man. Each time, it had nothing to do with the width of his pelvis.

Is that "manspreading," or just being a creep? Or was manspreading just a dumb word for using one's physical presence in a creepy way? And if that's the case, why does that make you defensive if you aren't personally guilty of doing that?

It is with women, after all, that men like to bond with the most, for rather obvious reasons.

I think there's a good-faith reading of "splaining" behavior for some guys, who really do think they're trying to be helpful and friendly (and possibly impress a woman), and I don't think they're intending to be rude or paternalistic when they do it.

And there's also an aspect here where I'm perfectly happy to listen to a guy gush about his special interest if I know and like him, even if I already have the knowledge he's trying to share. Enthusiasm and excitement is great, I love it!

But damn guys, you gotta read the room sometimes. If you don't already know a woman, you are not making a good first impression if your first interaction is to try and explain that she's wrong about something, or to take five uninvited minutes expounding on details that are irrelevant to the topic or task at hand.

Especially if you don't already know her level of expertise or experience with that topic. She might know more than you, in which case your splaining comes off as ignorant at best, insulting at worst. Or she might know the amount about the thing that she wants to know, and doesn't want to be read the Wikipedia article.

Reflecting on it, one aspect of this phenomenon that to me makes it "mansplaining" rather than a different kind of interaction is... Does the guy ask a single question during the conversation, or display any curiosity about the other person or their level of engagement? Or is it purely an attempt at unidirectional transfer of information? Or not even a transfer of information, but a peacock display?

And there is also the fact that by her sheer presence among an otherwise male group, she is automatically changing that group's social dynamics; and this makes it much, much less likely that the men will engage socially with each other in male-specific ways.

Maybe you do this to each other as a bonding activity when there are no women around and you're naked in a locker room or whatever, that's cool! Maybe it doesn't bother you when a rando comes up to you and starts telling you stuff you already know, or not-so-subtly implying that you're doing something wrong?

But whatever, I started writing this on a break a couple of hours ago, and my coffee is long-since gone, so I'm going to stop here