John Galaor

It is very difficult to interpret this scans with certainty. If you watch the brain scan of a tennis player, it can be quite different to that of a mathematician or of a pianist. The single fact that they think and act different made the wiring of their brain different. This do not alter the hypothesis that basic homosexuality can have of genetic origin. Then, as we has seen in the case of homosexual animals, the circumstances can play an important role in sexuality as a fact. Look for "Biological Exuberance" in Google, or here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals There is also a concept called epigenetics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics Well, then I can add another concept, social pressure. This can cause inhibitions in some development in the wiring of the brain, by depressing the productivity of some hormonal glands. The person can get stunted in their body development and intelligence. In cases more ordinary, other glands can also remained less developed due to social harassment. This could explain, by example, the more frequent case of homosexuality among boys who had several older brothers. The explanation calls for the older brothers harassing and bullying the younger one. In other case, the first son born could had come to this world in moments of crisis for the mother, or even the family. This could depress also the physical development of the child, and make it prone to be gay. Nevertheless, these commentaries do not preclude basic conditions that could determine the future sexual behavior of a child, as being strongly gay or strongly heterosexual. There is a basic genetic condition of physical development that can go forward also in bad conditions. Among the many peers in a litter, the stronger use to rob the food to the weaker. And in families with scarce food at the table, the older or more aggressive brother feeds himself better than the younger or weaker brothers. This early competence for food makes for aggressive brothers, and aggressive families. Countries in which this condition is common, are prone to have civil wars, and gangs of bandits and guerrillas. What I mean social conditions, or said in a different way, the experience of a child, his perceived rank among his peers are going to determine how much this strength would develop. The next question is "are there any aggressive and top gun gays?" They can exist but are not very common. Other question is how to explain the case. It seems counter-intuitive the case of an aggressive gay who trains in karate and had achieved the rank of San-dan, third degree black belt. My theory is that too much work, study or sport make lust to sag a lot. Then, unless this person would have a week or two of vacations doing nothing at all, his lust will be almost inexistent. Well, the Spartan warriors, as well as other ancient warriors from Thessaly, Beothia, Creta, or the Samurai, were known to form love couples. It was very frequent the samurais would cultivate an androgynous look. But they were respectable, because they were fearsome warriors that were easily offended with the most insignificant sign of disrespect. The ancient Greek warriors were similar in this, and they made a show off of their beauty and long hair, that hanged down in curls. For the battle, the long hair was recoiled in a bun. The bun was also an important adornment among the samurais. No other people, except ladies could wear a bun on their heads. You suppose well thinking the bun of the ladies was different to one of the warriors. Even the form of bun among ladies reflected the social rank they had. So there were different forms of buns. What a I mean, social conventions could play an important role of what we can see in a society. The next question could be, there were effeminates among Greeks? Yeah. They were called Hermaphroditus. There was also an important myth about Hermophroditus, a son of Hermes and Aphrodite. There was also some temples in several parts of the Peloponnese for persons that felt like girls in boy's bodies. Hermes and Aphrodite was considered the perfect couple. But the personality of both divinities was son strong that his son/daughter was at the same time male and female. When a boy had a strong feminine look it was considered an image of Hermaphroditus.

In the armies of some Ancient People was rather frequent the homosexual relations. It helped to the relax the warriors in times of rest. It also reinforced bonds between pairs of warriors of different age. Life in times of frequent wars was short. Those warriors were put aside from the breeding program. It would be too costly to maintain an army with married soldiers, with wives and children. So, most of the warriors in Ancient Greece were single, and could mostly not marry because they do not inherited the land or properties of their fathers. The inheritance was for the first born son. Then, due to the problems of overpopulation the women had not any sexual freedom. This phenomenon of homosexuality happens often in monasteries, boarding schools, armies, navies, etc. It was mostly a hidden affair not only because the Jewish heritage of Christianity in regard to homosexuality, but also, because in a warrior culture, virility was a virtue. Then, to play the subordinate role of being an insertee was considered demeaning. For it put the male in the same rank as the female, that has had a much lower social status. Then, in some armies, like the samurais, it was deemed immodest to speak openly about the facts of love. Existed some couples that made oaths of friendship or fraternity for life. The lovers were called, older brother and the younger one. But it was not allowed to speak of the essence of love. It was assumed that everybody knew what love was about, what implicated to have a lover, but the norms of decency obliged to maintain the essence of love a secret. Nevertheless it was permitted to manifest some discreet signs of affection among lovers. The warriors in Ancient Greece, were paired in couples for the battle and most times they died together. In general, the older warrior was the teacher of the younger one. The younger one kept an eye to the rearguard of his older lover and around, on his flanks. There were many famous couples in the Ancient Stories. The most famous couple is Achilles and Patroclus in the Iliad. By the drawings in the Greek ceramics we know that Patroclus was the "erastés", the older lover, for it was painted with large beard. While Achilles, that was the "erómeno" for he was painted younger without a beard, as can be seen in the Sosias Cup in Berlin, where Achilles in bandaging Patroclus. The erastés is the one who feels the "eros", while the "erómenos" provokes the "eros" with his beauty. Eros means "desire"; that's all. While "philia" means friendship and love, and can be applied to more relations like love among brothers, father-son, or simply love among friends or companions in the army, etc. But philia also meant "eros". The word is related to philein (to love, to kiss). Then, the philia was the word used for those that live in couples. For in a way, the philia was like eros in action, the accomplishing the dreams of desire. In Sparta young couples performed oaths of philia in the altar of Hyacinthus in Amyclae, a few miles from Sparta, that was near the most famous temple of Apollo. For there is a complex story between Hyacinthus and Apollo that was in celebrated each year with paean. All the military was stopped to celebrate the Hyacinthia, a paian feast in honor of Hyacinth. The myth says that Apollo and Zephyr (the god of western wind) loved young Hyacinthus. Then Apollo was playing with the boy and threw his disc up to the air, that went too far high in the sky, then as it returned the jealous god Zephyr, blew up and changed the course of the disc in such a way that killed young Hyacinthus. So, in the feast there was a ceremony in two parts. The first was to mourn the death of Hyacinthus and later ended with a reveling celebrating his resurrection, for Apollo resurrected the loving boy, for Apollo was also healer god and had powers to resurrect the dead. Among the samurai existed also couples of lovers. They had made an oath of brotherhood that lasted the whole life. In general, the members of the couple were called older brother and younger brother. For in those ancient cultures, either the Greek or the Japanese, the sexual role was determined by the age. The older member was considered the insertor, while the younger one was the insertee. The social protocols determined that only the older man could do some advances, or some courting to the younger male. The younger male had to show due modesty and demureness, and resist for a long time the courtship, feigning to be ashamed or blushing, with so many loving attentions. On the contrary, that a young male would propose or court an older male was considered an social infraction compared to whoring. It was a capital sin, something like trashy and of bad taste. The same idea happened in China, were the tradition was also established by age. The older lover was the top, and the younger one was like the virginal lady. Then, in all cases, either in Japan, China or Ancient Greece, the loving couples were quite respectable, because with the least provocation over the dignity of one them, there was more than enough reason to start a mortal fight. In general, in the case of China, the stories are more related to aristocrats, or the emperor. It does not disprove that there was also some homosexuality in the lower ranks of society. This is universal, and the hornier older boys were courting also the younger male aiming to perform a copulation or other services. In the Kabuki theater, it became notorious the quarrelsome nature of the samurais that could engage in a mortal combat with swords for the right of being the first to use the services of the young-man that played the role of heroine. The Kabuki originally was played by women, and to avoid the mortal duels that occurred with samurais that wanted to be the first to get the first actress, the Shogun forbade women to act in theaters. Then, as a young man was playing the role of first girl, the fights were then for the right to get the young actor the first. Most actors in the Japanese theater had to supplement their earnings by whoring their asses. On occasions, the prices paid for the sexual services of the cute young actors were very high, and a few of them become rich. The monetary success of the young actor was also good for all, as a part of the revenues were used to pay the expanses of the company. That said, the story proves that homosexuality is a complex phenomenon on many accounts.

I will put it in a different light. Many of the leaders of some aggressive groups are social "winners". I had not been even in a high school, but for what I had read in the nifty in the section high school, the stereotype leader in high school are the winners in sports. They are often the children of rich people, but even if they do not had good grades, will be in the future our bosses in work, our political leaders, senators, chiefs of financial institutions, in wall street, officers in the army, the navy, etc We will be submitted to their power later in life, with all probability. They would be bulling us later in life in the work and in the army. Then, as for a gregarious instinct we have, most people is worshiping them, and applauding their niceties, their jokes and their triumphs, for quite often they are the winners, the jocks, the football players and so on. It is a little like in the video THE BYSTANDER EFFECT, on youtube. If you have enough patience to watch the video until minute 3, you would see how different was the attitude to the actor that impersonated a "gentleman" of Wall Street, or the finances. It took exactly "six seconds" for a little crowd to crouch around him to help. While the lady took only 4 minutes and a half for a street worker to crouch near her. But the common folk did not deserve any attention at all. He was simply nonexistent. It was invisible for 20 minutes when the experiment was called off. This explains to us that we are rather a bunch of baboons always at the ready to lick the ass of the alpha male. We are not more than that. It is written in our genes. We cannot change this in a significant way. But sometimes this is concealed by the make-up of social manners. But if the make-up wears a little with the rain, or the UVA rays of the sun, our primate nature pops-up and outmaneuvers our polite manners.

This behavior you comment has two sides. One is natural. It is a tendency of young people to demean others, specially if they are not in the group. The group gives the young people some force. It is suppose they protect one another from outside dangers or enemies. But even within the group itself there are some quarrels to establish a natural rank, with a pecking order routine. The concept comes from the study of the hens. http://en.wikipedia....i/Pecking_order This happens also among the girls within a group. Sometimes, the boy or girl with the lowest rank flee the group, for is often the target of some pecking. The girls can be quite bitching among them also. So, the natural social condition of human beings is to form groups and establish a social rank within it. Then, within the group is more pleasant to harass those that are outside, that to going pecking again one another, for the rank has been well established. If a group has much stress within it ends dissolving, or many people would desert of it. So, if you are running on a road and a group of boys see you, they are probably going to harass you, just for sport. It is less probably that the harassment comes from a group of girls if you are a male. In general, there is little harassment between groups of girls and boys. Then to feel sure while jogging, by example, the best way is to go with a bunch of other people. That gives some safety, but not much if the group is small. The conclusion is that all solitary guys, or girls, are going to be harassed by the main groups. There is nothing that can be done to solve this problem, till some years later, when all these people would be spread out in the country. Nevertheless, even in a place of work, there is some bitching among co-workers. If you are a little queer or solitary they would even try to demean your work with the boss. Then, even in the work you need some allies. You need to befriend others to feel a little safer. Then you have to lick some asses as well, to be accepted in the group. So, in general, it is like humans hate one another a little bit, at least. You can see this fact, anywhere. Unless you are natural leader you have to be a follower. Even among us, we are not equally queer. A few of us are more queer than the rest. Then any frictions among us are also due to exercises in the pecking procedure. It is like a need to teach who is over whom. So, if you are not the leader, you have to duck as a sign of subordination.

He looks quite a fighter. My! It is like he has has come out the Star Wars or The Lord of the Ring. it seems in the US people is very prone to wars. I am amazed.

my god! In the US you got still a lot of wars. I am amazed.

I was impressed with these tender memories. I have not any comparable regret.

Do not feel bad for that. Being a hard worker and bright student comes early in life. If the parents reinforce well the joys of studying, any child can become a great student. But if they try to become a great student later in life they are gonna fail. It is rather difficult to become a good student later on life. I mean when one is an adolescent. It is only possible, if you are a monster student early on life. Well before you are ten or so. If you are forward like a grade or two, when you are six years old, this difference would accompany you the rest of your life. I had not the opportunity to study, but I loved books for I was not doing well socially. I had to start working early in life, but as the books were more friendly to me than people, I continued learning alone in the evenings. I had not reasons to being social. And little by little, I was studying all the matters that are taught in high school and college. Then, I had not any tittle, but I feel very happy with all my knowledge I have piled up. I had been a good father and taught nicely my children. They made all the studies I could not do. My daughter studied physics with honors in Edinburgh and my son did electronic engineering in Germany. So, their lives had been a lot better than mine. And I feel good for being able to be loving father. I never punished them, not even a harsh word, not any scolding, etc. They were wonderful kids. I cannot yet believe how good they were. The only sadness I feel is that they had not breed any children yet. But I did not tell to them any word about this topic. I believe in their freedom. They have to decide if they would make any children or not. I would like to have a few grandchildren. One or two.

I would like to understand why being closeted could be such a misery. My life had always been always inside a closet. But I did not feel any need to be open about my sexual life. Neither I was fearing to be discovered and exposed in public for my sex life was not very active. Only occasional acts, when things looked like a sure bet.

wow! that makes me feel like very lucky. I feel so sad reading your words. Woe!

I do not remember of any regret. Not I had been perfect or anything. My life has been rather shitty to say the least. Well, not my life, but my childhood mostly. If have had a shitty childhood, the rest of your life can look a little like a paradise. I was expecting more shit in the future years of my life and it does not happened. Things were improving, for I had not great expectations, but bucks full of shit pouring over my head. Anyway, there is a proverb in my country that says, there is not any good or ill that would last hundred years. Neither there is a body that could bear it.

omg! Is this serious? Is it real you still feel so bad? It has to be like a course or something. Oh, my! Thanks god, I can easyly forget my past woes. They are totally erased off my mind.

What a pity! I think it looked like good to write about a complex story of menage a trois.

but nothing is perfect on life. Then, couple is not that bad, and f-buddy is neither bad.

Harry Potter with a sense of humor Just open the video and you have it.

Your argument looks sensible. The main problem I see is "negativity". Many children develop a behavior of negativity, in the sense of wanting not to obey most of the orders, or petitions their parents make. If a boy develops a strong negativity, to negate him a petition reinforces their willing for that thing precisely. But, if the boy had not developed a negativity, it is easy to say no to him. Most boys show some degree of negativity and that gives a lot of headaches to parents; specially if the negativity is strong. Then, if the boy were obstinate, I would buy the Barbie if he wants one. I mean if I know he is negative, I would not play with that. If I do not pay any attention to that thing, this toy would end up forgotten in a box like most toys are. If I make a fuss about this issue, his desire would get stronger, at least to piss off me or his mother. Many disobedient boys extract a lot of pleasure out of pissing off his parents with negations. It we are aware of this possibility, the negativism, we would avoid to pay attention when a boy ignores an order or a petition we had made to him. This delaying to obey an order comes from the fact that we do not praise the child often enough when he obeys. Instead of that, some parents put a lot more attention on the child disobedience, or to his rejection of an order or petition. Then parents that have an authoritarian streak are very sensible to this sort of behavior, and are more prone to repeat an order to the child when he delays to obey and so on. This disobedience would excite the authority in the father or mother and made a case of insisting on giving orders to force the child to obey. A parent that is not authoritarian would think, "he is fed up of executing so many orders. I should give him more attentions when he obeys." Then he waits patiently to the next occasion when the boy obeys an order. Then you can exaggerate your praises to him as he is a very good child. And that's all. I am not authoritarian I would not comment on the delay of the boy to execute an order. I will forget he does not obey for I am sure he is fed up of obeying. He is obeying for nothing. Then this is not good. People usually do some work and is paid for it. Then, the least we can do for a boy is to praise him well, when he behaves nicely. And shut up our mouths when he does not. We should feign we had not seen any piece of bad behavior. But by praising his good deeds consistently, we would help him to become a lovely kid. Another problem is to solve a case of extreme "negativism" in a child. I had been consulted by some parents with this problems, but they do not like my explanation. For it means the cause of the boy disobedience are their own behavior with the child. I understand this rejection of the theory. I would be also piss off if some tell me that. The stubborn negative behavior of my kid has been caused by my own reaction to his acts. It sucks! Isn't it? So, I have to be rather cunning to explain to them how to solve this problem. It is not any easy. Other question is to do as Lugh said in another place; it was time for going to preschool and the boy do not want to cloth. Then, there is the option of asking him, "do you want to go to school in pajama?" If he says yeas, "all right, you will go on pajama." Then, perhaps he would change his mind when he sees he is going in pajama to preschool. A similar case is when a boy does not want to put his shoes when we are on our way for a visit. I remember, my daughter told me something like this, when she was like 6 years or so. "Well, you can go bare foot." I told her. As I showed myself ready to go there, it was a wish of my wife, she thought it was not a good idea of going barefoot anywhere. Her negative was mostly due that these visits to relatives sucks a lot for children. They are boring to death. I had observed this same problem with the kids of other people also. A kid, specially if he is alone with adults chattering, get utterly bored. It is only natural, and the only solution is sit him on your knees and caress him and play with him while the boring chatter goes on. You can also interrupt the chatter a while and present the boy to those... relatives, making him the star of the show for a while. Boys want to be stars and become the focus of all lights for a while. There is not any problem if there are more children in the house and they can play together, while we do all the boring chattering. But I agree with Yang Bang, is a sad thing imagine that our boy has a mental obsession with the Barbi and he does not go to play out with the other boys of his age. I would try my best to avoid this trap if I can. But if cannot change the thing by some innocent trick I had to accept the fate that he really like Barbies. The case is that I cannot imagine that we had inherited any gene to play with barbies as we had not any genes to play a piano, or a violin. My idea is that with violence and threatenings we cannot change a behavior. A strong behavior that is prosecuted with violence or a death penalty does not disappear into a void, it simply hides in a closet. Or into the hidden fantasies of someone. Then, as it is hidden it looks as it does not exist.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, FROSTY!! Have a nice day

well, perhaps, you had made a point. My problem is that I have not experience of watching athletes of 16 years of age. If the athletes of 16 are on average as burly as the David of Michelangelo statue shows, then you are right. To me, this male looks like a stud of twenty four or twenty five years, not an adolescent at all.

Perhaps we should discern between the prudishness of the Greeks, in their educated manners, and the real stuff. It is a question for debate, for those with a little member cannot be proud of it. Then, it is easy to imagine, or to deduce, that the size of the phallus was a sign of greater maleness. Not necessarily true, but a handy theory. Anyway, in the porno trade all the stars are well endowed males. Also in many stories in nifty this fetish of big sizes appears more often than not.

I knew this theory of Kinsey and it makes sense. I had added some refinement to this theory to explain bisexuality. It is just a mere hypothesis that at present cannot be proved yet. It is that humans had wired in the brain some sexual attitudes, both male and female at the same time. But a minority has more strongly marked either male or female attitude. This is mostly determined by some genetic variables, that affect the hormonal levels in the blood; for males and females had testosterone and estrogen in the blood. Due to hormonal levels, or to other causes, one tendency is more marked. But in the intermediate cases, it enters another variable; the circumstances. If we take notice of many mammals; in some species only a few males do all the breeding. The breeders can be as much as 25% and as little as 10% or less. The rest of the males had not any opportunity to breed in their life. In the case of humans, when we were hunter gatherers, it would had been similar, for to hunt big beast we had to work forming teams. Then, the groups of hunters could had been about 20 males or so. Well, perhaps in this case, the breeders were the stronger hunters. About five or six. The rest could not make it. Then, in this case, as someone was asking, they had to be some homosexuality. When the big preys were exterminated, the humans had to spread out more thinly on the world. Like actual hunter gatherers. Then, the life is so precarious that there is not a problem to form heterosexual couples, for they are very spread people. Each family needs a lot of space to gather food and to hunt. There is not any problem with overpopulation for hunger makes for a lower fertility. Then, when agricultural life starts, there is a moment in which there is an excess of population. In in this period in which are established restrictions about sexuality. Due also to the high density, it starts a strong hierarchy stress. This happens on both sexes. The aim is to retard the time for breeding. A little later is not enough to delay the onset on breeding, but some people is pressed for not breeding at all. Then harassment of of those in higher rank over the the rest, influences the development of brain, in the sexual awakening. Those that had inherited the lower aggressive attitude can feel they are feminine, in the case of males; the same can be similar in females. Those those males that feel aggressive and sure of their rank can feel heterosexuals. In the case of females, those with some combination of hormones can feel dominating and hate to be submissive to males. So, it is easy to imagine that that look for a submissive female. Those males middle of the road, can have a destine or other, depending on the circumstances. When heterosexual sex is almost impossible, or very unlikely, as it happens in the world today, the fantasies about the other gender start to fade. Then one starts to see some female traits in another male that looks like a girl, or show manners like a girl. This one would play the role of inserter, unless his stamina or lust would not be very strong, in which case he would to play the role of insertee, or servant to the more dominant male. Then, the same male, depending on the circumstances, can play a role or another; inserter or insertee. it all depends on the rank of the partner he has in this moment. Then, my theory postulates that in absence of perspectives of an heterosexual experience, some alternative connections awake in the brain and get stronger. But as not all males had the same levels of testosterone or other hormones, like estrogen or oxitocine, the sexual behavior presents wide differences. Then some bisexuals can marry if they improve in status, for the status play an important role in the production of testosterone. Then as a male grows up, after being involved in homosexual experiences when younger, he could marry normally and forget his gay past, as a phase of his youth. Later on, if he divorce and have not enough sex as he grows older, he can come back to the gay activity of his youth. While other males, like those that need to announce that they are gay and get out of the closet, they would not change his sexual status. Those that do not feel so gay, do not see any sense in getting of the closet. They do not see any advantage in telling this to anyone. Only those that had been involved with him sexually would know he is. So as Kinsey said, there is a gradation from being totally gay to being totally hetero. Then in the middle are those that are more or less gay, but also less or more heterosexuals. Then, all those that are in the middle do not get out of the closet. But about half of them, favor the rights of gays, as can be observed by the polls. In some countries in Europe, about 66% favor the rights of the gays. Probably for most of them have had some pleasant experiences with total gays. So it is logical that they would be in favor of the rights of gays. The others are too hypocrites to confess they are in favor of the gays. My opinion is that many straight gays have had experiences with gays. They had because it is not that easy to have heterosexual experiences in life, for many reasons.

It seems a good idea. There was an exception on this concept. If not in statues they made a number of drawings in ceramic of satyrs and the Greek convention at this time was to paint the satyrs with a great erect phalluses. The myths also told the satyrs had a supernatural lust. There is some ceramics in museums with erotic drawings where are shown people with "indecent" phallus like they were satyrs. It seems to me it was like a sort of pornographic industry that sold well. For the Greeks exported painted ceramics, and ceramic with draws all around the Mediterranean and Black sea. The ceramics were also used as instruments of politics to make propaganda of some young candidates. Those ceramics used to say repeated in plates, legends like "so and so is kalos"; so and so is cute. But the word kalos had also some wide meaning like admirable young fellow, fine, beautiful, noble, good. In the period of the democracy in Athens enters in crisis the love among young men. For it get in collision the aristocratic candidates with the populars. And homo-eroticism was most an aristocratic custom than a popular one. Some young lover of an aristocrat could get some importance in the fights of politics, and the populars accused this or that lover that had rose high in government of being a slut, a prostitute. This was a nasty accusation. Then it comes the decadence of male love. It helped also the greater amount of wealth that had brought into the picture the figure of the slave boy used as prostitute. This figure was so common, that it was giving a lot bad name to the traditional male lovers. Most times was a sort of marriages between different social classes. An aristocrat as "erastés", older lover, and a boy of poor class as "erómeno". Coming back to the main topic, the general the conventions in literature and statues was rather prudish. If you read Plato, the Symposium, or Phaedrus you will see how prudish they were. They were speaking of love, but you had to imagine what was this love made of. There is not any verbal hint about what happened. It was not like in the ceramic drawings. If you read the Erotes, of Lucian of Samosata, that is a little more libertine, with a daring tittle that reads "A Dioalogue Comparing Male and Female Love", you can see how much they dared. It was not much, really. There is not any explicit comment of the did. That means, even in the "erotes", the author was using obviously some form of censure. We are talking of the 4the century AD. The book is considered "not the work" of Lucian of Samosata. It is a book of the fourth century that imitates Lucian style of 'ridendo dicere verum,' 'laughingly to say the truth.' Other less known concept was the Hermes' pillars. The were not more hand three or four feet high and showed an erect phallus, with bearded head over it. You can watch it here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermes About the middle of the page is a photo of an archaic Greet "herm". The foot of the pic says, Archaic Greek herm, presumably of Hermes, unusual in that the penis has survived. Most of the herma recovered appears with the phallus mutilated, perhaps in the frenzy of destroying all the pagan idols of the Greeks.

I suppose all of us has seen some pictures of classical statues, some from Ancient Greece but most from Renaissance artists. The question is, the diminutive size the genitals on the male statues have any meaning either conscious or unconscious?

I started by having vague fantasies with imaginary girls, for I was in an orphanage. Then, when I started to feel lust, I went toward other boys. If one needs another person to have some experience of sex, the most likely to a girl is another boy. Then in my case, I was driven by lust. Then, much later, when I was a young adult, I could not have a girlfriend for I do not wanted to beget poor children. For as long I would not find a decent job I will not going to marry. Then, all this times, I had sexual experiences only with other males of my age, more or less. But I never felt the need to have deeper emotional connection, as you say, Cyhort. I never had dreamed of living with another male. Not that I had not propositions in this sense, but my mind never accepted the idea. So, for as long as I had only shitty jobs I forgot the girls existed. For I had the idea that if entered into this trap, my lustful nature would made me to marry her. And then, I would be breeding poor underclass people. I hated this idea. But in absence of girls in my life, or women as I matured, I had only occasional sex with another male. An affair of a single day; well, a not even an hour if you count the time to take a drink and chat a little. When I find at last a decent job, I looked for a girl and married her in three months. So, I am bisexual, but never had the idea of having a deep emotional connection with another male. I do not see the point. I think that my mind is incompatible with living with another male. Of course, I would not had accepted a bossy woman as wife either. I do not believe in that sort of thing. I was not bossy with her, she was not bossy with me. I had a sex life for as long as she wanted to have it. Later, when she grow older, she rejected the idea of having sex. But I do not divorced, for any other women would worse than that. I got the idea that most women hate sex. Not only women, I am forming in my mind the idea that even gays hate sexual life. Then, who loves sex? I am not sure. Perhaps, many man and woman had occasional moments in which they need to have. But a few had not any lust drive at all, and a few others had more of less permanent lust. Of course this has some relation with the hormones. Not only with testosterone, but with others as well.

that one was very good, Zolia. "I told you I was sick". or the other "I want a second opinion". a good one is also, "I needed some rest".

well, you look like a lovely lady. I had to see the data on your profile to know you were a male.