“My Gay Experience With A Straight Guy”: Commentary on a Youtube Video

Every once in a while, I come across something that demands a post. I think the video below is one of those, which I will follow with my own commentary.

The video is entitled “My Gay Experience With A Straight Guy”, which was posted in November 2018 by “gay” doctor and Youtuber Andrew Neighbors. The title describes the gist of the video, in which Dr. Neighbors talks about an experience with a “straight” college friend. I think that it’s a video that needs analysis, though probably not for the reasons you think.

Before going any further, there are some things I need to make clear. Firstly, I have never met Dr. Neighbors. I don’t know enough about his overall opinions and positions to make any general judgement, either for or against him. Given that, I can not and will not make a general opinion of Dr. Neighbors’ work; my critique is limited to this one piece of his output.

I will say though that, by the time the video was finished, I felt like tearing my hair out. I’ll tell you why shortly, but first, please watch the video. It’s only 11.5 minutes long, so you’ll be able to get through it quickly. If you want to make it shorter, start the video at 1:27, so you can skip the product placement. 

Now, there’s one point I have to make right here. It will be one that will color the rest of this commentary. 

Above all, this video exemplifies the chasm between non-”gay” homoeroticism and “gay” homoeroticism. His “straight” friend is used to the former, while Dr. Neighbors is accustomed to the latter. As you’ll soon understand, the two don’t mix together well at all. This video contains an example of when the two clash in real life. As a result of it, Dr. Neighbors missed out on a possibly hot sexual experience that fell right in his lap. 

To clarify, “gay” homoeroticism is usually predatory in nature. It honors headhunting and objectification, where people are viewed and used as mere vessels for pleasure. It focuses on getting as much sex as possible, inside the shortest duration of time. Relationships are a secondary concern. The ideal form of sex is anal play, including and especially anal penetration. As a result, “gay” homoeroticism encourages interaction that is adversarial, where one seeks to dominate another for their satisfaction. It’s focused on stating its intentions quickly, “getting down to business” immediately, and finishing just as fast. After the deed is done, its participants need not care about each other.

Homoeroticism outside the “gay” world is different. It’s much more playful, casual, and spontaneous. It doesn’t rush things if it doesn’t feel natural. It’s focused on building intimacy through camaraderie and shared experience. In this non-”gay” homoeroticism, relationships are the central focus, where people are important above all. Sex often happens in the context of friendship, as a conduit to achieve ultimate closeness. As a result, sex is often egalitarian in nature, where its participants wish to connect with one another, and not dominate each other. Because it is egalitarian, it completely avoids anything anal, because that imposes undesired dynamics of dominance and submission. It pivots on non-penetrative acts instead.

Shortly, you’ll see how these two modes interact with each other in the real world. To make the commentary more understandable, I will react on the video in the chronological order of its remarks. For the remainder of this post, content from the video will summarized in italics. Approximate timestamps of the described content will appear in brackets.

Right from the start, Dr. Neighbors admits his “straight” friend was hot – he was tall, had olive skin, green eyes, and an excellent physique from playing rugby and other sports. From the beginning, Dr. Neighbors also knew he was “straight”, and “wasn’t trying to make moves…I was trying to make a friend”. But they soon became very close friends. They played video games together all the time, which allowed them to really connect. Eventually, they regularly talked about sex, sexual things they wanted to try, guys that Dr. Neighbors crushed on, girls that the friend crushed on, etc. [2:06 to 3:54]

Even at this early stage, the differences between “gay” homoeroticism and non-”gay” homoeroticism show themselves. Notice that Dr. Neighbors says that with his “straight” friend, he “wasn’t trying to make moves”, because he was trying to make a friend. Within the world of “gay” homoeroticism, friendship and sex cannot coexist well. If you have sex with another guy, calling him a friend (albeit a very close one) would be considered somewhat delusional. Furthermore, the line between “straight” and “gay” is taken quite seriously. “Gays” are considered fair game, while “straights” are off limits, and not because “gays” necessarily desire it to be that way. This will become a recurring theme during the rest of the commentary, where it will reverberate more forcefully later on. 

Having said that, it’s probably a good thing that he didn’t “make moves on him” in the way he knows. In “gay” homoeroticism, “making moves” often involve behaviors that can be predatory and objectifying. “Straight” guys don’t want to be hunted by other men, because that (justifiably) puts them on edge. People who hunt other people usually don’t have their object’s best interests at heart. Instead, men want to be respected and liked as an equal. “Making moves” on his “straight” friend might have driven him away instead. Mr. Neighbors didn’t (and still might not) know how to make moves in a way that wouldn’t be predatory. 

As such, what he didn’t realize was that even then, his “straight” friend was busy making moves on HIM.

Remember what was said so far in the video – that their conversations often turned to sexual matters. To be clear, sex certainly isn’t an unknown topic in “straight” guys’ conversation. However, to really get in depth, that requires the friends to be very comfortable with each other. Given that they played video games together all the time, the moments they spent together helped them achieve a certain comradeship.

There are two other things to note. First, based on his description, their extensive conversations about sex were also quite frequent. Secondly, the sexual topics were very personal – guys that Mr. Neighbors found hot, girls that the friend found attractive, things they’d like to try with their sexual partners, etc. Going that deep into it possibly signals a sexual interest. Granted, it doesn’t always work out that way. However, when being so comfortable talking about sexual activity, it opens the door to actually doing sexual activity with a friend. Many mutual masturbation sessions start off by just talking about sex and masturbation while in states of undress. 

Given all of that, Mr. Neighbors’ “straight” friend was using the conversations to get a read on him. Through it, he was able to see what he likes and dislikes sexually. He also was laying the groundwork for a smooth transition into sexual activity, if the opportunity ever arose to do so. From what I can see, a mutual erotic attraction existed in their friendship. It’s just that people familiar with “gay” homoeroticism (like Mr. Neighbors) can’t pick up on those signs easily. “Gay” homoeroticism is defined by objectification. As a result, homoeroticism based on equality and camaraderie isn’t understood as being real and legitimate. This becomes clearer in the next segment we will discuss. 

They eventually started working out together. In fact, the “straight” guy was the first friend who introduced him to working out. [3:54 to 4:12]

Looking at Mr. Neighbors’ physique, I think that worked out for the best, because his body looks really good. But I digress.

Once again, this was another sign of non-”gay” homoeroticism that flew over Mr. Neighbors’ head. I have no doubt that the “straight” friend worked out with Mr. Neighbors to make his body better. At the same time, that also gave the opportunity for the “straight” guy to check out his body. After all, if they worked out together, they probably changed together in the locker room. In that case, they would have definitely seen each other in their underwear. 

Again, I’m not saying that this is the case 100% of the time. If a friend brings you to work out, it might be for solely for exercise. However, while this activity might not have an erotic component, it need not exclude it either. There’s a reason why the ancient gymnasium was a focal point for Greek homoeroticism.

Nor am I suggesting that the secondary reasons are somehow illicit. They simply display a natural and normal trait – being attracted to one’s own gender – and something natural and normal cannot be illicit. That’s why I didn’t suggest that those reasons were “naughty” or “clandestine”. There’s nothing naughty about finding someone sexually appealing, and honestly, the friend wasn’t hiding anything. It’s just that his interest was expressed in ways that Mr. Neighbors didn’t understand. 

As if to pound upon the point, the next part further illustrates the gap between the two types of homoeroticism. 

The friend knew Mr. Neighbors was “gay”, and Mr. Neighbors knew that the friend was “straight”. Despite the difference, they had a pretty good friendship, and he’s proud that he could maintain such a respectful relationship. In fact, Mr. Neighbors called him “one of my best friends”. He was able to console the “straight” friend when his pursuit of a girl fell apart. He feels that what made it so respectful was that, while his friend was attractive, his “straight” status kept him sexually out of reach. As a result, he had “no expectations” of any sexual activity. That set boundaries that, he felt, engendered mutual respect. [4:12 to 5:40]

I think that last part was quite enlightening. Mr. Neighbors says that the relationship was respectful because, given the difference in labels, sexual activity seemed highly unlikely. The lack of sexual potential allowed them, he says, to bond in a really beneficial way. 

Meanwhile, in non-”gay” homoeroticism, sexual activity is considered the highest manifestation of mutual respect and affection. In this world, friendships become beneficial BECAUSE of their sexual potential, and not in spite of it. I could cite several examples from the g0y movement (all taken from here) that would exemplify this, where sex results from an abundance of deep love and respect. The Man2Man Alliance says the same thing, where male-male attraction (and resulting activity) is born out of admiration for each other’s masculinity. 

Now, contrast that with what Mr. Neighbors said, where the friendship was respectful because sex was out of the question. What does that say about sex in the “gay” community? Wouldn’t that imply that in “gay” homoeroticism, sex actually engenders disrespect? Doesn’t that mean that in the “gay” community, sex and true respect cannot easily coexist? Doesn’t that mean that for a “gay” bond to have true mutual respect and love, sex should probably be avoided? 

Sex shouldn’t achieve the opposite of love and respect. That defeats the point of sex itself. Yet when you consider the usual form of sex in “gay” homoeroticism – anal play – it’s not surprising. Anal simply isn’t an act that generates true love, affection, and respect. This is for many reasons, but a major one is that the anus is not a vagina. As such, it’s an act that always causes pain and physical injury. An act of love shouldn’t cause pain or injury. Because anal does precisely that, it cannot logically generate love. It can only generate lust at best. 

Here comes the $100,000 questions. When it comes to the public reputation of same-sex activity, what is the true role of the LGBT community? Through the types of sex practiced in it every day, is it tearing down homophobia, or is it propping it up? If sexual activity is such an obstacle to a healthy friendship, could the type of sex performed be the problem?

Issues raised by these questions will reverberate more forcefully as we move to the next part of the video. We now arrive at a crucial point in the video, when the two modes of homoeroticism totally collide.

A few months later, the “straight” friend invites Mr. Neighbors via text to his aunt’s house for video gaming. The house’s occupants were out of town, and it had a nice hot tub and pool they could use. They could have a few others over and have a big party, the “straight” friend said. Wanting to see and use the hot tub, Mr. Neighbors agreed to come over. The “straight” friend tells Mr. Neighbors to bring his swimsuit with him.

Upon arriving at the house, the friend gave Mr. Neighbors a long and cheerful hug. Mr. Neighbors soon realized that the only ones there will be him and his friend. He also thinks that the friend had a drink or two before they joined up. He describes the atmosphere as “weird”, and felt that the friend had something on his mind. 

After playing video games for a while, Mr. Neighbors brings up the hot tub. They then go to the hot tub, and Mr. Neighbors wants to change into his swimsuit. The friend announces that he didn’t bring a swimsuit. To compensate, he strips off his clothes and enters the hot tub naked. Upon the friend’s suggestion, Mr. Neighbors did the same. Mr. Neighbors was startled and frightened by his boldness and spontaneity, though slightly aroused by his nude display. [5:40 to 7:45]

Okay, there’s a lot to cover here. We’ll discuss it little by little.

I find it interesting that when he arrives at his friend’s house, Mr. Neighbors describes the atmosphere as “weird”. In the context of his past actions, the environment created in that house wasn’t “weird” (or unexpected) at all. As we’ve just discussed, through the actions of the “straight” friend, the friendship was steadily taking a more erotic tone. This was merely the logical next step in that progression – that they end up alone, in a place where no one can see them, with plenty of time to kill.

Given his past actions, it’s immediately clear what the “straight” friend had in mind. To spell it out, he had sex on his mind. He wanted to have sex with Mr. Neighbors, and he created the perfect setup for it. The presence of the hot tub was the perfect excuse to not wear clothes. The fact that it was their aunt’s house meant that, more than likely, nobody nearby would know who they were. They could have had naked and steamy sex for hours on end, and no one in their lives would be the wiser. 

I should say here that when I say “sex”, I’m not including anal play here. I doubt very strongly that the “straight” friend wanted to do that. “Straight” guys generally don’t. He probably had mutual masturbation, fellatio, and other non-penetrative acts in mind instead. 

To me, a telltale sign of the friend’s intentions was the hug they shared. It was a very long hug, to an extent that Mr. Neighbors had to make note of. While it seems that they’ve hugged each other before, it was evidently longer than normal. There’s a reason why it was so long. That hug functioned as a heartfelt welcome, and as a prelude to what the “straight” friend desired.

Now, through his approach, the friend was illustrating what was detailed in “This Blog’s Guide to Having Male-Male Sex”. Under the subheading “Continuing to Up the Ante”, I said that escalation can take one of two tracks. One is where escalation is explicitly sexual in nature, where the friends (and anyone watching) can see that they’re going headfirst into sexual activity. The escalation cannot be disguised as nothing other than sexual. The other is where escalation is achieved through activities that, on their face, aren’t sexual at all. In that arrangement, sex happens “accidentally on purpose”, where those activities are thinly veiled conduits for eroticism. 

In the case of the “straight” friend, he was taking the second track. That’s why he initially said that many more people would be at his aunt’s house. The truth is he likely had no intention of inviting anybody else. That became clear when Mr. Neighbors arrived there. However, if Mr. Neighbors told anybody else about this arrangement in advance, that functioned as a good cover for why they would be alone in a strange house with a hot tub. If they ended up alone, it would seem purely accidental. Plus the stated setup for getting together – to play video games and enjoy a hot tub – would handily disguise the obvious sexual intent of their meetup.

He’s far from the only one who does this. I can give examples of both methods of escalation from my own life. Both of them have happened within the past two years, to show that this is the norm in non-”gay” homoeroticism. 

Thinly veiled escalation – One day, I came to a friend’s house during the early afternoon, and in the dead of winter. He does freelance work, and his girlfriend was working and wasn’t home.

When I arrived, we shared a long body-to-body hug, almost like Mr. Neighbors described in his own encounter. Then, we just settled down, relaxed, and talked about all kinds of topics. It was a studio apartment, so it wasn’t large. As such, there also weren’t many places to sit, since the sofa had all kinds of things on it. He otherwise had two wooden chairs and his bed.

While I was in a nearby chair, I really wanted to sit on the bed since it was more comfy. He said that I could if I wanted to, but on one condition. He didn’t like foreign material on his bed, and outside clothes could carry all kinds of stuff. Thus, if I wanted to sit there, I’d have to do so in my underwear.

On the surface, this was simply a matter of hygiene. However, he didn’t have this rule when I visited his apartment for the first time, which was just a few weeks prior. I had taken off my coat upon entry, but up until that point I was otherwise dressed. My friend was in his pajamas, in a t-shirt and sweatpants. Evidently, he was hoping I’d take the cue and strip down to my underwear too. He was likely hoping that we’d wear even less as the afternoon wore on. 

Explicitly sexual escalation – One day, me and another friend were working on a mutual project. We were in a public place, though our location and the time of day meant that almost nobody saw us. 

During our meetup, our legs were brushing against each other continuously. However, on his own and without warning, my friend firmly pressed his leg against mine. He did it for a long time, the pressure was hard, and the leg was noticeably warm. I’m sure he noticed the huge erection that was growing in my pants. In response, I put my arm around his firm back, which he relaxed into. His leg was still pressed against mine even then. 

Our breathing became slowly but noticeably heavier. The distance between us kept decreasing as we kept talking. At random, he lifted up his shirt and showed me his abs, which I’ll admit were impressive. In response and a few minutes later, I lifted up my shirt too, and showed the lower half of the tank top I was wearing underneath. Our conversation throughout this whole time was laden with sexual innuendo. Casually in conversation, he gave me a standing invitation to his place, where he has his own apartment under his parents’ own. 

In this case, anybody watching us would have seen what was happening. There was no way to disguise it. We clearly had the hots for each other, and wanted each other badly. Furthermore, it was pretty obvious that both of us knew full well what we wanted. 

~~~~

I won’t go into further detail with either experience, because they’re not really relevant here. I said these to illustrate that this sort of escalation isn’t unusual. If a guy is interested in another guy, this is the usual line of progression into sexual activity.

By the way, I should mention that both of them had girlfriends at the time, and still have them today. If they know of me, I highly doubt they know the details of my interactions with their boyfriends. This shows a fact I mentioned in a past post – that men will desire other men whether they have girlfriends/wives or not. It doesn’t mean they don’t love the women in their lives, nor does it mean that they are secretly “gay”. They are merely exhibiting a natural and normal desire that society refuses to recognize as such. But I digress. 

This is the main point. Because Mr. Neighbors is so used to “gay” homoeroticism, these actions caught him by surprise. That’s why he said it was “weird”. By saying that, he really meant that the erotic atmosphere in the house caught him off guard. He couldn’t see that this was one more step in the erotic progression already in motion. 

This relates to another noteworthy part of this excerpt. In that same “Male-Male Sex” article, communal nudity was identified as a good way to facilitate sexual escalation. The presence of the hot tub gave a good excuse for those friends to strip. It was a body of water, and traditionally, men swam in bodies of water naked anyway. 

So it’s interesting that when this opportunity for communal nudity presented itself, the prude was…the “gay” guy. Remember that Mr. Neighbors was perfectly happy with changing into his swimsuit. It was the “straight” friend who decided to go naked. Mr. Neighbors went naked only after the “straight” friend persuaded him to do so. Plus even after they stripped, Mr. Neighbors seemed far more self-conscious about it than the “straight” friend was. 

That’s not all though. When he wanted to change into his swimsuit, it seems Mr. Neighbors wanted to go into a separate room, out of his “straight” friend’s sight. So he wasn’t comfortable being seen naked even momentarily.

This relates to a point made in part 3 of our Everyday Nudity series, which touched on communal showers. That post said that, while “straights” and “gays” are scared of communal nudity, “gays” are way more terrified of it. “Straight” people don’t like it because it seems too “gay” for them. Meanwhile, “gays” are scared of it because it might expose their sexuality, which they feel insecure about. In other words, “straights” fear it will make them look like something they’re not. “Gays” fear it because it will expose something inherent in them – their same-sex attraction – that they feel self-conscious about. 

As a result, “straight” people might have an easier time embracing communal nudity. Once they lose the fear of looking “gay”, communal nudity poses less of an issue. They have a lower psychological hurdle to get over, which “gays” do not have. This might seem counterintuitive: since “gays” are openly into their own gender, one would think that they’d relish being naked with other guys. To the contrary, as is clearly shown here, “gays” end up being more prudish about it. 

Let’s go back to the video, where the chasm between “gay” and non-”gay” homoeroticism reaches its widest point. 

Once they get into the hot tub, they initially stayed a long distance apart. The “straight” friend took the initiative to close the distance, and they end up sitting side by side. They continued talking with each other, during which the “straight” friend has a bit more liquor. 

While the “straight” friend seemed to be relaxed, Mr. Neighbors was nervous, flustered and bewildered. To him, all this happened at an uncomfortably fast pace. Eventually, there came a long pause in the conversation. Mr. Neighbors thought about what to do, wondering if both of them will realize that this shouldn’t be happening between them. Then, the “straight” guy grabbed Mr. Neighbors’ head, and gave him a passionate kiss. He released Mr. Neighbors from his embrace, and after looking at each other, they start laughing. 

The “straight” friend confesses that he was curious to see if he would like this. He says he didn’t, and apparently allows Mr. Neighbors to give his two cents. [7:45 to 9:10]

As you can see, throughout this whole encounter, it was the “gay” guy who was pulling back. Contrary to popular belief, in this case, the “gay” guy was the one who was slowing the escalation. When they entered the hot tub, they stayed far apart. That wouldn’t have happened without both guys feeling that they needed to maintain their difference. Then, popular belief is again turned on its head when the “straight” guy decided to come closer. In the world of modern sexual philosophy, the “gay” guy should be the one pursuing same-sex activity, while the “straight” guy should be resisting. That clearly wasn’t happening here.

Now a key question – why was Mr. Neighbors resisting the escalation at every turn? On one level, it’s because this is a kind of homoeroticism he’s not used to. He says that it all happened too fast for him to fully remember. Once again, this is because he didn’t read the signs the “straight” friend was giving him. If he did, he would have been far less surprised. I know I wouldn’t be surprised if I were in his position. 

A deeper answer comes when he says that this whole encounter shouldn’t be happening. He felt so evidently because of their places in the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy. Mr. Neighbors was “gay”, his friend was “straight”, and as such their relationship should be sexless. To Mr. Neighbors, the difference in their status simply didn’t make same-sex activity feasible or advisable.

This in itself is another contradiction of the dichotomy’s logic. In Mr. Neighbors’ mind, the dichotomy’s lines are sacrosanct and shouldn’t be crossed. They should stick to their own side of the fence, so to speak. Meanwhile, the “straight” guy obviously didn’t care about those lines at all. It should be the other way around, where if sexual opportunities with “straight” guys arise, a “gay” guy would happily cross over the line. The “straight” guy should be the one trying to prop the boundary up, to protect his own “straight” identity from injury. Again, that clearly wasn’t happening here. 

If Mr. Neighbors still had doubts about what the “straight” friend had in mind, the friend soon put all doubts to rest. He grabbed Mr. Neighbors’ head and started making out with him. At this point, the “straight” friend is making abundantly clear that he wants to have sex with Mr. Neighbors, and that he’s all set and ready to go.

After they stop kissing, the “straight” friend says that he was curious to see if he would like it, and says he didn’t. Personally, I think he was hedging through that statement. After all, he was the one driving the erotic escalation the whole time. He was the one who arranged this meetup, the one who made them strip naked, and the one who closed the distance in the hot tub. Finally, he chose to kiss another man naked in a hot tub. If he was able to do that much, he was quite capable of doing so much more. 

A kiss takes two to tango. While they were kissing, the “straight” friend probably detected Mr. Neighbors’ resistance. So through that statement, he put the ball in Mr. Neighbors’ court. While he said that he wasn’t into it, he certainly left the door open to be convinced otherwise, if Mr. Neighbors really wanted to go the distance.

So now is the moment of truth. It’s all up to Mr. Neighbors at this point. Depending on what he says, the encounter can go headfirst into sex, or stop dead in its tracks. So what will Mr. Neighbors do? The next portion of the video tells us what happens. 

In retrospect, Mr. Neighbors says it was like kissing his brother. As such, he did not feel comfortable about it at all. While he found him sexually attractive, in Mr. Neighbors’ mind, they were too close to make a sexual relationship possible.

In his answer to his “straight” friend’s question, he basically says the same thing. Thus, they towel off, get dressed, go upstairs, and resume playing video games. From how Mr. Neighbors describes it, it sounds like he took the initiative to end the encounter. Nothing like that ever happens again, and they remain friends for years afterwards. Apparently, they are still friends until today. 

Currently, the “straight” friend is married and has children. According to Mr. Neighbors, he is one of the happiest people he’s ever known. 

Mr. Neighbors then tells us the moral of the story – don’t put people into categories. He saw from personal experience that “straight” and “gay” identities aren’t absolute. “Straight” people might end up “experimenting”, and that’s okay. He’s happy that all this happened. Because of this, he had a fulfilling friendship that he wouldn’t have had otherwise. Plus, he could be there to help him “experiment and figure out what he liked”. [9:10 to 10:53]

This was the part that drove me crazy. A chance to have a hot sexual encounter fell right into his lap – and he turned it down. If I was in his position, I would have went full speed ahead with it. 

The reason why he rejected it is even more bizarre. Mr. Neighbors said that he couldn’t have sex with his friend because when he kissed him, it felt like he was kissing his brother. Once again, this illustrates the great disconnect between “gay” homoeroticism and non-”gay” homoeroticism. While that thought made Mr. Neighbors squeamish, such an idea is considered ideal in the latter kind of homoeroticism. In the g0y movement, there are multiple stories existing where male lovers became closer BECAUSE they felt like brothers. The same can be said with the Man2Man Alliance, where lovers often describe each other positively has brothers. As such, it’s profound to see that something that is ideal to many can also turn others off. 

At the same time, this also illustrates the impact of anal sex on male-male sexual relationships. In “gay” homoeroticism, as is well known, anal sex reins supreme. The act pivots on dynamics of dominance and submission, where one must be a “top” and another must be a “bottom”. Sex between two “tops” or two “bottoms” is considered impractical, since someone must dominate the other for “gay” sex to work. In such an environment, sex is thus defined by unequal role playing. There is simply no philosophical room for sex to be valid yet equal. 

This is why Mr. Neighbors felt sex with his friend was repulsive. Mr Neighbors felt so close to that friend, he viewed him like a brother. To make it more simple, he viewed him as an equal. As such, while he admitted that he found him sexually desirable, the thought of sex turned him off. Given his experience in “gay” homoeroticism, he couldn’t reconcile sex with his friendship. The friend was too equal to him to have sex with. 

Here’s my question – shouldn’t sex be between lovers who consider each other equals? Isn’t sex itself a mutual adventure that excites its partners equally? Yet, from what can be seen here, such an idea is impossible in the “gay” community. This is why two “tops” or two “bottoms” cannot have a workable “gay” relationship to most “gays”. In the eyes of the “gay” community, good sex must be defined by inequality. 

And as a result, both Mr. Neighbors and his friend lost out. Mr. Neighbors lost out on bonding with his friend more closely. The friend lost out on exploring sexual urges that were natural and normal to him. As such, I think that deep down, that friend must have been crushed when Mr. Neighbors turned him down. 

The only thing that I fully agree with is the conclusion made by Mr. Neighbors – that people shouldn’t be put in categories. However, this whole video pivoted on maintaining and sustaining those categories. When one tried crossing the red line between “gay” and “straight”, the “gay” guy managed to keep both sides separate. In the end, and despite what Mr. Neighbors says, the categories won out here.

Concluding Remarks

So after this long analysis, let’s sum up what we’ve just seen. At the surface, this looks like another case of a “straight” guy wanting to do “gay” things. He hits it off with a fellow video gamer who happens to be “gay”. They have a fulfilling friendship because they respect each other’s places in the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy. When the “straight” guy risks disturbing that dynamic, the “gay” guy acts in the best interests of both. Thus, the friendship remains sexless, continues as normal, and everything ends happily ever after. At least, that’s how the story goes in the way Mr. Neighbors tells it. 

However, you’ve just seen how different the deeper story actually was. This really was a story of the chasm between “gay” and non-”gay” homoeroticism. Mr. Neighbors came from the world of the former, while the “straight” guy came from the latter. The truth is the “straight” friend was sexually pursuing Mr. Neighbors the whole time. It’s just that Mr. Neighbors couldn’t see that, because the pursuit was done in a mode of homoeroticism that he couldn’t understand. Ultimately, that disconnect blocked them from a sexual encounter that they might have immensely enjoyed, and could have brought them closer together. 

Let me be clear – though Mr. Neighbors takes a positive tone toward the end, this is not a happy ending. In fact, it’s actually quite tragic. Mr Neighbors feels that the encounter was an aberration in his friend’s behavior, and that he discovered he was fully “straight” and stayed that way. I can tell him that is not the case at all. I guarantee that those same desires and emotions are still inside that friend today, even as you finish reading this sentence. The only difference is that they are deeply sealed up today, and the next time they’re expressed, the outcome might be explosive and detrimental. 

In a larger context, this story also exemplifies a point often made here – that the “straight” and “gay” labels are two sides of the same coin. Both work to suppress same-sex activity, and to distort what cannot be suppressed. The “straight” label suppresses same-sex activity in ways that are obvious and well known. This story shows the less obvious ways in which the “gay” label does the same. 

As you’ve just seen, the “gay” guy was the one who throttled the potential of that sexual encounter. He did so because the mode motivating the encounter – non-”gay” homoeroticism – was one he didn’t understand. There are other “gay” men like him who would probably do the same. Meanwhile, the “gay” homoeroticism he knows pivots on anal play, which turns male-male sex into an unequal role playing expedition that undermines mutual respect. The combination of these two phenomena end up reducing the frequency and prevalence of same-sex activity, as this story shows clearly.

Though you might think otherwise, I’m not angry with Mr. Neighbors. I’m taken aback at the story he’s just told, and stunned at how he doesn’t realize the tragedy of it. However, even so, I’m not angry with him. He’s just practicing what he’s been taught, which is the problem. The problem identified by this story is bigger than him, his friend or this writer. It has to do with an entire system designed to keep same-sex activity to a minimum, and it is a system that must go. 

If there’s any consolation, it seems this experience has made him question modern sexual philosophy a little. Indeed, at the end, he said that this experience taught him not to put people in categories. Of course, the categories remain rigid by the end of his story. Regardless, on some level, he recognizes that the labels of “straight” and “gay” don’t fully capture the entirety of human sexuality. On some level, he perceives that modern sexual philosophy (and the labels they produce) aren’t perfect.

There are many others like him who, through whatever means, realize that these labels are lacking. However, like Mr. Neighbors, they might not understand just how wrong those labels are. That’s who this blog is trying to address, and it has plenty of resources to move that process forward. 

Thus, I urge you to read further on this site, to explore another way to think about same-sex activity. I urge you to read “The ‘Straight’-’Gay’ Dichotomy: How It Works”, to fully understand how that system functions. I also urge any who read this to go to “For Straight People (though not exclusively)”, which will point to philosophies and forms of same-sex behavior that don’t hinge on demonstratively false concepts. Also read the page “History of the Concept of Homosexuality”, to see how this concept evolved into its modern day meaning. Don’t be afraid of talking about what you learn to others, because that’s the only way progress will be made.

And if you wish to experience same-sex activity in your own life, or in a way different from the LGBT sex model, please read this blog’s “Guide to Male-Male Sex without Anal”. Though it’s written with men in mind, women might also find the information therein valuable. 

This video was intriguing for all the wrong reasons. However, if nothing else, it shows that skepticism on the labels exists even among those who wear them. Thus, there is hope that in the future, these strange labels will completely be discarded. Thus, love will be allowed to flow between males, between females, and between males and females.