Posts made by Shami94

https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/06/06/how-homosexuality-became-a-crime-in-the-middle-east

You really need to educate yourself with some academic sources, not web sites like "religion of peace" FFS. The Islamic world has a large body of homoerotic literature and art. Homosexual sex was explicitly legalised in the Ottoman Empire (including the whole of the Middle-East) in the mid-19th Century, long before it was legalised in the West. European homosexual men fled to Islamic Morroco, Greece (under Ottoman rule) etc. to flee persecution at home. Iran had a royal gay wedding in the 1970's. Homosexual sex was only made illegal in Iran in 1979 and in Saudi Arabia (in imitation) in 1980, both for political reasons, not religious. Islamic history has stories of several rulers who had sexual relationships with other men, for example several of the Caliphs of Cordoba and Babur, the founder or the Mughal Empire in India.

Yes, of course homosexuality existed before it was understood by modern psychology but the concept of an innate subconscious behavioural preference did not. The concept did not exist and there was no word for it. Yes, men have been having sex with men for as long as there have been men. Formal sexual relationships between men and men or men and adolescents existed in many cultures including Ancient Greece and Rome but it was not understood in the way that we do now.

The Quran and the Bible may condemn sex between men but:

1. The majority of homosexuals are women.
2. There are many homosexual men who do not or have not yet had sex with another man.
3. Surveys show that a small proportion of heterosexual men have sex with other men and given the small proportion of men who are homosexual, the number of heterosexual men who have sex with other men actually outnumbers the total number of homosexual who have sex with men.

So that translation of "a men having sex with another man" as "homosexuality" is an error. No one has ever been punished in any religion for being homosexual. They have been punished for having sex with another man. That is completely different and punishments for having sex outside marriage are typically just as severe if not worse.

I'm amazed by the level of ignorance in this thread. It's hard to know where to start. Sadly a lot of Americans are heavily influenced by propaganda in that country. First let me say that I was born a Hindu but I am now a Zen Buddhist. Although my main tertiary education is in Mathematics, Computer Science (and I am now studying for a PhD in that field), I took several subjects in religion at University. So here are some facts:

1. the word "homosexuality" first appeared in print in Austria in the late 1800's. The concept of sexuality (an innate subconscious sexual attraction) is modern: the product of modern psychological understanding and the theory of the subconscious mind. There is no reference to homosexuality in the Quran. There is no reference to homosexuality in the Bible. The first translation of the Bible that included the word "homosexual" was in 1941. This translates sexual acts as sexuality which is clearly an (probably intentional) error by modern homophobes.

2. When someone quotes "Kill the infidels wherever you find them" (post number two), you know you are dealing with someone completely brainwashed by the lies and distortions of the US far right propaganda machine. The "Infidels" in that verse refers specifically to the people of Mecca who were persecuting the Muslims in the early days of Islam as is very clear by the wider context. Islam in fact is the only world religion that specifically recognises other religions (Judaism and Christianity aka the "people of the book") as valid.

3. "People like to cherry pick from their religion" from some other post. Religion is defined by what the people who identify as members of that religion actually believe and actually do. It is not defined by what is written in books or what religious leaders say. In Christianity, there is the Catholic/Protestant polemic where the reformation attempted to claim that the literal interpretation of the Bible was more important than the traditions and beliefs of the Christian community. This ONLY applies to Christianity. Until only very recently (late 19th century under the influence of Christian missionaries), this was completely alien to Islam and remains alien to all of the other world religions. It is the weirdest thing you will ever read on social media where Christian (influenced) people try to tell Muslims what they believe by quoting the Quran and Hadiths at them. The vast majority of Muslims have never read the Quran and certainly not the Hadiths. Religion is learned within families and social groups, not from reading a book and very little from listening to religious teachers.

In my experience, growing up in Mysore and Bangalore in India and now living in Australia, Muslim families are more tolerant and understanding of their gay sons than most other families. In the same-sex marriage vote in Australia recently, surveys showed that the percentage vote in favour in Muslim communities was lower than the community in general, but higher than in evangelical Christians or even in the Chinese community.

Cock rings, bubble butts, huge bulges, button up jeans that show huge bulges, public sex (people watching me fuck someone).

The word "homosexual" first appeared in print in the 1860's. It is the product of modern psychological understanding and the theory of the unconscious or subconscious mind. The concept of an innate unconscious behavioural disposition did not exist before then.

The earliest translation of the Bible that contains the word "homosexual" was in 1941. If we accept that the Greek word "Arsenokoites" means a man bedding (having sex with) and another man, something highly debatable, homosexuality is an obviously incorrect translation.

1. more than half of homosexuals are women.
2. many homosexual men don't or have not yet had sex with another man, but they are still homosexuals.
3. if surveys are to believed, the small proportion of heterosexual men that have had sex with another man actually outnumber the total number of homosexual men since the proportion of men who are homosexual is so small.
4. Sexuality refers to a disposition, i.e. who are are sexuality attracted to. It does not refer to any sexual act.

The modern translations of the Bible that print the word "homosexual" are therefore clearly and absolutely wrong. The mistranslation changes the meaning from condemning people for what they do, to condemning people for how they were born.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Arsenokoites

http://canyonwalkerconnections.com/word-homosexual-first-introduced-bible/

https://www.forgeonline.org/blog/2019/3/8/what-about-romans-124-27

Hi,

a few years I wen't to Bodh Gaya in India. I am a Buddhist and Bodh Gaya is a sacred place for Buddhists. I met a guy there and he gave me a gift of a Mala, a string of prayer beads which had been kept in the hands of the Buddha statue in the temple overnight.

Later we had sex and he told me that I should take off the prayer beads whenever I have sex or go to the toilet because they are sacred. To me, as a Zen Buddhist, all of my experience is equal and I don't think there is anything polluting or not sacred about about having sex or even going to the toilet.

What do other religions think about this? For example if your are Christian and wear a crucifix, do you take it off when you have sex?

The world of publishing has changed hugely since Stephen King started. Authors used to double line space type their work (with a paper and ink typewriter) or employ a secretary to do it. Then they would manually edit the work themselves (with pen and red ink) or employ an editor. For an established author, their publisher would edit the manuscript, often with little control from the author. Design, typesetting, marketing etc.. were all obviously done by the publisher.

With modern computers, there is the strong temptation for authors to try to do everything and try to do it all at once. Using a WYSIWYG editors like Word, they write, spellcheck, edit, design and typeset while they should be focussing on the writing. Then with self-publishing being so big, authors try to do their own marketing.

In the last few years there has been a big shift away from this. Writing tools like Ulysses and Scrivener try to let authors focus on their writing and push everything else to proper later steps. In these tools, you write in plain text with minimal markup for titles etc.. After all, there is absolutely no point for an author to worry about fonts and page breaks etc.. when books are very often read with eReaders with variable screen sizes and the ability of the reader to change the fonts. The apps then use pre-made or customisable style sheets to format and typeset the book.

1. write your book in plain text. In your first draft, don't worry too much about grammar, syntax, spelling. Just be creative.
2. Edit your next few versions yourself until you have got it right.
3. Use online tools like Grammarly to check the grammar and syntax or there are plenty of people who will offer to proof read and correct your book online for a small fee.
4. Is your goal really to make money or to express yourself?

Most publishing deals (with printed books) will only give you 25 - 30% royalty and you will usually sign away your rights, but you will get design and marketing for that. You will get much higher royalties from self-publishing, e.g. 70% from Amazon KDP but you will have to do marketing (or pay them or someone else to). Amazon offers print on demand version though you will have to design the cover properly and they keep a lot more of the money.

No. I feel lucky to be gay. Now I am living in Australia, but I grew up in India. It is harder for gay people there but the lives of straight people seem worse somehow. Even in Australia, straight people's lives are so conventional and boring. Straight married men are dead.

@underlvr:

For gay mystery/detective/p.i. books you might consider Mark Richard Zubro, Joseph Hansen, Robert Innes, Gyles Brandreth, Frank W. Butterfield, Greg Herren, Richard Stevenson, R.D. Zimmerman, Dorien Grey, Josh Lanyon, Anthony Bidulka, Neil S. Plakcy, Lev Raphael, James Buchanan, Victor J. Banis, Orland Outland, Mark McNease, and Michael Nava.  Duncan Andrews combines mystery and sci-fi in his books.  Christopher Rice is a good author in the sci-fi/paranormal genre.  One female writer that I felt was good in the gay detective genre is Charlie Cochrane.

Josh Lanyon is a straight woman.

One of the torrents I am seeding has been active continously for a few days now. One peer is connected and they have downloaded 7.5G so far. However, the file is only 66M! It also shows their download progress always at 0%.

Obviously this would be helping my ratio but killing their's, but should I be concerned or do anything about it?

I always like to mention a book called Jalendu by Mark Andrew. It is very long but worth it. It has a realistic gay coming of age and love story but also is historical/political fiction set in 16th century India. More importantly at has a philosophy or spirituality (though not religious) that changed me a lot personally.

You can get it from GT

https://www.gaytorrent.ru/details.php?id=fab8df6cb867de87b9f5b89e8d356c2c94a94ebcd513955e

The problem is though that for most of the straight women who read these books, as well as for closeted young gay men discovering their identities, fiction purporting to be "gay romance" which is actually a heterosexual woman's fantasy about what it would be like for her to have a cock, with a fake gay male identity and name and a fictional backstory about how they grew up as a gay man, is going to be the primary source of information about what gay men are actually like.

Yes, some women write good gay characters, but why do so many straight women writing "gay romance" have to lie about who they are?

There is a good article here on this question:

https://electricliterature.com/why-are-so-many-gay-romance-novels-written-by-straight-women-e1ad2ad2f5c8

"Seeing yourself, whether it’s on the screen or on the page, is a powerful experience. So often, though, for queer people, the options are either super whitewashed or rooted in hurtful stereotypes. In gay romance novels, it’s both, and straight women writers are responsible."

"The author handles her gay characters like dolls, using them to act out her desires. She shoves the rubber faces together and smudges them against one another: Now kiss. The characters, who are labeled as gay, are only fantasies — -straight women’s fantasies, shared with an audience of straight women. The first time I read a novel like this, from its sex scenes to its deep, emotional dialog, all I could think was, Is this what we are to you?"

But it is worse than that, because so many young gay men reading this shit think that is what gay men ARE like. There is nothing in the book information or online that tells you that this was actually written by a straight women.

I remember when Josh Lanyon finally publicly admitted that she is a woman how upset a lot of her young gay male fans were.

An Anglican priest in Australia put up a sign outside his church calling the Australian government minister in charge of immigration a sodomite.  He explained that according to a correct reading of the bible, the "sin of sodom" is not a man having sex with another man. The sin of sodom is inhospitality.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/anglican-priest-rod-bower-brands-peter-dutton-a-sodomite-in-social-media-post-20170930-gyrtk5.html

"The sin of Sodom is greatly misunderstood by those who usually choose to do so, it has nothing to do with homosexuality, it is all about hospitality, or more to the point lack thereof, and particularly about the condition of the heart that leads to inhospitable behaviour," Fr Bower said in the post.

I'm curious about this from another topic. Retrograde ejaculation is when your semen goes up into your bladder instead of out through your penis when you have an orgasm. The semen then comes out later when you pee.

There is an article about it here https://www.epainassist.com/pelvic-pain/retrograde-ejaculation

It is usually thought to be a sexual health problem, but I used to know a guy in Indonesia who could do it deliberately but I never knew exactly how he did it. He started doing it as a young teen so that he could masturbate in bed but not make a mess. Also that article further down has a section on doing it deliberately as a form of contraception.

I'm curious. Does anyone here do it? If so how and why?

The article I mentioned above says doing it deliberately doesn't cause any problems, but I wonder if it does and what it feels like.

Teacher, if I can fuck him. My ex says he lost his virginity with one of his high school teachers. The way he described it sounds like he was raped but my ex bf doesn't see it that way. For example he said he had to hide his underwear because they had blood on them.

I don't think I've met a guy for sex who didn't make precum. I think I make too much.

I can never piss when I have an erection. Interesting fantasy though. I don't think my bf will be into it.

I think so. Google "coitus saxonicus" and also retrograde ejaculation. If the cock ring is tight, it can cause you to ejaculate up into your bladder. Some guys can do it deliberately by squeezing the base of their shaft when they are having an orgasm so they don't make a mess. I know an Indonesian guy who used to do it when we had Skype sex. "coitus saxonicus" is an old way of birth control by learning how to do it. I can't do it but when I cum wearing a cock ring, it feels like my cock suddenly swells up extremely and the cum squirts out with a lot of pressure. Also sometimes when its a big load, my pee hole hurts later.

It makes my cock very hard but also makes me last longer. My BF says he can feel it harder and also feel it inside him when I'm cumming. But I also like to wear it normally under my clothes, but I always get hard when I'm putting it on and sometimes too hard to get it on. I get erection too easily.

Hi,

I bought stainless steel cock ring. I can get it on when I'm soft by putting one ball in, pulling sack through, then squeeze other ball through and then thread soft cock down between the top of the ring and my balls, but there is no way I can do that if I'm already hard. Does anyone know a way to do it?