I think I'm bisexual? 19 male here. Should I experiment with gay guys (whom I find attractive) or play it safe and only fuck with females (whom I also find very attractive). Long term relationship wise I'd like a woman
>>16614175
Hope you like diseases, moron.
>>16614175
how is sticking with females playing it safe? i mean i guess theres that exposure element but its not hard to be discreet these days with apps and internet and such.
i recommend experimenting. the worse that happens is you have some 'meh' sex.
>long term relationship wise id like a woman
just a warning, this is what every 'striaght' guy i ever fooled around with up from middleschool to college has said, and they all ended up being gay in LTRs with other dudes. people tend to romanticize the ideas of relationships with women cuz thats pretty much all they see in the media, but once you start experiencing some man on man action you realize its the same thing.
not saying you are definitely a homo, but thats been my experience thus far.
>>16614192
>i recommend experimenting. the worse that happens is you have some 'meh' sex.
You do realize that anal gay sex is the most surefire way to get AIDS, right?
>not saying you are definitely a homo, but thats been my experience thus far.
What is anecdotal evidence?
>>16614189
Condoms are a thing?
>>16614210
>you do realize that anal gay sex is the most surefire way to get AIDS, right?
you do realize that anal sex is not the only way to experiment. he said experiment, not gangbang
that being said, condoms are 70% effective, PrEP is 99% effective (And you dont even a condom) and being a top decreases that chance from 1 in 30 to 1 in 900 (assuming you are circumcised).
plus its extremely easy to go get a free 1 minute hiv test, so even if you wanted to do anal, you could.
>what is anecdotal evidence
evidence, nonetheless.
>>16614211
Condoms aren't going to protect you.
>>16614246
I'm circumcised if that helps, but I doubt I'd do anal. Idk its just confusing. I've had sex about 10ish times with two different gfs, enjoying it a lot, but guys turn me on a lot too.
>>16614246
>he said experiment, not gangbang
I was going to comment on how this isn't gays operate, and then I realized just how predatory that makes you. You sicken me.
>>16614279
this isn't how gays operate
fixed
>>16614276
Point being, is risking it with a guy worth it? I feel like until I do, this urge is going to keep bothering me like a fly buzzing around
>>16614246
>he said experiment, not gangbang
>implying taking it up the ass is not part of experimenting
>condoms are 70% effective
30% chance of getting a life-long debilitating disease. Nice odds right there.
>PrEP is 99% effective
Have fun not forgetting that daily dose.
>free 1 minute hiv test
So helpful to know that you have already pozzed and you haven't even decided if you want to be a fag yet.
>evidence, nonetheless.
Actually, no. You're just wrong.
>>16614293
OP here. I also share these concerns.
>>16614293
>30% chance of getting a life-long debilitating disease. Nice odds right there.
Way to point out weak evidence and then assume that 100% of homosexuals have AIDS.
>Actually, no. You're just wrong.
[insert evidence here]
>>16614287
What do you want out of life?
Do you want a family? Do you want kids?
Understand that it's healthier if you only raise a child with a woman, a child needs a stable father and mother figure.
>>16614312
>Way to point out weak evidence and then assume that 100% of homosexuals have AIDS.
It's a pretty good assumption. You don't seem to realize just how rampant HIV is among gays.
>[insert evidence here]
>please provide evidence for how my anecdote is not evidence
>>16614312
>[insert evidence here]
Anecdotes mean nothing. It isn't evidence.
>Way to point out weak evidence and then assume that 100% of homosexuals have AIDS.
It's a fetish for many of them so they lie about it to haze newbies. Schools and the media actively lie about the role homosexuality plays in the spread of diseases so a lot of people are easily fooled. The vast majority of gays either have casual sex or are in open relationships where they have more casual sex, disease spreads like wildfire and a lot of random experimenting kids get pressured into shit they don't want to do, which only leads to them getting sick.
>>16614319
Oh yeah, i want a family. But not until I'm 28+. Just curious if I should satisfy my curiosity before I commit to a woman
>>16614330
What's the point? You also want to try meth and heroine before "settling down?" Seriously, what is the point of trying to identify your tastes when you explicitly state you're going to abandon them?
You're basically just going to slut it up with strangers so that you can "get it out of your system?" You gain nothing from this other than shame and confusion that's going to make it impossible to maintain a normal marriage. And a disease.
>>16614330
>Son, did I ever tell you the times I took it up the ass?
>>16614320
>>16614328
>It's a pretty good assumption. You don't seem to realize just how rampant HIV is among gays.
>It's a fetish for many of them so they lie about it to haze newbies.
I will point out how others are providing weak evidence yet I will provide none myself for the claims I make.
>please provide evidence for how my anecdote is not evidence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_evidence
Please educate yourselves with some basic and easy accessible information provided by Wikipedia.
I'm not even the guy you originally responded to, I just happen to like your line of reasoning.
>>16614330
If you know you want to be with a woman, then being a part-time faggot would at best change nothing and at worst only damage your potential relationship. You'll be better off just not risking it.
>>16614341
I'm not sure how that article supports your claim. Care to elaborate?
>>16614341
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_evidence
I see nothing on that page suggesting that anecdotal evidence is a valid form of proof for anything.
>>16614351
What claim?
>>16614341
>I will point out how others are providing weak evidence yet I will provide none myself for the claims I make.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/
I don't see why this is even up for debate.
>>16614354
It seems like you oppose the idea that anecdotes are worthless as evidence. Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur. We don't have to provide any evidence to disprove his claim as he never presented any to begin with.
>>16614336
>>16614342
>>16614337
I'm gonna have to end this by taking your advice anons. There are some things I'm better off not knowing. Thanks everyone.
>>16614380
Good luck bro.
You got one life to live man. Go fuck a dude. Have him fuck you. Suck each other off whatever. If you like it, do it again. If you don't, move on to something else.
Try to have this attitude going forward
>>16614380
You really let yourself getting talked out of this so easy by people that are afraid to really live their lives?
I'm not saying go out there and do it, but you can have a lot of fun that only you ever need to know about.
Don't worry too much about diseases, most guys in your age group haven't even figured out they are gay/bi yet or willing to be open about it so they don't have much experience. If you wanted to experiment now WOULD be the safe time to do it.
>>16614352
That's a nice equivocation. I linked you a hierarchy of evidence, it clearly states that anecdotal evidence is at the bottom. However, something that's included in a hierarchy of evidence is typically considered as evidence. It is without a doubt the weakest form of evidence and I'm not saying anything else.
You should remember though that the fact that something is anecdotal does not mean that it cannot be supported by a higher level of evidence. If I drop an apple and say that it was pulled to the ground by gravity that likely is true. Just like how correlation studies are weak and people pull out "correlation doesn't equate causation" when they don't like the study. Many anecdotal claims are worthless trash, just don't confuse evidence with a complete explanation for a phenomenon.
>>16614356
I haven't said it's up for debate, I have pointed out the fact that claims were made without evidence while saying that others' comments weren't good enough.
>>16614361
Seeing as you are unable to read I will now quote:
>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) rank above observational studies, while expert opinion and anecdotal experience are ranked at the bottom.
You have also moved the goalpost from "not evidence" to "worthless evidence." Just thought I'd alert you on the difference.
>>16614387
>try to have this attitude going forward
>if you don't want to get fucked by a man you are a BAD PERSON
As someone who experimented with guys a couple of times before, don't do it. Stick with women. Google the CDC's statistics on HIV. The amount of MSMs with HIV is staggering and increasing. As someone stated already in this thread, you might as well assume they all have HIV.
I'd link you the article myself OP but I'm on mobile.
>>16614391
One, there is a reason for why using anecdotal evidence is considered to be a fallacy included in the /pol/ sticky - it proves jack shit on its own and does jack shit to reinforce "higher-ranking" evidence, which is why I don't consider it to be actual evidence. Ever heard the term "hearsay"? Two, comments about personal experience do not equal comments about general trends. Nice false equivalence, though.
>>16614507
This is such scare tactics, just don't speak with black people as those are the ones that top the STDs statistics.
Hookup with gays, if you are that paranoid ask them for bloodtests. Always test yourself between partners.
If he's 19 he is bound to find someone that hasn't even had sex yet, and would be willing to experiment with him at his own pace even.
Don't let fear ruin what could be good experiences.
>>16614534
This is how they always get you.
>don't be afraid of what THOSE people tell you
>just fuck a lot of guys
>having HIV is ok as long as you know about it
>it'll be fun, I promise
>just trust me, you dumb fucks
>>16614565
Why are you in this thread exactly? You're not the one wanting to experiment with guys, so why?
I never said sleep with a lot of guys. I even advocated that he asks for their latest STD test, which you need to do. And it is fun, that I can promise. I've slept with five guys and I don't have a single STD.
>>16614534
Why not just stick to the female/male pairing that has worked for literally eternity? People are completely capable of choosing what they are attracted to. The only reason more and more people are becoming confused about sexuality is because of the media attention homosexuality gets, and how it is portrayed as "normal." Fuck, that's the whole reason I experimented with guys in the first place.
If you watch enough gay porn or think enough about the idea of homosexuality, people will generally start developing an attraction. Likewise, cutting off all porn and mentally sexualizing women will lead to heterosexual activity. Thoughts generally lead to actions, and nothing and nobody are set in stone.
>>16614579
I've never watched most porn and I've always known I was attracted to both sexes it was never a matter of confusion for me but a desire to experiment which I did and enjoyed.
If you are satisfied with a female/male pairing, good for you. I wouldn't have missed out on going through with a MMF threesome though, as it is one of my fondest memories and I learned a lot about sex from it. If I should've taken your advice I would've gone depressed through life knowing that other people got to experiment something I would've wanted. This is your life and your adventure, do with it as you like and I will do with it as I like.
>>16614576
OP didn't know if he wanted to experiment, that's why he came here to ask if he should. And frankly, based on that, as well as his plans, it should be obvious that this "experimenting" is a high risk with pretty much zero reward. And frankly, I find your attempts to get him to ebgage in such self-destructive activities disgusting.
>>16614615
This is an advice board, if advices are unanimous that's not much of an advice. He deserves to hear from people that aren't afraid. Again you can't say that it won't have any reward. If he's really curious people scaring him with HIV isn't very healthy and he shouldn't base his choices around fear. People like same sex relations, if they didn't they would've stopped with it long ago. As long as he makes sure he's safe and knows he can call things off whenever he wants it can be good for him. People scaring people "straight" isn't something I take kindly to.
>>16614629
I say "zero reward" because being bi in a straight marriage will only introduce problems. Any and all enjoyment of whatever buttstuffing he might engage in will be only temporary compared to the consequences it might have. If you want to slut it up, feel free to do so, but don't assume everybody's situation is the same as yours.
>>16614656
That's the beauty of being bisexual, when you do gay stuff you are gay, but when you do straight stuff you are straight. If you get married with a woman as a bi male, that's just like any other marriage and I suspect you do so because you are in love with the woman and don't plan on cheating on her. Just as I would expect a straight man marrying a straight woman would, or a gay man marrying a gay man.
If having sexual experience is slutting it up to you then I guess I understand why your bi experience was so miserable because you aren't comfortable with yourself at all.
>>16614668
>>16614507
>>16614579
These are me, the guy who experimented but is arguing against it.
>>16614615
>>16614656
Are others. Just clarifying
>>16614668
This is the most simplistic view of marriage I have ever seen. If what you said is true, then why do so many married people cheat on their partners? People and relationships change, not to mention no two people are 100% compatible.
Also, you really shouldn't assume everybody is like you. Not everybody has these tendencies, I'd even argue that most people don't, and they certainly don't fag it up like you apparently did.
>>16614696
So your previous argument of being bi in a straight marriage doesn't hold any merit, because people already cheat on their partners in marriages regardless of bisexuality or heterosexuality.
I'd say most people are bisexual, consider the kinsey scale, absolute straight and absolute gay is only occupied by 2 spots but bisexuality is occupied by five spots. Most people probably want to experiment but either are too afraid or find out it isn't as important to them, shaming people from trying to express their sexuality in the bedroom where it bothers no one is non-autonomous. Inform people about practicing sage sex instead, sex can be enjoyable in many different pairings.
ITT gangbang on gay peoples opinion
>>16614705
Here's where you're wrong. I'm saying that being bi brings no long run benefits in a marriage compared to the doubled chance of cheating (considering the effective doubling of the pool of candidates). Nice strawman, though.
Considering the Kinsey scale, not only is it ridiculously simplistic, since it exvludes asexuals, there's bo grounds for the assumption that our population is uniformly distributed across it. In other words, just because there are 2.5 times as many bi slots on it as thete are straight slots doesn't mean there are 2.5 as many bi people as there are straight people. I'd look up statistics on this, but I'm on my phone right now.
>>16614705
>>16614731
samefag
>>16614745
Here's where you're wrong, it doesn't double your chances of cheating since you are in a committed relationship based on a pact. If you're a cheater you're a cheater regardless of orientation. Furthermore bisexuals or gay people make up are about 3% of the population that's hardly doubling the chances of cheating.
Considering the kinsey scale DOES include asexuality I'd say good bye to you since you clearly do not know what you're speaking of. Kinsey described asexuals as X on the scale so they are included. Sorry to disappoint.
>>16614745
This is basically true, most people nowadays consider sexuality to be multidimensional field and not a single continuum like the Kinsey Scale. Most people probably do fall into a pretty narrow sphere on that field that could reasonably be labeled "straight."
Acting like being attracted to double the usual amount of people also necessarily doubles the chances of cheating is asinine, though. Most people with a tendency to cheat will do so, most people who lack or suppress that tendency won't. You really think there are many potential cheaters out there who just never have the opportunity because there's so few candidates?
>>16614764
So it still increases the chances, though by not as much as what I said. This is a benefit how?
Regarding the Kinsey scale, one, it includes asexuals by not really including them, but merely acknowledging their existence outside of it. Great model of reality, I gotta say. And two, the exclusion is not even my argument for why your mention of it is absolutely inconsequential. Nice job refuting my point.
>>16614696
>why do so many married people cheat on their partners?
It's actually because most people have sex with multiple different partners before marriage. Happiness in a marriage is inverse correlated with your number of previous sexual partners. Experimentation during your youth is unironically causing marriages to fail.
Look at it this way: would you really even care about having all of those guys in your ass if you just married as a virgin and never knew the difference?
>>16614869
Uh, yeah, no, correlation, causation and all that. People who tend towards promiscuity will naturally tend to struggle more with monogamy, but that wouldn't change even if they restrained themselves from experimenting during their youths.
>>16614878
No, it's not a promiscuity issue. It's a simple matter of sexual partnership. It changes your tastes and your behavior in general to make them incompatible with monogamy.
You are not "born" unable to marry, you do it to yourself. You will never concede this point because it runs totally contrary to your lifestyle.
>>16614869
Is marriage really the end all be all for you? If so many marriages fail anyway, why bother with it? I've never wanted to get married from seeing how miserable it has made my parents, is marriage a vestige of something to you?
Also, not everyone that experiments with same sex relations get fucked in the ass, someone has to do the fucking as well you know. If I didn't have regular sex with people I would be miserable yes, because I'd watch a society that has become sexually liberated and felt left out of having fun myself.
>>16614878
Actually, I'd posit that having all that experience only reinforces the dissatisfaction, so even if you are a natural slut, restraining yourself would increase your chances of being and staying happily married.
>>16614889
The OP specifically stated that he wants to end up with a long-term relationship, the purest kind of which is marriage. So yes. Nice job shitting on traditional values, though.
>>16614889
Marriage works, but it does not work when sluts marry sluts. People are raised from birth to be promiscuous and they don't find out until too late that they are unhappy.
A lot of women, especially here, advise waiting until 30 or 40 to settle down. A lot of people think this way. They want to "experiment" until they are too old to experiment, but this very compulsion is what makes it impossible for them to be happy in the end. Marriage works and the nuclear family makes it possible to raise functioning children.
OP is explicitly being given advice that goes against his wishes. Sexual liberation is not fun, it doesn't provide anything for you. All it does is ruin you, like a drug addiction.
>>16614901
>muh traditional values
Please don't end up regretting never experiencing life when you get older, I work with enough older people that regret things they didn't do.
>>16614906
Marriage doesn't work, it's an outdated concept. Sexual liberation is fun because you can form your life the way you want it without being held down.
>>16614912
>Marriage doesn't work, it's an outdated concept.
2015
0
1
5
>>16614912
I find it funny that you always respond to the parts of my posts that are mainly there as padding, while completely ignoring the main bulk that actually addresses your claims. Your assumption that it is possible to regret not taking enough dicks, but not taking too many of them is laughable. Your prioritizing short term enjoyment over long term happiness is pitiful. And your projection of your own insecurities is both.
