Comments 45

  1. Again, adorable.

    A lot more of this will be the result of our making same-sex marriage legal in all 50 States. You can’t stop people from expressing their affection for each other if you allow them to marry (yes, years later).

    It’s about time.

  2. The world is on its side over this video. lol. So cute. Young people need love too.
    Thanks for the video.
    Happy Holidays, Josh

  3. Adorable, absolutely.

    But Penboy, gay marriage will not bring on more of this. Actually, as acceptance of LGBT has gone up, the amount same sex activity between boys has gone down drastically. This happened not only in the US but also in Scandinavia. Boys are simply having less same-sex activity than ever in human history.

    The reality is that two adolescent boys kissing may or may not be “gay”. If they like boys, there is only a minority chance that they will also like adult masculine men when they get older, unless they already do. They might end up liking boyish looking 18yos (such as we find on this site), if they’re lucky. If not, the phrase “it gets better” is not applicable here.

  4. Hey Wordworth can you please paraphrase your last paragraph. Stupid me didn’t get it :p. Looks like there are several “ones” I need to put together but I fail to draw a proper conclusion.

  5. mewoo: I read it again, it seems pretty clear to me. But for your sake I clarify in brackets:

    The reality is that two adolescent boys kissing may or may not be “gay”. If they [the two adolescent boys who are kissing in the video] like boys, there is only a minority chance that they [the two adolescent boys who are kissing in the video] will also like adult masculine men when they [the two adolescent boys who are kissing in the video] get older, unless they [the two adolescent boys who are kissing in the video] already do. They [the two adolescent boys who are kissing in the video] might end up liking boyish looking 18yos (such as we find on this site), if they [the two adolescent boys who are kissing in the video] are lucky. If not, the phrase “it gets better” is not applicable here.

  6. @Cpt.Proton
    “Uploaded on Dec 20, 2015 the original was giving people a creek in the neck. I don’t know the source. A fellow called Josh Kore might know :)”

    ❦Thanks for flipping it, all I could do was take a screen shot then flip it but with your great work I’m fairly sure my original thoughts re it were indeed correct thus the reason I didn’t comment.
    It would be nice if Josh would confirm my suspicions but he’s fooled us before a few times and never admitted it…
    😀Thanks Mr.Josh Kore for being an excellent host all these years and for free too!

  7. @Wordsworth

    > Actually, as acceptance of LGBT has gone up, the amount same sex activity between boys has gone down drastically.

    How do you know this?

  8. why did you upload a video of two children kissing? also why no lesbian stuff. the website says gay and lesbian. yet in all my 7 years ive never seen a single female

  9. @me
    “-yet in all my 7 years ive never seen a single female”
    ☞I take it you haven’t looked very well as there’s been quite a few, maybe even one or even two in the above video…

  10. No females – remember all the androgynous photo tests? And of course every news post. The site is clearly predominantly featuring males but there have been plenty of females.

  11. @Wordsworth:
    “gay marriage will not bring on more of this.”

    Uh, yes it will for the very simple reason that if same-sex marriage is allowed, then a government or society can’t stop or even discourage same-sex romance and of course, public displays of affection, if it’s allowed by heterosexuals for millennia.

    Your “feminist” argument is pure bullshit. And, like others have said, provide some proof (links — plural) that “the amount same sex activity between boys has gone down drastically.“.

    Boys are having less sex now? That’s rich. You’re providing way too much bullshit just trying to prop up your “feminist” propaganda. There’s never been a time when boys are having any less sex.
    .

  12. Mr. Penboy, you have to read me more carefully. I said boys are having less same-sex experiences than before. If you don’t believe that, let me remind you of the people who said Copernicus was wrong. By the way you quoted me as saying boys are having less sex now (which might also be true, but I don’t know). There is a difference.

    I know it seems counterintuitive to you that boys are having less same-sex experience than ever before, but maybe you should not be making bold claims without stating that it is your opinion. The statistics are not a matter of my own opinion. What is my own opinion is *why* boys are having less same-sex experiences than ever before.

    The most recent study that I’m aware of is from Scandinavia, which I brought up because it is from one of the most feminist-dominated areas of the world. I’m sorry but I don’t have the reference handy and don’t have the time to go digging for it. If you know how to do literature searches and if you’re serious about this kind of thing, I’m sure you can find it.

    After you find that study, or perhaps some other ones, you could contrast it to the Kinsey study, to go even further back in time. The study participants grew up in the early part of the 20th century, and most were well versed in same-sex activity with other boys and sometimes also with men. Most same-sex activity was (formerly) engaged in by boys who grew up to be heterosexual i.e. in adulthood have attractions predominantly to females, and such boys make up the vast majority of men. It is these boys who are having less same-sex experiences now.

    Why, you may ask? The reasons are open to debate, but it seems obvious to me.

    For one, now (due to identity politics) it is “gay” to have feelings for another boy (or to have sex with another boy, without having feelings for him). To someone who does not identify as gay (for instance, someone who is not attracted to men, or not attracted to males at all), this could present an identity conflict. Ideally, it shouldn’t matter, but I think it does matter for a lot of boys, especially if girls might find out (which leads to the next explanation).

    Another big reason is that there is far less gender segregation today than before. Boys kissing girls was absolutely scandalous in the US in the 1950s. Males didn’t so much have girlfriends until they were college aged. One might say the erosion of that segregation has been bad for girls, given the numbers of girls who are allegedly having bad experiences in college being cajoled into having sex while drunk. But the end of gender segregation meant that the bonds which boys used to make amongst themselves (and with men) were replaced with the attempt at bonds with girls. I don’t think this has been a positive development for anyone, including for the boys themselves.

  13. @Wordworth:

    First, you didn’t accurately define “boys” as opposed to “men” in your opinion.

    “I said boys are having less same-sex experiences than before.

    No, that’s simply not true for multiple reasons:
    1. With a larger population, proportionally (percentage), there are more gays/gay activities than before — and [example] America is finally [slowly] acknowledging that our own homosexual population is quickly approaching 15% [and my opinion is that it’s even higher — approaching 20%];***
    2. Today’s boys are not accepting their parents’ absolute restrictions as they once did;
    3. Because of condoms, boys are having just as much if not more sex with each other (bypassing the “era” of the AIDS scare);
    4. “Bisexuality” is “excusing” more boys to “experiment” with same-sex than before;
    5. Increasing societal acceptance of homosexuality and bisexuality allows even more boys to have same-sex than before;
    6. Boys are increasingly more aware and at an earlier age of their own sexuality than and of their peers’ sexuality (and one could say, their sensuality as well);
    7. The readily available porn (Internet, primarily) also accounts for more boys desiring and having same-sex today than “yesterday.”

    These are not just “my opinions.”

    .

    “if you’re serious about this kind of thing,”

    I’m serious enough about this, but I place my acceptance of the truth within the confines of my own learning experiences — not some bullshit “feminism.”

    “Most same-sex activity was (formerly) engaged in by boys who grew up to be heterosexual i.e. in adulthood have attractions predominantly to females, and such boys make up the vast majority of men. It is these boys who are having less same-sex experiences now. “.

    You can’t admit that [younger] males engage in same-sex practices and then grow up to be heterosexual and stopping their same-sex practices and then claim “they’re doing it less now than before” when a new generation is now engaging in same-sex practices … awaiting their own “adulthood” status.

    .

    “Another big reason is that there is far less gender segregation today than before.”

    Not according to this: http://www.singlesexschools.org/schools-schools.htm

    .

    “Boys kissing girls was absolutely scandalous in the US in the 1950s.”

    No it wasn’t — hardly so. While it’s true that boys then as opposed to boys today usually didn’t kiss a girl until they were approximately 15+ years old and only in a [usually] “private setting” [movies, etc.], your statement holds no water with boys of the 1950s or even the 1940s [because of the war, the “silent majority” encouraged boys and girls to offer affection [date] and of course, marry as soon as possible to have children.]

    [horsey and I disagree on many things, but he will tell you even this is {feminist} bullshit.]

    “Males didn’t so much have girlfriends until they were college aged.”

    Again, total bullshit. See above for the obvious reason.

    .

    “But the end of gender segregation meant …”

    Again, re: above link shows that gender segregation is hardly at an “end.”

    I’ll come back to your 2nd to last paragraph when I get my thoughts more in order. The only thing I can agree on right now is that there is “identity politics.” I’ll come back to that in a bit, but right now I have to go somewhere.

    *** There are no polls that accurately show just how many homosexuals there are in any given society, just as there are no polls that accurately show just how many true atheists [as opposed to “agnostics, nones”, et al] there are in any given [religious] society.
    .

  14. Penboy, you are arguing your opinions as if they are fact. The reason for social science research is to be able to place one’s learned experience in context with that of others.

    I’m arguing the facts based on studies. There is much less same-sex sexual activity among boys now than before, according to studies. You say boys *should* theoretically be having more same-sex experiences, because acceptance of LGBT is on the rise. I am saying that the studies show the opposite, and I am not the only once who noticed this, and I offered a few explanations of why.

    Whatever kind of uptick in same-sex experiences between boys you think you are noticing is nothing compared to the kind of same-sex activity of boys that Kinsey noted in his study. I’m not interested in a minor uptick, when there already had been such a drastic drop which dwarfs whatever uptick you think you’re seeing. Yet the Scandinavian study compared, if I remember right, over a fairly recent horizon, and still found a drop.

    Whatever kind of uptick in gender segregation you think you are seeing is nothing compared to what used to exist. But just as important, there was no notion in the culture that female versus male sex drive and motivation is a “socially constructed” difference, whereas it is politically incorrect today to say there is a difference because that would be misogynistic and anti-feminist.

    By the way, the homosexually-identified population is not at 15%. Behavior and identity are different. Homosexual identity is still at a pretty small percent among males.

  15. By the way, Penboy, a 17yo friend tells me he is the only out gay boy in his whole high school of 1500 students. So, my learned experience is that things have actually not changed much in my lifetime.

    1. Post
      Author

      Statistically that’s almost impossible. It’s way more likely that he’s the only gay boy that he himself is aware of but I doubt that he personally knows every kid at his school. Not everyone is out either. Hell, on a High School many kids probably don’t even know yet what their sexual and/or romantic preference is.

      And it’s not only gay, lesbian, bi- and pansexual & asexual people making up the queer community either. There’s also transgender, genderqueer & intersexual folks. And so on. Considering all that I have a hard time believing that there’s any school of that size anywhere in the world that has only one queer kid among its students ;)

  16. @Wordworth:
    “I’m arguing the facts based on studies.”

    You keep saying crap like this, but NEVER PROVIDE any links. It’s not up to ME to find any “studies” in your favor.

    I provided just one link to show gender/sex segregation is NOT “dying out” as you seem to think.

    I said, “homosexual population is quickly approaching 15%”, not that it WAS/IS that figure. And most polls show me correct — noting that “approaching” is RELATIVE to size of population.

    Even in Iran, their poll showed that as many as 17% were “homosexual” …. and in a fascist society like theirs, to give that high a number is telling when in “free” societies such as ours or any others, people just won’t tell the truth to “strangers” taking such polls — very much like (true) atheists.

    Without any PROOF, you just blathered on with YOUR OPINION, NOT FACTS.

    “a 17yo friend tells me he is the only out gay boy in his whole high school of 1500 students.”

    Out to who? And you seriously believe that out of 1500 students (or roughly 750 I’d guess are male?) that ONLY ONE IS GAY?

  17. “So, my learned experience is that things have actually not changed much in my lifetime.”

    No, you’re behaving and “reporting” just like a religious nut case — you want a particular result so you’ll say and twist everything to make it look like you have it when in fact, it’s nearly the opposite.

  18. Oh, one more thing. By your “learned experience,” America would never have made same-sex marriage legal.

    Within approximately 11 years, we’ve gone from 1 State legalizing same-sex marriage (Massachusetts) and at least 65% of American society NOT wanting it to ….. ALL STATES legalizing it and OVER 60% of same society ACCEPTING it. Exactly opposite of what you’re trying to tell me [us].

    All of my points are based on multiple polls and common [societal] sense.

  19. I think you’re not understanding what I’m trying to say, in addition to not trusting that I know something about the social science literature on this topic. Try to show some respect.

    I began by saying boys are experiencing less same-sex activity now than before. I referred to a short-term comparison (a large Scandinavian study) and a longer term point of comparison (the Kinsey study). If you are an expert in the field then you know both of these studies already. If you can’t find those studies by now, than you’re not as serious as you say you are about this subject. You don’t have to believe them but if I were you I would be careful about taking too strong a position without checking against studies that are out there. Everyone thinks their “common sense” is right.

    One of the things I said (as an opinion) was that as identity politics has made LGBT more acceptable within the culture, those same identity politics are also partly the cause of the reduction in same-sex activity among boys which is seen in studies. As you know I have also previously suggested that the broader feminist ethos has caused LGBT to become more acceptable, at the same time demonizing attraction to boys (whether the holder of these attractions is a man, or a boy). This is my “common sense” but I’m pretty well read in this subject, too.

    Gay identity hovers around 2-4% of the population, not anywhere near 15%. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make about a proportion being “relative to the population” or “approaching” 15%.

  20. “Gay identity hovers around 2-4% of the population, not anywhere near 15%. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make about a proportion being “relative to the population” or “approaching” 15%.”

    This is just ONE site:
    http://gaylife.about.com/od/comingout/a/howmanygays.htm

    Read the ENTIRE page and notice the numbers:

    “The most widely accepted statistic is the 1 in 10 convention (for every ten people, one is gay)” [That’s 10% right there.]

    and another: “however research shows that the number may be more like 1 in 20.” [5% but, I don’t believe this at all.]

    “Nonetheless, The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law, a sexual orientation law and public policy think tank, estimates that the total number of GLB persons in the U.S. is near 8.8 million, based on the 2005/2006 American Community Survey, an extension of the U.S. Census.”

    Now, read why there isn’t/can’t be an accurate counting of TRUE homosexuals (and this is just in the USA).

    “Not all GLB people identify as such and not all GLB persons are willing to admit their sexual identity, attraction or behavior on paper. … government agencies such as the Census Bureau cannot explicitly ask citizens if they reside in same-sex headed households. As a result, census data will only count same-sex couples as ‘unmarried partners.’ ”

    Any way you look at it, these numbers (and most other RELIABLE census/polls) shoot the hell out of your “hovers around 2-4% of the population”.

    And, “my” numbers are most definitely approaching 15%.

    Again, we will NEVER TRULY KNOW an ACCURATE count of homosexuals in any given society — particularly any society that has a large number of religious people.

    “If you are an expert in the field then you know both of these studies already.”

    I don’t need to be an “expert in the field” to understand not only these numbers, but the psychology of trying to get “accurate” numbers in this respect.

    How about you show respect for my knowledge and experience that quite frankly, overshadows yours.

  21. Do you seriously think that only a 2-4% population would have the effect our gay community has had on our entire society to change something as personal as marriage? 2-4%? Really? With the number of stupid religious people in this country? Seriously? You would accept that? And in that short amount of time?

    You need to think twice about this.

  22. You’ve not defined what you mean by a “homosexual”. I’ve said 2-4% are gay-identified and that seems to be the best estimate we have of that. That means that if they have same-sex attractions sometimes or all the time but aren’t gay identified, they don’t count as being “gay identified”.

    You even quoted one source of that (the UCLA study) which found 8.8M. The total US population is 319M. 8.8M is 2.7% of 319M. So, you’ve quoted a source that corroborates the number I said.

    If you define “homosexual” in other ways, based on whether they’ve had some certain amount of same-sex experiences at some point in their lives, then you get a vastly different figure. The 1 in 10 is “widely accepted” only by the general public, but is not close to the real number:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx

  23. It’s folly to suggest that the experience in Scandinavian countries automatically equates to a similar experience here in the US – or in any other country for that matter. There are big differences in culture that could well be driving this apparent trend. If you’re a social scientist, you know this to be true. It’s a false dichotomy.

    My own experience is that same-sex activity among boys in the US has skyrocketed in the last few years. That’s not to say that actual sexual activity has kept pace with same-sex relationships, since I’m seeing many boys using social media to find a real relationship and being clear about not wanting it to be sexual – at least not at first. (Disclaimer – this is purely from personal observation, not a controlled study.)

    Polls of complex social issues done by Gallup and other commercial pollsters should be taken with a grain of salt. They are not social scientists or psychologists and don’t create the extensive controls necessary for a cleaner, more accurate result. Their polls are designed for rough snapshots to be used by media organizations, who love anything sensational or counter-intuitive. Ever notice those “shocking new study” headlines? The media has discovered an “oultlier” – a study that contradicts all others. As any scientist well knows, those outliers are almost always wrong.

  24. @Dave:

    Very good. I agree.

    Polls of complex social issues done by Gallup and other commercial pollsters should be taken with a grain of salt. They are not social scientists or psychologists and don’t create the extensive controls necessary for a cleaner, more accurate result. Their polls are designed for rough snapshots to be used by media organizations, who love anything sensational or counter-intuitive.

    ^^ This, exactly. And I think that Wordworth thinks just like the media outlets that you described. For him, the operative “buzzword” is feminism.
    .

  25. You guys are all missing the point.

    Maybe I didn’t make it clear, or maybe you guys are not good at reading, or in my writing you read what you want to read instead of what I actually wrote.

    In the early part of the 20th century in the US, the majority of boys had same-sex experiences. The majority. The majority. The majority. The majority. Should I say it gain? The majority.

    The majority who had these experiences were not gay-identified. The majority who had these experiences sexually preferred women. Shall I say it again? The majority who had these experiences were not gay-identified. The majority who had these experiences sexually preferred women. Shall I say it again?

    Most of their present-day counterparts are not having sexual experiences with boys. Let me repeat. Most of their present-day counterparts are not having sexual experiences with boys. Let me repeat. Most of their present-day counterparts are not having sexual experiences with boys.

    To the person who actually thinks that the presence of boys on social media looking for relationships is an indicator that boys are having more same sex experiences than they did in the early part of the 20th century, you are deluding yourself. There are 319M people in the US. 23% are under 18. That’s about 37M boys in the US. If 2.7% are gay (will be attracted to men when they become an adult), that’s about 1M gay boys. Are some of them online looking for relationships? Sure. Just because you’re seeing them join social media, at the same time that everyone else is joining social media, you think this is proof of an uptick? It may be easier for them to find people, and for sure, it is entirely possible that those with a predominant interest in boys or men are having an easier time finding them. But we’re talking about a small percent of boys to begin with.

    In the early part of the 20th century in the US, most of the boys having same-sex experiences were not gay, which is why any uptick in sexual activities of the 2.7% who are gay pale in comparison with the drop in same-sex experiences of the those who are not gay.

    Do you get it now?

  26. “In the early part of the 20th century in the US, the majority of boys had same-sex experiences.”

    And, you KNOW this HOW? Do you have intuitions that no one else had/has — enough to KNOW the sexual exploits of so many MILLIONS OF BOYS?

    Enlighten us.

  27. Mr Penboy, with respect, I warned you against making strong statements without having the facts on your side. You think I make this stuff up. I think you have a short memory. Like I’ve said many times in this thread, it came from the landmark Kinsey study.

    The sampling frame of the Kinsey study has itself been the subject of later studies (such as the one by Laumann), and the interview technique guidelines made for and used in the Kinsey study are still considered the gold standard.

    Whatever you are accusing me of, you have committed yourself, by saying that boys *must* be having more same-sex experiences than before because we have gay marriage now. I’ve said that they have less than before, and I pointed to two studies.

  28. “I warned you against making strong statements without having the facts on your side.”

    Yet you don’t provide any proof (links) to back yourself up. It’s not for me to look this up, the onus is on you.

    “Whatever you are accusing me of, you have committed yourself, by saying that boys *must* be having more same-sex experiences than before because we have gay marriage now.”

    No, I didn’t. Nowhere did I use the word “must” with respect to “boys having same-sex experiences”.

    What I did say, is that if we [any society] are going to allow [legalize] same-sex marriage, we will have to allow [any] same-sex public displays of affection whether [the religious] like it or not. And, also, we will be seeing and accepting same-sex romance by younger boys and will soon [a generation or two?] accept this as totally natural and normal. And this will manifest into young teens (11-13) or even pre-teens openly showing their attractions to their same-sex peers if they feel that way.

    “Whatever you are accusing me of, you have committed yourself, …”

    I just explained, AGAIN, what “I’m committing myself to”.

    Speaking of “reading properly,” I suggest that you do likewise and re-read everything I’ve written. It speaks for itself.
    .

  29. Also, I strongly recommend you read again, very slowly, the 7 points I use to back up my claim that boys are having more same-sex activities today (most recently) as opposed to the 1950s, 1940s, or even earlier. Each of those points are just simple common sense — that’s why it was easy to list them. And, I’m pretty sure that most guys that come onto this site (not to mention thousands of others) will verify most, if not all, of those points.

    Oh, one more thing: In 2006, USA didn’t have 319 million in population. We had only about 299-300 milliion.
    .
    .

  30. I’m pretty sure that “most guys that come onto this site” will see that you’ve contradicted yourself a lot in this thread.

  31. @Proton:
    “looking at these walls of words, all I can think is TL;DR”

    Of course, just like when you enter a library, you automatically “think” TMW;WB — (To Many Words, Won’t Bother)

    To the “moderator”:

    When are you going to fix the REPLY situation?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *