EXCHANGE OF EMAILS WITH A BISEXUAL ALMOST GAY

Hello Project, it’s a bit that I don’t write to you. We exchanged some emails some time ago and the conclusion of our speeches concerned the fact that I had already made a path of awareness and acceptance of my homosexuality. Acceptance passed through ups and downs, rethinks and changes of ideas. Being single, the only possibility I have is to resort to masturbation (I cannot spend too much time on abstinence). Lately, almost for fun and curiosity I started watching straight porn videos, and I must say that I don’t dislike them. For a while, I thought maybe I could even like straight sex. Yesterday I also tried to masturbate watching a straight video, but it seemed so exaggerated and fake that I soon lost the desire. So I changed and opened a gay video and finally I saw something that really pleased me. Looking at a straight video I really thought I saw mechanical gestures, with rough and almost animalistic guys and fake girls who shouted for a fake pleasure. And then, I don’t know if you’ve noticed, never a kiss between boy and girl. Watching a gay video instead I saw two guys definitely excited and eager to please each other. Boys who almost always kiss each other. I saw sex, even if in a typical setting of a porn video, lived in a more spontaneous and passionate way. That’s why yesterday, in order to masturbate, I chose to watch a gay video. However, a hetero video is always a mechanical representation of sex. The gay video shows at least complicity and is very realistic since the boys don’t pretend orgasm, while in the straight movies the girls pretend orgasm, sometimes even absurdly and in a way so much exaggerated. Why this difference in heterosexual sex? I think because heterosexual sex essentially fulfills the purpose of procreation. Gay sex, on the other hand, being an end in itself, is much more linked to pleasure (especially physical). A relationship is based on love, otherwise it doesn’t work, but I believe that homosexual sexuality has a component both physical and of a search for physical pleasure that heterosexuality doesn’t have. I believe that, in general, a heterosexual couple has a less intense sexual life than a homosexual one, precisely for this reason.
Mark

Hello Mark, if you don’t have a partner, resorting to masturbation is a necessity and you shouldn’t try to do without it because masturbation is a practice that has a value even in terms of health. It is a known fact that those who practice daily masturbation are less exposed to prostatic cancer in old age. So no limitation to masturbation, which is good for both the body and the mind. And then you say right, gay sex has no procreative concerns and therefore is totally focused on the pursuit of pleasure. Physical pleasure is an important thing that favors psycho-physical balance and should never be devalued or neglected. The talk about porn is actually very complicated. Today new types of pornography are spreading, let’s say so, softer and more specifically gay, in which for example sexual meeting doesn’t end necessarily with anal penetration and cuddling is greatly enhanced. The current porn so-called gay are built for a large mass of hetero-curious people and don’t conform to true gay sexuality that is not an imitation of heterosexual sexuality. In practice, some gay porn sites have started producing videos specifically for gays, that is, basically, for a segment of the market far less important than that of the hetero-curious people. On one thing, however, I disagree, that is, that heterosexuality is less attentive to the pursuit of pleasure. I tell you this because I receive a lot of mail even from straight guys and in many cases at least I don’t have the impression that the straight sexuality experienced by those guys is less attentive to the pursuit of pleasure, because the vast majority of heterosexual sex has not at all a procreative purpose, on the contrary, excludes it a priori, so heterosexuality assumes a dimension of research of the eros practically analogous to that typical of gay sexuality, even if the ways are different.
A hug!
Project

Hello Project, do you know sites where you can see videos for gays and not for hetero-curious people? Can you give me some suggestions? In fact, often the videos follow the traditional scheme, which begins with short preliminaries, oral sex, anal sex, orgasm. It doesn’t seem to me that true gay sex follows this mechanical scheme. In my experience gay sex was almost always an alternation of kisses, masturbation and oral sex, with orgasm achieved with mutual masturbation. Gay sex is so and this is not often seen in gay porn videos. That’s why I would like to know if there are sites with videos of this type. On straight sex I understand what you say. Perhaps my thought is distorted by the fact that being a homosexual, I find it hard to understand how there can be genuine sexual pleasure outside of homosexuality.
Thanks and a hug. Mark
P.S. I didn’t know that masturbation prevented prostate cancer. Then masturbating at least once a day is good for health, as well as mood!

Hi Mark, I have only seen some “typically gay” videos but it must be said that they are still a rarity. Because the ratio between hetero-curious and gay users, in so-called gay sites, is estimated at least 5 or 6 hetero-curious people for every gay, because the hetero-curious finds the so-called gay site made especially for him, while gay doesn’t find exactly what he would like. Your experience of gay sex is the one most widespread and typical among gay guys but unfortunately the so-called gay porn puts the gay label on things that don’t represent gay reality at all.
A hug. Project

Hello Project, clear, but … so how can I tell if I’m gay or just hetero-curious? Let me explain: if I see a straight video I get excited, and I can masturbate and get to orgasm. But this doesn’t mean that I’m straight. In fact it happens that if I see a gay video I get excited, and I understand from the physical reaction I experience, that it excites me more than a straight video, and this, with videos of equivalent content (i.e. the usual sequence: oral sex, penetration, orgasm). So I can masturbate and get to orgasm by watching a gay video. I add, even if I see a lesbian video I can feel excitement, etc. It follows that all forms of sexuality can induce excitement and lead me to masturbate. However, if I see a gay video the level of excitement is greater (understand what I mean – I talk about the abundant pre-ejaculatory fluid in the case of gay video and almost absent in the case of hetero video) and in some cases I reach orgasm without almost touching me. Only with gay pornography I happened to masturbate several times in a row at a short distance. With hetero / lesbian videos once a day it’s enough for me. From these facts (as well as from the fact that the few gay experiences I had were sexually more satisfying than my few hetero experiences) I deduced that I’m homosexual (or at most bisexual with a prevalent homosexual tendency). Certainly pornography occupies a fundamental space in my sexual life. At the moment I have no partner and pornography and masturbation are my only outlet. Returning to the hetero-curious, I think the difference lies in the fact that for me a gay video is beautiful in its less rude parts, where you can see kisses, masturbation and oral sex. For me the beauty of the guys involved in the video is also crucial, so much so that I often see the usual videos because there are actors and scenes that I particularly like (I’m very selective!). And then I think that a hetero-curious sometimes masturbates watching gay videos, but normally masturbates watching straight videos. But I masturbate from time to time watching straight and normally watching gay videos. Perhaps it could be said that I’m gay-curious. What do you think about it?
A hug. Mark

Hello Mark, the things you say are perfectly logical if you limit yourself only to the sexual plan, but the substantial differences between a gay and a hetero-curious are not limited to those strictly sexual you have described perfectly, there are also emotional differences. A gay falls in love with guys even on an emotional level, he seeks their company, even without sexual purposes and above all doesn’t have a deeply frustrating heterosexual sexuality. A hetero-curious has a frustrated hetero affectivity and doesn’t have a gay affectivity. His dominant form of sexuality is hetero, for him, a guy is only a substitute for a girl. A gay doesn’t only like having sex with his boyfriend but loves everything about him, he falls in love with him. The gay couple is not a very common thing but it exists, in the perspective of hetero-curious people the prospect of a couple relationship with a guy is completely missing, there is no love story. From what you write more than an exclusive gay, you look like a polarized bisexual, also strongly polarized, in the gay direction. The real trouble of bisexuals not strongly polarized, that is, of the bisexuals for whom the couple’s life exclusively hetero or exclusively gay is impossible, lies in the fact that both gays and girls, look for a guy to build a stable and exclusive relationship. And a big step forward in civilization still must be done before thinking of less rigid couples in which even a bisexual is not forced to renounce the other half of the sky.
A hug. Project

Hello Project, thanks as always for the most acute observations. A question: what do you mean when you write about a gay who doesn’t have a deeply frustrating heterosexual sexuality? in which situation is a heterosexual who has a profoundly frustrating hetero sexuality? And how does he react? Perhaps a heterosexual can find himself in a frustrating hetero sexual situation and then he takes refuge in gay sexuality as a fallback? Help me to understand.
Thanks, Mark

Hello Mark, the situation of the hetero-currious can be classified as “homosexuality of escape”. I try to clarify the concept starting from the other form of “homosexuality of escape” that typical of guys who have suffered sexual abuses. Among the forms of sexual imprinting (first sexual or para-sexual experiences) beyond the classical situations related to spying on the nudity of other people, to sexual exploring games with peers of the same or the other sex (all forms of imprinting experienced in a non-traumatic way), there is also, and it is not very rare, that linked to sexual abuse by adults. Imprinting can be either homosexual or heterosexual, and this has nothing to do with true sexuality. Imprinting is very often prepuberal and is experienced more as a game, more or less forbidden, than as a form of sexuality, because for the sexuality in the true sense of the word the assumptions are missing. Generally an imprinting that doesn’t conform to true sexual orientation (which will begin to develop with puberty) creates an obstacle to the development of true sexuality. If a guy who has had a gay imprinting then finds himself heterosexual, the question is not very traumatic because the evolution goes towards a socially accepted and encouraged dimension, if then the emerging sexuality is gay then there will be no detachment between the imprinting and puberty sexuality. In the case where, instead, the imprinting has been of hetero type (socially accepted) and the development of puberty sexuality goes in gay direction, some acceptance problems may arise, because it is a matter of overcoming the habit of considering oneself hetero and also sometimes to masturbate with heterosexual fantasies, however, the problems are overcome in the end because the boy perceives that gay sexuality has for him a considerable weight, not comparable to that of straight sexuality, and this on a physical level. The real problems, and these are things that must be taken very seriously, arise when the imprinting happened through sexual abuse and worse when it happened with violence. But let’s go into detail. If a boy has suffered sexual abuse by an adult man and then feels a heterosexual sexuality in him at the time of puberty, that sexuality for him is not only pleasant but also liberating and he will claim it as his sexuality as opposed to the sexuality of the abuser. On the other hand, when the boy who has suffered sexual abuse by an adult man feels a homosexual desire at the time of puberty, he will try to reject it with all his strength, because he will refer it to the suffered abuse, in essence he will be brought to think that his nascent gay sexuality is the result and consequence of that abuse. It is in these cases that the so-called escape heterosexuality is manifested, the boy unconsciously forces himself to heterosexuality which he considers as a rebellion against abuse. Obviously the situation is very delicate and, if not well managed, can also lead to irreparable consequences. If the situation is well managed, one gets to overcome it, even if traces remain, when the first homosexual “love story” arrives, that is, the first profound “affective” relationship with another boy. The period of “escape heterosexuality” of abused children is terrible, because they are homosexual guys who are trying to escape from their homosexuality, which they attribute to abuse. Failures with girls are the rule and so are frustrations and depression at the limits of uncontrollable. This is one of the basic reasons for which pedophilia must be fought with every means, because it is objectively devastating. Even for hetero-curious people there is a form of homosexuality of escape, clearly of escape to the gay and not to the straight field as in the case of homosexual abuse. A hetero-curious is a hetero, so for him the frustration of hetero sexuality is objectively heavy. It is that frustration that gives birth to the idea that “on a sexual level” and only on a sexual level a homosexual relationship can be gratifying and can respond appropriately to the frustration in the hetero field. The hetero-curious is not a gay man, he has not built a gay affectivity over the years, for him homosexuality is that of porn. When a hetero-curious really tries to get in touch with a gay guy he finds himself displaced, because as long as the gay boy has not realized that he is not really in front of a gay man, the gay boy will not only focus on sex but will also try to build a relationship on the emotional level. From a sexual point of view, then a gay man doesn’t take long to realize that his partner is not gay, sexual fantasies are different, sexual practices are different and it starts to become clear that creating a relationship doesn’t make sense, and here the other dogma of the hetero-curious is broken, namely that dealing with a gay boy is easier than dealing with a woman. Hetero-curious (who is a heterosexual searching for an escape sexuality) is not a married gay who is seeking a relationship out of his marriage is trying to realize his true sexuality, the hetero-curious remains such, often changing homosexual partner, until he finds a heterosexual availability, which for him is the natural way, in practice when the straight path becomes possible again the curiosity is put aside, maybe until to the subsequent hetero frustration.
A hug. Project

Hello Project, your explanation is very interesting. But I still don’t understand what makes you conclude that I’m bisexual and not hetero-curious. I try to explain myself better. Made the premise that for me (as for many) heterosexual sex is culturally acceptable while the gay sex is not, and consequently having gay sex has given me guilt while having straight sex no, my sexuality and my affection have the following characteristics:
sexuality: masturbation: mostly (at 90% or 95% I would say) gay (both with the help of porn videos and gay fantasies);
sexual contacts: I had gay and straight experiences (over time, the first gay at 14 years old, then alternate straight and gay, and still few).
Gay experiences on average more satisfying and uninhibited, with the girls some difficulties.
Physical preferences: I am not indifferent to female beauty. I recognize a beautiful girl very well, but with a girl I feel shy and inadequate. I don’t have a special preference for a particular type of girl. Boys, on the other hand, to please me sexually, must correspond to a very particular physical canon. I recognize if a guy is handsome, but that doesn’t necessarily mean I like him. To please me, in the sense of attracting me sexually, a boy must be done in a certain way, as high as I say, with the face as I say, etc. With guys I’m much, much more selective than with girls.
Sexual preferences: I prefer male to female sex. An erected penis is much more exciting for me than a vagina. When I had experiences with boys, being able to touch their penises, it was very exciting, while touching a girl’s sex was not bad, but it didn’t drive me crazy the same way. Having oral sex with a girl tells me little (I don’t like it), while I like to have oral sex with a guy. Masturbating a girl I like it, masturbating a guy I like best. I can have a complete intercourse with a girl, ok I can do it, I don’t like and don’t care to have a complete intercourse with a guy.
Affectivity: it is much easier for me to fall in love with a girl. For some guys I took a crush, but I have never fantasized about a lasting relationship and a couple life with a guy as I did with girls. This means that I was fine with the boys, I liked them, but I was especially interested in the sexual aspect. I was fine with the girls, but with them I was especially interested in the emotional aspect. Of course, as I have already told you, gay sexuality takes me much more. And if sexuality (especially the freer one of masturbation) goes in that direction, I can only say that I’m bisexual / gay. I must also say that the girls I met were not the best, sexually speaking, and this could have helped to give me a distorted view of female sexuality, leading me to prefer gay sexuality experienced as more uninhibited and immediate. This could be what made me a so-called hetero-curious. However, my strong preference for gay sex (fantasized and practiced), pleasant memories of gay experiences, almost exclusively gay masturbation, made me think (since adolescence) that I’m gay or bisexual. Only as a teenager I was convinced that I was a straight boy who let himself go to gay fantasies and practices, in the absence of just and available girls. Now, however, given that the right and available girls have never arrived (but did I ever really look for such girls?), I think I’m a gay who lets himself go to some incursion into the hetero world (only a few videos, however, no masturbatory fantasy). For this, joking, I say that maybe I’m a gay-curious.
A hug, Mark

Hello Mark, well, I try to respond articulately, but you of the hetero-curious have nothing at all. First of all, you don’t have the typical age of hetero-curious people who are generally over 40/45 and even beyond, in the second place you never had a previous hetero story important and exclusive, which is almost the rule for the hetero-curious people, in your story there was no strong hetero experience that led you to such a frustration as to induce curiosity for the other orientation. Indeed, your first gay experiences date back to 14 years. And then all your sexuality is clearly gay, but not only because it is about guys but because it is absolutely and typically gay regarding the desires: what excites you is not at all what excites the hetero-curious people, who see guys as a substitute for girls and who tend with guys to have sexual intercourses aimed at anal penetration with fixed roles. You write: “Sexual preferences: I prefer male to female sex. An erected penis is much more exciting for me than a vagina. When I had experiences with boys, being able to touch their penises, it was very exciting, while touching a girl’s sex was not bad, but it didn’t drive me crazy the same way. Having oral sex with a girl tells me little (I don’t like it), while I like to have oral sex with a guy. Masturbating a girl I like it, masturbating a guy I like best. I can have a complete intercourse with a girl, ok I can do it, I don’t like and don’t care to have a complete intercourse with a guy.” All these things for a hetero-curious are absolutely inconceivable. A hetero-curious, who deals with a guy as if he were a woman, will never touch the guy’s penis, and the idea of masturbating the guy he would not even consider it as a theoretical hypothesis, could have oral sex done by the guy but not the opposite, because this, in behavior code of a hetero-curious, would mean taking on a passive role, what for him is unthinkable. For a hetero-curious the so-called complete intercourse (active anal sex) is the purpose of sexual contact with a boy. For a gay, such an idea is inconceivable, and in the vast majority of cases anal penetration does not exist. So you certainly are not at all a hetero-curious! And you are not even a gay-curious, because I don’t think you’re frustrated with gay sexuality. And then your relationship with girls has a sexual component, which will not be dominant, but exists and is not negligible. That you tend to create an affective relationship more easily with girls seems to me something more than possible, what I hardly can understand is the fact that you cannot find a gay affective relationship coordinated with sexual interest. But the solution to this apparent strangeness, which is the only one that doesn’t fit into the dimension of true bisexuality, you give it yourself in your premise when you say that a gay intercourse provokes you to feel guilty and a heterosexual one not. If you overcame this conditioning of a social nature knowing a gay guy with whom to build a truly mutual and deep relationship, I think you would fall in love and also on an emotional level! It has not happened yet, but it will happen!
A hug. Project

Thanks Project, Your considerations are very logical. So, from what I understand, you don’t see me at all as a hetero-curious, but rather as a bisexual who is strongly oriented towards homosexuality. I add to your considerations some clarifications: I had a couple of stories with girls, between 17 and 22 years. Stories long enough (a couple of years each) and quite painful. The first because the girl lived in another city and my so called falling in love had been essentially an infatuation (sexually we didn’t go beyond the kisses); with the second one I had established a relationship based on competitiveness that did not last. The strange thing is that this girl, very pretty I have to say, had a little masculine ways (she was riding a motorcycle and practiced martial arts) and I didn’t like this because I wanted her to be much more feminine. Sexually there was enough understanding, even if we never went beyond mutual masturbation (practiced almost always in the dark or in the shade). In short, a sexually not really uninhibited relationship. We didn’t look for penetration (I didn’t ask her and she didn’t even) and we didn’t even practice oral sex. As I told you before, having oral sex with a girl has never drove me crazy (I did it in a few cases, but really it didn’t drive me crazy). During the two years of relationship with this girl I could not help but masturbate thinking … about the gay experience I had had with a classmate at 17. Here too nothing stratospheric, we masturbated each other, almost for fun, during a white week and then the year after, I had come forward and we had agreed to meet one evening at my house to repeat the experience. So we ended up seeing each other one night when my parents were outside, we completely undressed and masturbated (with the light on, I underline it). A unique episode, never repeated with this classmate, after this episode we always pretended that nothing had happened between us. And this was not the first guy I had sexual contact with. The first, as I wrote to you, was when I was 14 years old (we were both still in eighth grade). It was probably because sex with these guys was uninhibited and satisfying while sex with the girls was inhibited and unsatisfying, but from those experiences I began to think, not without anguish and confusion, that I was gay. But my thought in those years was: if I found an uninhibited girl to have satisfying sex, then everything would change. Perhaps this is a recurring thought of many gay or bisexual boys who don’t accept their homosexuality. Of course, with time, seeing that things didn’t change (my masturbation became more polarized towards homosexuality, I couldn’t find uninhibited girls – but was I looking for?) I gradually became more aware that my homosexual tendency was not a temporary thing but a constant. On affection I agree with you. As I said, for some guys (two definitely), when I was between 15 and 20 years, I took a crush (I often thought of them, I masturbated thinking of them, and I didn’t think of them only in a sexual key, I loved them for their way of being), and this simultaneously with my hetero stories (but I didn’t masturbate thinking about girls with whom I was “in love”…). Unfortunately, social, cultural and personal conditioning are still such that it is still impossible for me today to think of a couple’s life with a guy, lived in the sunlight. While with a girl I certainly don’t have problems, affectivity works very well, even if I have to sacrifice full sexual satisfaction.
A hug, Mark

Hello Mark, the most striking thing in your mail is the weight of conditioning that you suffered: “but from those experiences I began to think, not without anguish and confusion, that I was gay.” But why anguish and confusion? You didn’t do anything to go to a straight life, which I think would have been completely unsustainable, because you say that the affection with girls was fine but you should have made some sacrifices regarding sexuality. One like you, bisexual with a 90% -95% gay inclination (based on the frequency of the masturbation fantasies) is in fact “almost gay” and if you had made a choice oriented towards heterosexual marriage, given that for you a straight sexuality is possible, you would have done as many gay guys who, since they can get to have sex with a girl, they say: ok, then I’m straight and marriage for me is the ideal solution, it’s okay with my family, is what everyone expects from me,. . . I should just do some “little renunciation” on the sexual field! But married gays, as well as married bisexuals with 95% gay propensity, underestimate the extent of that renunciation. You yourself say that when you were with the girls you didn’t masturbate thinking about them but thinking about your previous gay experiences, but when the sexuality of the couple goes in a different direction from that of masturbation, the real sexuality, that is the one with which you can feel gratified both sexually and emotionally, it is not that of the couple sex, but the one free from all expectations, that is masturbation. Indeed it is typical of married gays to practice gay masturbation in an exclusive way even when they live a straight sex life with their wife (early years of marriage), and this is enough, together with social pressure to keep those guys tight to their marriage, but when heterosexuality then fades completely, because a woman feels that there is something wrong, even though she may not be able to understand what, the sexual and emotional attraction force of gay sexuality becomes more and more urgent with all its strength and the straight marriage definitely goes into crisis. A couple’s life without a strong sexual feeling, at least at the beginning, is destined to show all its limitations in the long run. In other words it is a choice that is not instinctive but mediated by reason, for reasons of utility and convenience, in the name of those reasons one accepts to make “small sacrifices” on a sexual level, but these sacrifices are not at all small and are not at all on a sexual level only and in the end make the life of this strange heterosexual couple absolutely unsatisfactory. The risk of a wrong choice such as marriage, in these conditions is high, because saying bisexual doesn’t mean at all that gay or straight it’s the same, but it means that, with rare exceptions, one of the two orientations is strongly prevalent. Between the non-rejection of a woman and the “real” desire to live sexuality with that woman there is an infinite number of possible gradations and the problem of bisexuals is linked to the fact that a couple relationship, hetero or gay, starts with the assumption of being exclusive. A bisexual with 95% gay polarization will most likely give up without too many regrets to a straight sexuality, which basically belongs to him in a marginal way, but he will never sensibly give up a gay identity that characterizes him in a strong way, driven only by reasons social type or because he was conditioned to see the homosexuality as inherently wrong. I think that beyond all theoretical reasoning, for you, despite the social pressures, the idea of marriage is now a hypothesis put aside in a definitive way and without regrets. Unfortunately for many bisexual guys strongly polarized in the gay direction, things are not like that, and marriage looks like a mirage, a lifeline, and this inevitably leads to very serious problems. I add a question that seems important to me. This exchange of mails I think could be of considerable benefit to several guys. If you agreed, these emails could be published on the forum, on blogs and could be inserted in the chapter about bisexuality of the manual “Being Gay”, preceded by an exchange of emails between me and a hetero-curious. In this way it could be possible to give our readers the right coordinates to interpret many phenomena and to avoid wrong choices. Obviously, emails can be modified by you as you deem appropriate to avoid putting your privacy at risk, but I don’t see how it could be put at risk since there are no specific references of any kind. Let me know what you think.
A hug. Project

Hello Project, thanks for your comment. Excuse me, but I think it is practically impossible for a 14-year-old boy to have a homosexual experience, even if limited to mutual masturbation, without experiencing, afterwards, anguish and confusion. Even though I had wanted that experience, I was aware that it was a homosexual experience and it was not something made for play (like: I close my eyes while you masturbate me and I think it’s a girl I like a lot who is masturbating me). No, while with my partner we touched each other, I was interested in his sex, and in him as a boy. After reaching orgasm, however, the excitement (which decreases the inhibitory brakes and the control) has disappeared and, therefore, having regained control, disturbance and anguish took over. That is: what I just did is gay sex, gay sex is considered ugly by parents, relatives and friends, what I did is ugly. Moreover, if what I have done is an indication of what I am (that is, I am a homosexual), then I am disturbed and distressed. And here’s the whole attempt to rationalize the thing like: it’s an isolated case, it happened because I didn’t have a girlfriend, if I found a girl I would not think about these things, etc. etc. If the 14-year-old boy had been really straight, problems wouldn’t have arisen, I think, because he would have thought right away that it was the girl of his dreams who was masturbating him. And the next day maybe he would masturbate thinking about the girl of his dreams and not about what he had really done with his classmate. I, 14 years old, instead, after that experience, in the following days had masturbated just thinking about that experience. But I also rationalized gay masturbation, thinking that it was due to the fact that the only sexual experience to remember was that. As a rationalization it was really weak, but as you can understand the environmental pressure of parents, relatives and friends, wasn’t week at all. Here is the reason for anxiety and disturbance. But I don’t understand one thing: why do you say that I have not done everything to go to a straight life?
A hug, Mark
P.S. If you want you can publish everything, in full.

Hello Mark! First of all, thank you for permission to publish the emails, but I have to try to do an organic job with an exchange of emails with a true hetero-curious and I must also rewrite part of the chapter of Being Gay about bisexuality and it will take a few days.
Regarding the substance of your last email I totally agree, I don’t think I could better describe the mechanisms that lead to feel gay sex as a fault and a wrong thing due to family and social pressures. But the problem lies precisely in those familiar and social pressures, sometimes so deeply internalized that they become almost components of the ego. The fact that in Italian society, as it is, a 14 year old boy can be complexed by a gay sexual experience is something evident, the fact is that the upstream conditioning is only the result of a total ignorance and a lot of prejudices, this was what I meant when I told you that I didn’t understand what you could be afraid of. Complexes towards gay sex really exist and gays too experience them at least at the beginning, but I know that the problems are above all at the beginning …
A hug. Project

Thanks Project. And what about my question about why you say I didn’t do anything to go to a straight life?

Hello Mark. I mean that you have not forced yourself to get to an exclusive heterosexuality that you did not feel really yours, which means that, at least in adulthood, family and social conditionings have clearly been overcome, there is perhaps some atmosphere of forbidden surrounding gay sex, but it is not an oppressive atmosphere that leads you to do what you don’t want or to put aside what you want. You didn’t force yourself because you had your substantial psychological independence, perhaps earned with difficulty, but now reached and consolidated. Keep in mind that even today there are gays, that is, people who have no interest at all in girls, who, because maybe even if thinking of guys they can also get to have a sexual intercourse with a girl, force themselves to “behave like heterosexuals”, in these cases the problems are big and they are not problems related to sexuality, that is to say to an uncertain sexual orientation, on the contrary here the gay orientation is very well defined, but they are problems of psychological dependence. In essence these guys cannot make themselves independent from a homophobia internalized at a very early age and now acquired. This homophobia forces them to act against their very nature and deeply affects them making them insecure. Just in these days I’m exchanging emails with a straight guy who also had some gay experiences, very minimal for the truth, in early adolescence, but who continues to give a disproportionate weight to these things as if they could put in crisis the possibility of fully experiencing sexuality with his girlfriend, which instead goes objectively well, because the girl is intelligent and she cares about him. In that boy’s childhood there was a terrible relationship with his father, including very frequent beatings and public humiliations, he felt like an unwanted child, that is probably the source of insecurity that leads that boy to think he is not trustworthy and he’s not able to guarantee his girlfriend a satisfying married life when they will be married, and in this context the overestimation of a minimum of gay exploration in early adolescence fits perfectly, especially since those gay experiences were also a way of doing something that his father thought execrable, that is, of reacting to his father’s oppressive power. Note that the episodes of gay exploration had been completely forgotten and that the masturbation of that boy had always been in a straight key, which leaves no doubt about his total heterosexuality.
A hug. Project

_____________

If you like, you can join the discussion on this post on Gay Project Forum: http://gayprojectforum.altervista.org/T-exchange-of-emails-with-a-bisexual-almost-gay

Advertisements

FORM PRETENDED STRAIGHT TO GAY AT AGE 30

Hello Project, 
31, almost married, I say almost because in the end I did not get married, it was impossible for me, my girlfriend and I had planned our wedding in six months. I used to think that the idea of marrying would put an end to my problems, but I was beginning to feel trapped, I hadn’t said anything to my girlfriend. According to her all things  were going very well because I was able to have satisfactory sexual intercourse with her, but I imagined I was with a guy and that was the only way I could get excited. In practice I imagined her completely devoid of her femininity and also endowed with male sexual attributes. The more I realized that it was not so, the more I felt disappointed. 
She wanted me and did everything to excite me, there was some physical response but she didn’t really excite me at all. We have never had penetrative intercourses, I would not have really made it, in short I felt almost a sense of repulsion, I felt it quite as a violence on myself, and so at six months from the final choice I told her, but also to her family and mine, that I didn’t feel like getting married. My God! What happened! My mother thought I had another girl and my now ex-girlfriend thought it too, they bombarded me with questions of all kinds, they thought of everything, but the idea that I could be gay didn’t even touch them, perhaps only my father had some doubt. With my ex-girlfriend and her family the break could not be more traumatic than it was, with my parents things went differently, for my mother my ex was right to think that I betrayed her, from my father, the response was that if I didn’t feel at ease I did well to break before the marriage.
Now they expect (my mother certainly) from me that I bring home another girl, according to them such a thing is obvious and necessary, but in reality I not only have no girl to bring home but I should bring home a guy and moreover much younger than me, ten years younger than me. If I did something like that I don’t even imagine the reaction. They certainly don’t suspect at all that I’m gay (some doubt “maybe” my father) and that I can be with one who is ten years younger than me, even if my father is 16 years older than my mother, but they are straight and this is considered normal. 
I met my boyfriend a year ago. We met on the train, during a trip to Hungary. A good part of the trip was at night, in an almost deserted train, on the carriage there would have been 5/6 people and we had a compartment just for us. We talked a lot, then he fell asleep on the seats and it was just beautiful to be in front of him, by the way, is also a nice guy. Then he woke up and we started talking again, inevitably about girls (speech started by him) and told me that “it was not his kind”. I looked at him in amazement and he asked me: “And you?” And at that point I told him the truth. 
The embarrassment but also the mutual interest was enormous, he asked me about my experiences on a sexual level and I told him that I had never been with anyone, except for a bit of petting, even pushed, but with girls, and he replied that he too had never been with anyone but that he wanted it to happen only if he really fell deeply in love with another guy. We exchanged cell phone numbers. He told me so many things about the family, in short, a nice climate has been created. We spoke until arrival. He got off the train before me. 
That journey literally shocked my life. I was hoping with all my strength that he would call me and it happened, then we met often when he returned to Italy because he lives in a city that is 20 minutes by train from mine. So we always spent Sunday together. I felt for him an infinite tenderness and I wanted him and also on a sexual level but given what he had told me I never took a step that could put him in trouble. At first I had not told him anything about my ex-girlfriend, but then I had to tell him and there I understood that he had fallen in love with me. 
He reacted with panic, he was very worried, he told me that I should not get into trouble but he always talked about me and never about himself, in the end he told me clearly that his dream would be with me, because I had shamelessly tried to get in touch with him, and he kissed me for the first time. After two days I truncated with my ex-girlfriend. I really wanted to have sex with him but for months I never did it because I felt like I was somehow going to do something wrong. We saw each other, we went out, we were fine together, I was very tempted but I tried to avoid, then we finally got there. He took the initiative and I let him do. 
It was not a thing of sex, it was a deep need both his and mine. When I hugged him, I felt a total transport, I never had the slightest doubt that my boyfriend could only be him. With me he is very tender but also very determined, has its ideas in mind and I really like this, we can say that I am also happy that in practice the choices are made especially by him, because in the end he does what I would do even if maybe I would not have the courage to say it. I’m fine with him and I think he’s fine with me (he knows about this mail, I made him read it). 
But what will we do now that we have arrived at this point? I think we are now a real couple but he is at university and will have to study for a few years. How can we think of a couple life? His parents don’t know anything about us but wouldn’t take it well, especially since I’m 10 years older than him. In practice we still need the support of our families for quite a few years. He doesn’t seem worried about this, he says that what matters is that I am there and that the fact that others know can only be one more problem, not an extra freedom. 
He does not even want to hear about a possible coming out or even about making plans too long. I would always like to have him with me and instead we see each other at most once a week. I don’t complain, for heaven’s sake, in fact I consider myself very lucky but I dream of being able to live with him, in a house of ours, fallig asleep in his arms, but now the situation is stalemate and will remain so for years. A I feel inside bit of melancholy, because I found a wonderful guy but I cannot live with him the life that I would like and he too would like. And it could be so easy to experience total happiness! 
If you want to publish the story, he agrees. A hug, Project. 
Former solitary traveler
___________
If you like, you can join the discussion on this post on Gay Project Forum: http://gayprojectforum.altervista.org/T-form-pretended-straight-to-gay-at-age-30

THOMAS AND KLAUS MANN TWO HOMOSEXUALS

On November 20th, 1968, during a general audience, Pope Paul VI expressed himself so: “One forgets that man in all his spiritual being, that is, in his supreme faculties of knowing and loving, is correlative to God; is made for him; and every conquest of the human spirit increases in him the restlessness, and ignites the desire to go further, to reach the ocean of being and life, the full truth, which alone gives beatitude. Removing God as a term of research, to which man is by nature addressed, means to mortify man himself. The so-called “death of God” turns into death of man. We are not the only ones to affirm such a sad truth. Here is a testimony that has been left by a very cultured avant-garde writer and unhappy type of modern culture (Klaus Mann, son of Thomas). He wrote: “There is no hope. We intellectuals, traitors or victims, we would do well to recognize our situation as absolutely desperate. Why should we make illusions? We are lost! we are won! The voice that pronounced these words – the testimony goes on -, a voice a little veiled, but pure, harmonious and strangely suggestive, was that of a student of philosophy and literature, with whom I met by chance in the ancient university city of Uppsala. What he had to say was interesting, and it was still characteristic: I heard similar statements by intellectuals everywhere in Europe. . . And he said in a voice that was no longer certain: We should abandon ourselves to absolute despair …” Dear sons, for us no, it is not so.”

Who is Klaus Mann, the man Paul VI considers the most unhappy paradigm of modern culture? And what is the meaning of the reference made by Klaus Mann to that student met in the ancient university city of Uppsala? As mentioned by Paul VI himself, Klaus Mann is one of the sons of Thomas Mann, that is the son of one of the men who most influenced European culture in the last hundred years, but it is not about literature that I intend to speak.

The fact that Klaus is son of Thomas has enormous significance, from my point of view, because both the father and the son found themselves having to deal with their homosexuality and in front of it they gave very different answers. In the work of Thomas Mann the atmospheres are very particular and, in general, the gay reader feels immersed in a world that doesn’t seem strange to him at all. The conflict between the “serene” bourgeois world where everything is codified and ordered and the appeal of art that has anyway the charm of the abyss, often emerges. This conflict in “Death in Venice” reveals itself, out of metaphor, as the conflict between heterosexuality and homosexuality.

Thomas Mann, born in 1875 in Lübeck, when he was a high school student, confessed his feelings to a friend who didn’t share them because he simply couldn’t share them. That experience constituted the first falling in love of Thomas Mann. One gets the impression that the image of that high school mate often returns within Mann’s work. But Mann experienced a much more engaging falling in love with Paul Ehrenberg, a young violinist and impressionist painter a year younger than him. Between 1899 and 1903, according to the diaries and letters of Thomas Mann, falling in love became a real infatuation, which led to an intense relationship between the two guys. A painting by Ehrenberg entitled “Die Hetzjagd” (the hunt) hung for some time in the room of Thomas Mann. In those years, from a set of memories of family life written by Thomas for Paul Ehrenberg, who lived in Munich, the drafting of “The Buddenbrooks” began.

Both the character of Hans Hansen of “Tonio Kröger” (1903) and the character of the painter in the novel “The hungry men” (1903) and that of Rudolf ‘Rudi’ Schwerdtfeger, also a violinist and an object of homosexual interest in the “Doctor Faustus” clearly refer to Paul Ehrenberg. In the case of Tonio Kröger the analogies become very strong because in Munich, where he used to meet Ehrenberg, Mann saw by chance for the first time a twenty year old girl who was talking animatedly with the tram ticket collector, he tried to know who she was, he was told that she was Katia Pringsheim, a student of mathematics, physics and chemistry, daughter of the great mathematician Alfred Israel Pringsheim, a university professor very rich and of Jewish family, who lived in a grand palace the most beautiful life that a high bourgeois could dream of. The professor Pringsheim was not an observant Jew, and he let his sons follow Lutheranism but it was not enough to save his family from Nazi persecution. Mann, through friends, managed to get introduced to Pringsheim and “fell in love” (I’ll explain later why I put this word in quotation marks) with Katia but she wished to enjoy her youth and was not willing to marry and nothing followed.

Mann left for Denmark where he wrote the Tonio Kröger, in which Tonio falls deeply in love with both his school friend Hans Hansen and the young girl Ingeborg Holm, both had blue eyes, light hair and a distinctly Nordic appearance. The strength of Tonio Kröger derives from the fact that it is a substantially autobiographical novel in which the true passions of the young Mann are transfused. It should be emphasized that Tonio is identified as “a different one”, in this case for artistic reasons, that is, as someone who cannot enjoy what others enjoy. In Denmark Mann not only wrote the Tonio Kröger but also wrote letters to Katia Pringsheim that convinced the girl to agree to the wedding, celebrated on February 11th, 1905. It was a “happy” wedding, here too I have to put the term happy in quotation marks, six children were born. However, many doubts remain in considering this marriage as the outcome of a love story.

In his essay “On marriage – toast to Katia” Mann argues that marriage and art are both a bourgeois service to life, an ethical pact and a sacrament, because it is precisely through art and marriage that the spirit arrives to dominate on matter, on flesh and blood. It should be noted that shortly before the marriage Mann had lived with Ehrenberg a very strong relationship and it was not a sublimated relationship, such as the one described in Tonio Kröger, but a sexual relationship that decades later Mann himself will consider the fundamental emotional experience of his life with unequivocal words: “I lived and loved, . . . finally, with a new happiness, because I held in my arms someone I was deeply in love with”, but, it must be underlined, these evaluations of the relationship with Ehrenberg have matured in Mann several decades after their relationship.

At the time of their relationship, Mann’s attitude was radically different and was dominated by a kind of self-denial as a homosexual and by the condemnation of “abnormality”. In practice Mann condemned himself to marriage to try to remove from himself the homosexual passion he had lived deeply with Ehrenberg. Thomas’s brother, Heinrich, who also claimed that Thomas’s relationship with Ehrenberg was madness and insisted that his brother get married soon, suspected that the marriage had been accepted by Thomas for reasons of social opportunity, of course it is that the social position of his father-in-law undoubtedly favored Thomas.

Some, given the existences of marriage, have tried to talk about a bisexuality of Thomas Mann but the reality would rather make us think of an escape from homosexuality to a bourgeois paradise much more reassuring. The poor Ehrenberg had no choice but to follow the path of marriage, too, and ended up marrying the painter Lilly Teufel. Mann, after the wedding, wrote “Royal Highness”, the story is set in the Grand Duchy of Grimmburg, a tiny imaginary state, reduced to situations of economic hardship, and the protagonist is the second son of the Grand Duke who is forced to marry a rich heiress to raise the fate of the state. The contrast between “Royal Highness” and “Tonio Kröger” could not be more jarring. Thomas Mann had six children from Katia, the first two were admittedly homosexual, the eldest Erika, born in Munich on November 9th 1905, married on July 25th 1926, not yet twenty-one years old, with Gustaf Gründgens, but in 1929 divorced. Erika, a declared lesbian, had her first relationship in 1932 with Pamela Wedekind, whom she met in Berlin and who was engaged to her brother Klaus, who was also a homosexual.

We known, in successive periods, at least three other important and sexually passionate lesbian relationships of Erika Mann, on whose sexual orientation there was never any doubt. Her father Thomas had a very positive attitude towards women with whom his daughter had a love affair, but he didn’t show the same openness towards his son Klaus. The attitudes of Klaus and his father towards homosexuality were radically antithetical and this didn’t encourage dialogue between them. I don’t elaborate the discourse on Klaus Mann’s homosexuality here, because I will take it analytically again after concluding that on his father.

Even after the marriage Mann didn’t abandon the homosexual topic and in 1912 he published “Death in Venice” which was the basis of the homonymous film by Luchino Visconti of 1971 and of the homonymous 1973 melodrama by Benjamin Britten. Needless to say, both Visconti and Britten were homosexuals. The story is imbued with a tragic spirit. Gustav von Aschenbach, a fifty-year-old man who dedicated his whole life to art, after remaining a widower, went to Venice and in the grand Hotel des Bains in the Lido island, was struck by the beauty of a Polish boy aged more or less 14, Tadzio, sailor suit, stayed in the Hotel with all his family. On the boy Aschenbach builds a thousand arguments apparently related to his conception of art, while he observes the boy trying not to be discovered. But it’s too hot and in Venice cholera breaks out, the authorities minimize but Aschenbach realizes that the danger is real, he should warn the family of that boy but he doesn’t because he doesn’t want to see him leave, in the meantime, from an exchange of looks Aschenbach is led to believe that the boy shares his feelings, the presence of Tadzio becomes obsessive in Aschenbach’s mind who comes to realize that his interest is a sexual interest and that the art plan is just a fictional overlap. Aschenbach weakened and sickly sees Tadzio play with friends and then raise an arm almost to greet him, that will be the last image of Tadzio that will accompany the last breath of the man who had hiddenly loved him. The novel has its undeniable tragic power, but the association between homosexuality and death seems to be a too emphasized theorem.

Mann’s difficulty in accepting his homosexuality was also found in 1925 when Thomas wrote a small essay entitled “On Marriage”. In this little work Mann opposes marriage (obviously heterosexual) to homosexuality as if they were the only two possible options. And his position against homosexuality appears very clear, I would say far too sharp to appear credible. In 1927, when Mann was 52, during a holiday in Silt, he met the then 17-year-old Klaus Heuser and invited him to his villa in Munich. The one for Klaus Heuser was probably the last great passion of Mann, but always very restrained. When Heuser went to see Mann in Zurich in 1935, Mann noted in his diary: “He has not changed at all or just a little: skinny, still a boy at twenty-four, the same eyes. I kept looking at him and saying ‘My God!’ … He expected me to kiss him but I didn’t, but before he left I was able to say a few words of love to him.”

I come now to a critical moment, not only for the life of Thomas Mann and his sons but for the whole of Germany and unfortunately also for the whole of Europe and not only for it. The elections of May 1928 had brought to the Reichstag 12 National Socialist deputies, but already in the 1930 elections the National Socialist party of Hitler had passed to 107 deputies. In the 1932 elections Hitlerian deputies rose to 230 out of 608 seats in total and the National Socialist party became the first party in Germany. Hitler ran for the presidential elections of January 1933. In the elections, Hindenburg, a hero of the First World War, outgoing president, appeared the only candidate able to stop the rise of Hitler and was supported by a coalition that went from the nationalists to the Social Democrats. Hindenburg again won the presidency with 53% of the votes against 37% of Hitler, who was appointed Chancellor on January 30th, leading a coalition of parties (Nazis and German-national popular party), but a few days later, in the elections of March 5th 1933, the climate had radically changed. It was voted in the week when the Reichstag building was burned (February 27th 1933).

Marinus van der Lubbe, a 24-year-old Dutch communist, blamed for the fire, was beheaded for this reason on January 10th 1934. The majority of historians agrees that the fire had been organized for political purposes by Nazi leaders, the evidences in this sense are many and were collected from independent sources. The Reichstag fire became a pretext to banish an anti-Bolshevik crusade against democratic parties. The fact is that Hiltler convinced Hindenburg to issue the so-called “Reichstag decree” on the same day of February 27th 1933, on February 28th the decree became law and most of the rights guaranteed by the Weimar Constitution were suspended for emergency reasons. In this climate, the elections for the renewal of the Reichstag were held on March 5th. The leaders of the Social Democratic Party were forced to flee. Despite an endless series of threats and intimidation, the Nazis didn’t obtain the absolute majority. Hitler was therefore forced to maintain an alliance with the German-national popular party. Hitler aimed not at a coalition majority but at obtaining the so-called “decree of full powers”, i.e. a legislative power independent of the Raichstag, to pass the decree of full powers a majority of 2/3 of the Reischstag was needed. On March 23th the decree was approved with the support of the Catholic Center and with the only Social Democrats voting against, and entered into force on March 27th. Many social democrats were physically prevented from entering Parliament while all the communist deputies, who constituted 17% of Parliament, had been arrested.

Given this historical picture, one wonders what was the position of Thomas Mann and his sons. If one considers that in 1929 Mann was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature it is easy to understand that his position would not have been indifferent to the Nazis. In January 1933 Mann held a public lecture at the University of Munich on the theme “Pain and Greatness of Richard Wagner” in which he effectively denied the links between Nazism and Wagnerian art, the Nazis present in the hall gave signs of nervousness because Mann represented a voice openly out of the chorus, just in the critical moments of Hitler’s assault on power. Mann realized the danger, especially since his wife’s family was of Jewish origin, and he immediately moved to Switzerland and then to the United States, and a group of German anti-Nazi exiles gathered around him.

I limit myself to remembering that from 1940 to the end of the war Thomas Mann recorded a long series of speeches in German that were broadcast by Radio London to be heard in Germany. In these speeches Mann is the first to refer to the extermination of Jews in the gas chambers, the report of crimes perpetrated by the Nazis is documented and there is a very clear attempt to awaken the consciences of the Germans by making them aware of the atrocities that Hitler’s propaganda had systematically hidden. There is no doubt that Mann was one of the very few and tenacious “German” animators of anti-Nazism. Immediately after the surrender of Germany on May 8th 1945, Thomas Mann will read in German on the radio the radio message titled “The lagers” announcing the destruction of the culture and life of Germany and making the Germans understand how the horror of the extermination camps had shamefully destroyed the image of Germany in Europe, Mann argues that this is a sin against the German spirit that cannot be forgiven.

If already in 1945 Europe began to make a difference between German and Nazi, this is due to the few characters who behaved like Thomas Mann. But one thing should be stressed, Thomas Mann did not make choices of convenience but of conscience, and when in 1952, the most ferocious “McCarthyism” spread in the United States, a sort of witch hunt against the Communists or presumed such, wanted by the Republican Senator Mc Carthy assisted by two young men who would have had considerable weight in the history of the USA as Richard Nixon and Robert Kennedy, Thomas Mann became indignant and abandoned the United States as the greatest foreign intellectuals did, for example Charlie Chaplin and his wife Oona O’Neil. Even if the discourse would deserve much further study, let’s leave aside Thomas Mann and take care of his son, whom Paul VI presents as the unhappy paradigm of modern culture.

Klaus Henry Mann, second son of Thomas was born in Munich on November 18th 1906. From the age of 19, in 1925, with the publication of his first novel “The sacred dance”, an autobiographical book of a unique and disarming sincerity in which he portrays the life of the gay Berlin of the 20s, he declared himself homosexual. In the same year “Anja e Ester” also came out, a very delicate love story between two girls. If you think that the pretext for the murderer of Ernst Röhm and the top of the SA by Hitler in 1934 was just homosexuality, it is understood that in 1933, with Hitler’s coming to power, the situation of Klaus became particularly dangerous and Klaus followed without hesitation his father in exile.

He was a sensitive and fragile 26-year-old guy, but he was one of the most tenacious and courageous adversaries of Nazism. His liberalism was guided by great ideals, it was, in essence, a faith that in some respects recalled certain aspects of socialism. Fascinated by the Christian ideal, Klaus had deep friendships in every social and cultural level. He himself tells us with the utmost seriousness of fleeting loves with some sailors from the port of Marseilles. He loved without being returned the surrealist writer René Crevel and later had a history of a few years with an American journalist Thomas Quinn Curtiss. He became a fraternal friend with the lesbian writer Annemarie Schwarzenbach, with André Gide, Nobel Prize for Literature in 1947, and Jean Cocteau, a French academic, author of novels, theater and film director. Both Gide and Cocteau were explicitly homosexual. A work by Klaus Mann is particularly well-known to the general public due to its film reworking, which won the Oscar in 1980, and is “Mephisto or the story of a career”, in which Klaus describes the story of his former brother-in-law, the actor Gustaf Gründgens, who had divorced his sister Erika in 1929, and had sold his soul to the devil in order to make a career in the Nazi regime. Obviously Gründgens didn’t like the publication of the work at all. The adoptive son of Gründgens, in the 1960s, turned to the court and after seven years of legal battles he succeeded in obtaining from the German Supreme Court that the book was not reprinted, but after his death the book was printed again.

In 1934 Klaus published an article titled “Homosexuality and Fascism” for a Prague magazine and composed a fictional biography of Piotr Illich Cajcovskij, also a homosexual. In 1937 he published “Window with bars” on the last days of Ludwig of Bavaria, the homosexual king who hated war and loved art. A film will be drawn from the book by Luchino Visconti, “Ludwig”, in 1972.

Just before the war, in America, Klaus lives poor and alone, tries suicide but then reacts and when the United States enter the war he enlists and enters the military department of the Ritchie Boys, a special group made up of Jews and German refugees, particularly trained in psychological warfare who are very motivated and know perfectly the German mentality. In 1942 the American soldier Klaus Henry Mann was added to the Fifth Army that would fight in Africa and in Italy, before departure Klaus Mann asks to have an interview with a Catholic military chaplain because he intends to convert to Catholicism abandoning Lutheranism, as it is clear from the letters (“Briefe und Antworten” Letters and Answers). It seems that the meeting actually took place but that the chaplain refused the conversion, probably because of Klaus’ homosexuality.

In Italy Klaus is employed as a war reporter following the Fifth Army, he works with Rossellini as a screenwriter of “Paisà”, after the war he goes in person to visit the horrors of the Nazi extermination camps. Intoxicated by drugs, in 1949 he goes to Cennes to detoxify himself. On May 20th, after walking for a long time in the rain, waiting for a certain Luois, he swallows a massive dose of barbiturates and on May 21th he dies at the age of 42. He was accused of everything, even of being a spy of Stalin but he remains a character of the highest nobility of mind for anyone with the ability to understand it, but Paul VI, in calling him the model of the desperate intellectual of the ‘900 that in the death of God had condemned to death the man behaved towards him exactly as the Catholic chaplain who had refused his conversion.

__________

If you want, you can participate in the discussion of this post open on the Gay Project Forum: http://gayprojectforum.altervista.org/T-thomas-and-klaus-mann-two-homosexuals

MARRIED GAY GUYS

This post is dedicated to married gays. I will leave aside all the considerations linked to sexual orientation related to guys who have a straight sex life at the couple level and have a typically gay sex life at the masturbation level, because these considerations have an important meaning only before getting married. I will start here from the situation of married gays, as it showed itself to me through the chats with people living this condition.

The totality (or almost totality) of married gays arrives at the wedding with the full awareness of being gay. These are guys who have been masturbating for years exclusively with gay fantasies, that is, thinking about guys, who often have lived sexual experiences with other guys even after 15/16 years of age and even in adulthood, after 20 years of age, and have considered these experiences as “something that everyone does” (including hetero guys) and therefore not indicative of a gay orientation, even if in reality the involvement of a gay guy in a group masturbation session is very different from that of a straight guy. All this, ignoring seemingly minor episodes, such as experiencing erection in the presence of certain guys or the desire to see them naked in the locker rooms of gyms or swimming pools.

The pressure towards heterosexuality (conscious or unconscious) exerted by the environment on these guys has been so strong as to bring them to stop their gay instincts at the level of masturbation and to orient themselves at the same time towards a couple heterosexual sex.

Generally when a guy who suffered a strong social pressure towards heterosexuality, despite his being gay, that is even though oriented in his free sexuality (which manifests itself in masturbation) towards other guys, experiences for the first time a sexual intercourse with a girl his reaction is not necessarily bad at all and, whatever the level of sexual involvement in the contact with the girl (even minimal) is, that sexual intercourse becomes the typical sign that “the gay problem is overcome”. A gay man is a gay man, not an impotent and, especially when he has lived for years in a situation of substantial sexual deprivation, if he is close to a girl in love with him, in a situation that pushes him to a heterosexual intercourse that has at least some features of intimacy and non-superficial warmth, can very well get to have a heterosexual intercourse somehow satisfying. It is clear that such a intercourse has nothing to do with the expression of the free sexuality of that guy who, even feeling terribly guilty, will continue “episodically” to masturbate thinking about guys, or will eventually completely repress his free sexuality forcing himself to put aside masturbation altogether in the belief that masturbation is the cause of the homosexuality.

The first straight intercourses of a gay guy lead him to the idea of having finally overcome the “gay phase” and to have found a “mature sexuality”. Often, for these guys, the fear that gay impulses will forcefully return to be felt is a push to intensify heterosexual intercourses and to go to marriage quickly. It’s the typical idea: “You saved me from homosexuality”, or: “If I get married and can have sex with her every day I will not think about masturbation and my gay impulses will disappear”. Often, therefore, gay guys who go to the marriage, experience periods of intense heterosexual activity, which however are characterized by a deep sense of ambiguity because in almost all cases, these guys, even making love every day with their girls (or with their young wives, if they have already married them) never talk with their mates about their sexual orientation problems. With wives, in principle, at least for some years after marriage, gay husbands do not even mention the problem of homosexuality, there is therefore no real interpersonal communication between husband and wife, who have daily sexual contacts but without an adequate level of trust and mutual communication.

In a percentage of cases around 10%, the guys talk to the girls openly about their doubts of being homosexuals, doubts that are automatically underestimated by girls, who having a straight sexuality are led to think that their boyfriends, by the simple fact that they have sex with them, can only be straight. Generally, a girl is more afraid of her boyfriend’s infidelity with another girl than of the fact that her boyfriend is gay. In some cases the girl thinks she can sexually reorient her boyfriend towards an exclusive heterosexuality by “sexually cuddling” her boyfriend exasperatedly, what results usually in a very quick and clear reaction of rejection. These attitudes as “Red Cross nurse of love” are lived by the guys as aggressive and not respectful towards them.

In the situations described above, the girl still remains convinced of the substantial heterosexuality of the guy but, in some cases at least (rare but not sporadic) the girl has instead full awareness of the fact that her partner is gay and she accepts him as such, that is, the girl, who is really in love with her boyfriend, consciously agrees to stay close to him without any sexual contact or with a sexual contact limited only to the purpose of conception of children, children who may also be explicitly desired by the guy. These attitudes that have something heroic (in a sense at least) are linked to the fact that the solitude of each of the two spouses with respect to the outside is so strong that they must bind each other with a kind of very close symbiosis in order to survive.

It should be emphasized that when a hug is too tight and too long-lasting it risks taking your breath away. In situations like the one described, mutual dependence is very strong and is felt as a bond that sooner or later ends up becoming constrictive. There are couples, and I have known some, who consciously married only to have children, and there are cases (and I have seen some examples) in which a heterosexual wife helps her gay husband to live like a gay man, an attitude in which the boundaries between pleasure and suffering are very fragile. In all these cases, however (about 15-20% of the total married gays) between husband and wife there is still a frank dialog and at least a relationship of friendship and mutual respect. When a gay guy marries a straight girl and they have no children the problems connected to the possible separation are above all of social and patrimonial nature.

Often a gay guy agrees to be with a girl by excluding in his mind the hypothesis of having children and when he realizes that this hypothesis for his wife is essential, the marriage becomes a kind of imposition for him. When there are children the problem of the relationship of a gay married with his homosexuality is extremely more delicate. The emergence of a homosexual tendency is experienced by a gay man who has children as something that can jeopardize the relationship with the children and the feelings of guilt can be very profound. I met a 49-year-old gentleman a few months ago, who had never had a conscious perception of his homosexuality (an exception in the field of married gays), he had a son more than 20 years old but nevertheless he realized that he had a sexual interest for a work colleague. When this gentleman contacted me in his words I felt a deep anguish, due to the fact that he had never suspected he could be gay and was scared of such idea, because his knowledge of gays derived only from reading newspapers and from attitudes typical of the mass media. This gentleman, whom I had the opportunity to hear several times, sincerely loved his wife and son and came to speak openly with both his wife and his son who accepted it and, paradoxically, this form of sincerity has strengthened family ties. That gentleman agreed to live his sexuality as a very private thing exclusively in terms of masturbation and fantasy, totally giving up the idea of looking for a mate and as people say in such situations of “making a new life”.

The solution may seem like a compromise solution to gays who have not been married and who have never had a heterosexual satisfactory family life, but for that gentleman radical choices would have involved a violent cut with the previous life and would have had very little prospect of leading to realization of a new life with another man.

In most cases, however, the family situations of married gays are quite different and much heavier. The lack of sincerity on the problem of homosexuality involves the establishment of a series of formal relationships and under them a series of conflicts, affective life becomes over time a sort of recitation or due act. With his wife, if she requires a frequent sexual intimacy, a married gay ends up pretending, which usually involves many problems, such as the lack of erection that can worry the wife but doesn’t worry her husband who knows that during masturbation with gay fantasies erection is all right. These problems touch the sphere of sexual intimacy of the couple and can be disruptive. Generally, at first a married gay guy tries to repress his homosexuality but over time this attempt is useless and the illusion of heterosexuality turns into a fiction of heterosexuality. The gay impulses are strengthened as the relationship with the wife deteriorates.

It is only right that I explicitly break a spear in favor of the wives who are often completely unaware of the true motivation of the deterioration of the relationship with their husbands and who live, also themselves, really difficult moments. Basically, even if their husbands acted in good faith or did not really realize what they would do with marriage, these women were misled about the true sexual identity of their husbands, who, moreover, were also confused about the matter. The fact remains that at a certain point, a woman who has married a gay man without being aware of it, understands that relations with her husband are substantially frozen, sexual intercourses are completely absent, dialogue is completely lacking, at least on important issues, and marriage is in crisis. When there are children the problem becomes difficult to manage, because in case of separation there is the problem of the entrustment that creates further conflicts between husband and wife which are often resolved in court.

How does he live his sexuality a gay married who has passed the phase (which in many cases doesn’t even exist) of the illusion of being heterosexual? Here the answers are the most varied:

1) The husband accustomed to sexual repression up to play the part of the heterosexual, limits himself to live a gay sexuality in terms of masturbation and porn sites found on the Internet. Such situations are, at most, compatible with the preservation of marriage, at least on a formal level, where there are children, because the external aspect of the family doesn’t change. Often this is the state of affairs to which things stop. The husbands can get to forums like Gay Project or other serious gay sites and simply look for friendships with other gays, often married too, in chat and at a distance. This solution allows a married gay to find a safety valve that puts him in a position to talk openly about his problems and also to find serious answers. It is obviously a compromise solution, but in situations such as those in which a gay married and with children lives it is a situation that is in many respects acceptable, since in most cases we are speaking about men who are no longer young and are totally lacking knowledge about the true life of gays. It should be borne in mind that for a non-young man the chances of finding a “serious” companion (that is, not the one-night experience [risk of aids!]) are not very high and moreover few gay men would be available to build an affective, stable and serious relationship with a man who has a family, has children and therefore has a number of other very strong emotional bonds.

2) If the husband thinks he has to regain lost time looking for a companion with whom to live his affectivity and his sexuality, and the husband is still thirty or so, he can experience situations similar to those of the so-called “frenetic phase” of sexuality of those who discover themselves gay or finally release their gay sexuality at a fully adult age. These guys are not content to masturbate looking at a porn site but sign up for erotic chats and dating sites, giving credit to the idea that the problem of finding a partner is actually a problem that can be solved easily “with a little effort”. Through the chat they get to sexual encounters, often even at risk of AIDS, because a user of dating sites can also have over 100 different partners in a year! Apart from the risk of AIDS, occasional sexual encounters generate feelings of disgust and frustration after the first times. However, it does not follow a rationalization of the behaviors but only the repetition of other attempts with other partners. I emphasize that in these situations the emotional dimension, which is essential in a gay’s emotional and sexual life, is practically completely absent. After a little practice of erotic chats and dating sites, a depressive phase takes place that depending on age can be more or less heavy.

3) There is however a third path followed by married gays towards their gay identity, and it is a path that can only be done in two. I state that the concrete realization of this third way, which is that of “loving friendship”, is not the result of an individual initiative, but is connected to the idea of being already really in two, that there is an “original affective couple reciprocity” and that a real relationship of affectionate friendship already exists, on which an explicit sexual dimension can also be inserted. Given that married gays who end up in a marriage crisis are not very young and are not only undeclared as gay but are declared as hetero, for them the idea of living their sexuality and their affectivity in a strictly private dimension is fundamental. In dating sites and erotic chats there are often people who don’t have too many problems to declare themselves gay, to go to gay clubs and to be seen around with mates clearly gay. Such things are very embarrassing for a married gay, for whom therefore the option of the amorous friendship remains substantially the most desirable. If that friendship is lived with great discretion, it allows the marriage to be maintained at least on a formal level and in some cases even the wives are not in principle opposed to such solutions that allow a stable relationship between the gay father and the children, avoiding putting their emotional growth at risk. I saw, in about 30% of cases, the development of a loving friendship between a married gay and a friend of his, also gay and undeclared. These relationships, even if they occur between fully adult men, have the freshness and genuineness of the first affective contacts between adolescents, allow the two partners to live a deep affective dimension and to integrate sexuality with moments of non-sexual intimacy, linked to totally sincere dialogue and openness and to mutual trust without restrictions, all things that have an enormous value and help not to trivialize sexual intercourse.

For the moment I stop here. I await further input from readers to be able to broaden and deepen the discussion. I would like to point out that the statistical sites show the constant presence of readers who use on the Google search engine keys to Gay Project as “married gays”. The problem exists and it is not statistically irrelevant as usually believed.

__________

If you want, you can participate in the discussion of this post open on the Gay Project Forum: http://gayprojectforum.altervista.org/T-married-gay-guys

SPLITTING BETWEEN GAY SEXUALITY AND HETERO AFFECTIVITY

To face the topic starting from a concrete basis and to invite all of you to say your opinion in order to enrich and complete the picture, I report here, with the permission of those involved, some traits of e-mails and some sections of a conversation in chat on the subject. Obviously the names are fictitious. Immediately after, you can read the text of the article GAY SEXUALITY AND HETERO AFFECTIVITY. I think it can somehow be the basis for a discussion, with all the reservations of the case.
_____________

Mail by Albert

[omissis] I grew up in a strange family, my parents think that homosexuality is a psychiatric illness that feminizes you, basically they don’t have the faintest idea of these things, a gay man, so to speak, normal in external behaviors, according to them , cannot even exist, that’s why they not only have never thought about the fact that I can be gay but they consider it radically impossible, because I don’t have anything of effeminate.

The absurd thing of my family is instead the fixed idea, of my mother in particular, that guys have always and only sexual fixed ideas on the girls, it could also be true, but for my mother the fact that her son can have sex with a girl before marriage is really inconceivable, is monstrous.

They think I have a girlfriend. When I talk about a colleague of the university, my mother surely assumes that I have for that girl some kind of sexual interest. Even now she tells me that I have to be careful and that “I don’t have to do stupid things! (sex)” But for her to do stupid things basically means just getting pregnant a girl.

Now she still behaves like that and thinks that I didn’t bring home a girl so as not to give my mother the opportunity to intervene to give me advice on an aspect of my life that she considers so important, always taking for granted that I can only be heterosexual. But when I was younger, 14/15/16 years old, my mother was heavily involved in my female friendships, she invited my female friends to my house and subjected them to a kind of scrutiny, it was something I could not stand. As for the guys, on the other hand, my parents never got involved in anything, they only warned me, but rarely, about those who talked too much about girls, because, according to my parents, they could take me on a bad road. In practice between the ages of 14 and 16 everything about the girls had to go to the scrutiny of my mother while male friends didn’t get involved.

At 14 I had a crush on a girl my schoolmate, that is, I better say I was very good with her but I didn’t feel sexually attracted even because I discovered the masturbation a year later, at 15, a bit late, I know. Anyway at the time of my first crush with a girl I can say that I felt it above all as a beautiful thing, I liked being with that girl even if I didn’t know how to give it an explanation. Then my mother understood what, according to her, was happening and she interfered heavily: “Who is she? Do you know her parents? Why you don’t invite her here at home?” etc. etc., in practice they made me hate her. She was a very pretty girl, but when she realized that I wanted or had to bring her to my house to let my parents know her, she absolutely didn’t want to hear reasons and she looked at me as if my way of doing was strange. Then such a thing it bothered me a lot because I thought I had done everything as it had to be done, that is, as my mother told me. Then I realized that I was perhaps succubus of my mother and that my so to say girlfriend had realized it.

Let’s say that after that I didn’t have any more fantasies about girls and my discovery of homosexuality took place. It happened in the summer when I turned 15, at the seaside. I was camping with my parents and with my sister. We stopped for almost a month in a camping and after a few days I could get to know other guys. I had met another guy who was 16 years old and my parents left me very free because I was with him and they trusted him. Actually he was a very good guy who seemed older than his age. I spent all day with him, from morning to late evening, I was fine, I felt comfortable, it made me feel older but he never talked about girls. He was modest to the incredible, a bit my opposite, I had no problem then to show me naked, perhaps because in the nudity I saw nothing sexual. For him I think it was exactly the opposite. I think it was just this that triggered the spring that made me enter the gay world. We took a bath and then we changed into a thicket near the beach. There I started to tease him because he never took off his swimsuit, he pretended not to hear and then I threw myself on him and ripped his swimsuit away by force, then he reacted and ripped away mine, then we did compare our equipment and he got an erection, I remember everything like it was now, he was red like a pepper, then began to masturbate and I imitated him, in practice I discovered masturbation like that. Then for a few days the thing went on great, so we masturbated each other, but then something happened that I didn’t like at all, he wanted to kiss me and I remember very well that I replied: “I’m not a fagot!” He pretended not to have heard and didn’t insist but our relationship changed radically, we continued to have sex but he was not at ease. After three days in this way we quarreled furiously and we also got into a fight. I realized that he was gay, even if he hadn’t told me it and I disliked very much being pampered by him, it almost made me sick, at least I told him so, even though I continued to masturbate in practice until now on the memory of what I had lived with him that summer. The point is this, I have never fallen in love with a guy. When I see a guy I like him, I would never be able to kiss him or be pampered by him. I read in the forum that many guys like these things even more than sex, but for me it is not so, I don’t see myself spending my life next to a guy, it seems to me an unnatural thing absolutely not mine.

In very recent times there was something important, I met a girl and for the first time I think I feel for her feelings, I like to stay close to her, to flood her of text messages and call her on the phone three or four times a day (I cannot more because we are hours on the phone), for me it’s just a pleasant company but there is a fact, for her I feel tenderness and a lot, but not really a sexual desire like what I feel for guys. Even if, after what happened at the camping beach, I no longer have had physical relationships with guys, I would like to explore the sexuality of a guy, it’s a kind of fixed idea, but for a girl I don’t feel the same things, I don’t know at all the sexuality of girls and I would feel a tremendous embarrassment if I had to have a sexual intercourse with a girl. I tried to masturbate thinking about that girl but it was just a forced thing, I came also to the ejaculation but just mechanically, in practice I didn’t feel any sexual transport. What I think is that I stopped in the middle of the ford, I don’t feel gay because I don’t fall in love with guys and I don’t feel heterosexual because girls sexually don’t tell me anything. I think that I could also stay with a girl but passively, that is, I would accept it but I would let her do everything, admitted and not granted that there can be results then. I feel strange, Project, in a great uncertainty, very unstable. In practice I don’t know what direction I have/want to give my life.
_______________

Chat with Nicola

Nicola writes: ok, now I go to the point, in short, I think I’m straight, you could ask me then why I’m here, if you give me some time I’ll explain, but I would like to start from the fact that I think I’m straight. “I think” it means that in practice I am convinced or almost convinced of it. So, I’ve always had girlfriends since I was little, at 16 I had my first real sexual intercourse with a girl, my first girlfriend.

I have had three girlfriends and with all of them I have had sexual intercourses and from that point of view things have always been all right, even auto-eroticism was all about girls. Now it’s almost a year since I’ve had my last girlfriend. Until recently, having sex with a girl was something missing, but now things are changing. I practice sports, I see a lot of naked guys every day but gay fantasies never went through my mind, this up to a month ago, then a strange thing happened, in the gym came a new guy who is 23 years old , I’m 24, and I began to fantasize about this guy, just on a sexual level, something that had never happened to me before. In the evening I lie down on the bed and I think of him, that is, I think of him and me in a sexual situation and it excites me a lot. In practice I don’t masturbate any more thinking about girls, or very little, while I’m fine even just staying in erection when I think of him without even needing to get to orgasm, it happens sometimes but it’s just thinking sexually of him that makes me feel good, I think that we are in the gym alone and we undress each other and then we masturbate each other, rarely I fantasize of oral sex. I tell you, Project, I never imagined I could think of a guy in these terms.

Project writes: but did you spoke with this guy?

Nicola writes: spoken in the serious sense of the term no, because I’m afraid, in fact I have almost the certainty that he is straight, it seems so strange that it’s me to write something like that, I think that in practice my interest in him is only sexual, I don’t know, but I have this impression.

Project writes: if this guy corresponded to you, that is if he was interested in talking to you, how would you react?

Nicola writes: I would be very happy but I think it’s an impossible thing and then look, I think of him just in terms of sex, this is true, even if hetero fantasies are not 100% finished, but I also think that I would like to embrace him, maybe fall asleep next to him, but to create something emotional two persons are needed and I’m alone and that’s why I settle for a bit of sex. If I imagine a couple relationship with him, I think of it more or less like what happens with a girl, sex, all right, it’s another thing, but I think the affection would be more or less the same, but I don’t know because I’ve never tried and then I think that if I happen to meet a girl who falls in love with me at the end I would always be straight, maybe straight with some gay fantasy but essentially straight. And then with a guy how would I do? My parents would kill me, they always saw me 100% straight and in fact I still think it’s more or less like that. For them the word gay is like saying depraved. Frankly I have never felt homophobic like my parents, I had never felt gay until a month ago and I don’t even feel now, even if I feel something strange but I’m not afraid of these things, if I find out I’m gay it’s okay, what I don’t like is uncertainty and still I don’t think I’m really gay.
______________

Mail of Federico

I read everything you wrote about the weight of affectivity in the relationship between two guys, frankly it is very nice even if I don’t know how realistic it can be. That is, let’s understand, I speak from my point of view, that is from the point of view of a married 33-year-old man who is going into crisis because he has sexual fixed ideas for a 25-year-old known at work. I underline that I’m and I feel heterosexual, I love my wife and I also desire her sexually, but now it’s more than a year that there is this new fact and it’s something that destabilizes me a lot. I masturbate thinking of a guy. It’s crazy that a married man does these things and yet it happens. At first I felt guilty towards my wife, but now it doesn’t happen to me anymore, I live two parallel lives or better a life and a half, because my being gay is only halfway, there’s the sexual part, the rest doesn’t exist al all. I never considered my 25 year old like a guy I could fall in love with, it’s just that female sexuality is not enough anymore for me, I like it very much but in my horizon there is not only that, in fact I see my 25 year old a bit like a porn actor (he is a very serious guy! Indeed even too serious) that excites me.

Is all this pathological? At first I thought about it but now slowly I got to the point that if I masturbate thinking of him I don’t do anything wrong, he doesn’t know it and will never know it and also my wife will never know it. So where is the problem? What am I doing wrong? Anything! On the other hand, I would never abandon my wife, it doesn’t even pass through the antechamber of my brain that I could put myself with a man. I don’t know how such a thing can evolve over time, maybe in one year I will have abandoned my wife and I will have escaped with him, but it doesn’t seem to me even thinkable! And then, one like me what is he? Is he gay? But from what you say it doesn’t seem realistic. Is he bisex? Frankly I don’t believe it and I don’t feel like it. I think someone like me is straight even if he has some small interest in gay sex, and I only say sex, perhaps I had better to say only at the level of masturbation because I would never go with a man apart from the risk of aids, it’s not really something that seems possible to me. What do you think about Project?
__________

GAY SEXUALITY AND HETERO AFFECTIVITY

It happens to me quite frequently, in interviews with the guys, to find myself faced with real forms of splitting between affectivity and sexuality. It is not uncommon for guys who experience sexual drives that are strongly or even exclusively oriented in a gay sense, to feel an affective attraction towards girls, for whom, however, they live forms of attenuated or strongly sublimated sexual interest. This phenomenon is found many times also in forum posts and is confirmed by the statistics on sexual orientation of Project Gay. 23.72% of the guys who took the test on sexual orientation of Project Gay (a sample of several hundred guys, but not representative of the general population and with high concentration of gays) claim to have a masturbation oriented exclusively in the gay sense, while only 15.22% claim to fall in love only with guys, but what amazes even more is that compared to a 11.68% of guys who claim to have a masturbation oriented exclusively in straight sense, 27, 26% claim to fall in love only with girls. From the statistics of sexual orientation by age we can deduce that in the same sample the percentage of gay masturbation varies little with age while the percentage of hetero masturbation tends to increase and, at the same time, bisexual masturbation decreases (with sometimes hetero and sometimes gay fantasies).

Sexuality becomes polarized with the years and tends to follow not the masturbatory gay tendency but the affective hetero one. I mean that a percentage of younger guys tend to experience hetero affectivity despite gay masturbation, for them the homosexual dimension has only strictly sexual contents while the affective ones are reserved entirely or almost entirely to girls. The sexuality of these guys tends to evolve over time, the heterosexual affective tendency slowly becomes sexualized and the tendency towards heterosexual masturbation increases. While hetero affectivity is also enriched with explicit sexual content, the gay orientation on the strictly sexual level tends to be recessive. This is the underlying reason for which, to consider gay a guy masturbation is indicative but doesn’t solve the problem definitively and it’s necessary to say that a guy is gay if he has both a gay masturbatory sexuality, and also a gay affectivity, that is, he falls in love with guys.

As if to talk of gay sexual orientation it’s necessary to find together an exclusive tendency to masturbation with gay fantasies and also an affective tendency equally exclusive to fall in love with guys, so to talk about real bisexuality it is necessary that a guy has a masturbation that contemplates both heterosexual fantasies and gay fantasies, even in different proportions, and that he falls in love with both boys and girls. I mean that in a defined sexual orientation, that is stable, gay or heterosexual or bisexual in different degrees, strictly sexual drives are always associated with the tendency to fall in love with the same persons for whom sexual drives are felt.

Bisexuality is not a phenomenon analogous to the dissociation between affectivity and sexuality. Basically, a hetero guy falls in love emotionally and sexually only with girls, a gay guy falls in love emotionally and sexually only with guys, a bisexual guy falls in love emotionally and sexually with both boys and girls. In these situations affectivity and sexuality interact in an organic way and tend to direct a guy in a global way, both affective and sexual, to other people.

The dissociation between affectivity and sexuality is not a form of bisexuality but is a completely different reality. I would like to underline that it’s not a matter of pathological phenomena but of normal realities that touch significant percentages of the population. As it also happens for homosexuality and for bisexuality, the dissociation between effectivity and sexuality can lead to states of suffering, sometimes very heavy, if the social environment is constrictive and adopts rigid sexuality models, but suffering doesn’t come from the split between affectivity and sexuality but precisely from the sexually repressive climate.

Statistically, the dissociation between affectivity and sexuality is a relevant phenomenon, as it’s evident from the Gay Project statistics. The discrepancy between orientation of masturbation and affective orientation is noticeable but tends to decrease with the passing of the years and several guys who despite falling in love with girls had a gay masturbation, tend slowly to orientate even sexually in the straight direction. Approximately 5% of guys between the ages of 14 and 18 who took part in the Gay Project survey on sexual orientation tend to orient themselves definitively in straight direction as time passes. I must underline that the guys generally consider the split between affectivity and sexuality as a form of bisexuality and tend to consider themselves bisexual or even gay, above all due to the gay masturbation. Interpreting these phenomena is not easy because they are things that start with guys who consider themselves essentially gay and then slowly, not realizing their emotional world in a gay dimension, experience affective attraction to girls and slowly also discover a straight sexuality that is rewarding for them.

In the interviews with the guys, elements have emerged that lead me to try to give an interpretation of the facts that could at least in a good percentage of cases be realistic, clearly all of it should be taken with benefit of inventory.

In several situations of dissociation between affectivity and sexuality, in the background can be found the presence of a very rigid family in the sexual field and of children who have felt hyper-controlled during adolescence. Their female friendships were evaluated and judged by the family that tended to exercise control over the sexuality of the children, automatically presupposed exclusively hetero.

Sermons on the way to behave with girls, attempts to know how the child behaves with girls, tendential intrusiveness in the relationships of the child with the opposite sex, and on the other hand no interest in the male friendships of the child since early adolescence. If you go out with male friends, all right, if you go out with a girl you have to tell your parents who she is, where you go, when you come back, etc. etc.. The lack of freedom in the sexual field sometimes leads hetero guys to try to realize their freedom from the family in the environment of male friendships. While for a guy who can have a heterosexual emotional and sexual life basically free from family control, friendships are only a part of actual life, and not the one that polarizes sexuality, for guys who have no freedom in their emotional and sexual hetero behaviors, the friendships with other guys constitute an extremely gratifying environment because it is completely foreign to the family.

It often happens that, even in groups of substantially heterosexual guys, forms of special and very close affection are created that are not necessarily sexualized, the so-called special friendships (the best friend). For a guy who has no other sexual release valves, particular friendships easily take a sexual coloring. Pretty common episodes in the environment of heterosexual teenagers, such as masturbating together watching a straight porn, become, for a guy who feels forced by the family in his sexuality, a way to have his own private in which the family cannot enter, a sexuality which is finally subtracted from family control.

Sexual fantasies about friends and masturbation in a homosexual key end up dominating the scene and for a long time the guy can consider himself really gay, but since this sexual tendency cannot be declared nor shared and it is only experienced at the level of masturbation, the guy clearly perceives the difference between his way of living the para-sexual experiences with his friends, such as the nakedness in the showers of the gym, and the way of living those same experiences on the part of his friends, and this tends to confirm him in the idea of being gay.

However, the sexual morality of the family makes it practically impossible for the guy to accept the idea of an emotional couple relationship with another guy that would involve bringing homosexuality from the level of masturbation to the level of sharing and conscious and courageous choice. Sometimes guys also come to real sexual experiments with other guys but in situations that are not in any way accessible to the family and only with contacts for sexual purposes. From this phase that is from the greater awareness that non-affective homosexuality is not really gratifying, derives a sense of deep dissatisfaction or devaluation of sexuality, which is finally considered just as a technique. These are the most acute phases of the dissociation between affectivity and sexuality. In these situations the guys become again (now they are fully adults, 22, 23, but also 25 years old or more) particularly sensitive to a hetero affective contact. It’s obvious that after having become accustomed through years of gay masturbation to having homosexual fantasies, the approach with hetero sexuality is experienced as problematic, but that approach has a deep and satisfying affective dimension that the guy had not known in the gay environment. Thus begins a path of reunification of sexuality and affection that can last even two or three years, during which slowly but gradually the gay fantasies give way and heterosexual sexuality, combined with the effectivity gains ground.

We must immediately say that the process is delicate and, for example, a traumatic experience in a hetero environment can interrupt it, as a true and profound gay falling in love could also interrupt it. These are important transitional phases of the definition of sexuality in which, even if statistically evolution takes place prevalently towards heterosexuality, it is not at all said that the opposite does not happen. One idea must be kept in mind: sexuality must never be forced. The dissociation between affectivity and sexuality represents an evolutionary phase which, I repeat, has nothing pathological and must be experienced for what it is by following one’s own affectivity and spontaneous sexuality, avoiding to create too many problems and on the contrary setting aside any abstract and preconceived vision of oneself in both a straight or a gay key. Anxiety is the worst enemy of sexuality, so those who find themselves in such situations do not consider them as a problem to be solved. Sexual orientation issues are problems only to the extent that they are considered as such.

__________

If you want, you can participate in the discussion of this post open on the Gay Project Forum: http://gayprojectforum.altervista.org/T-splitting-between-gay-sexuality-and-hetero-affectivity

MACHIAVELLI HOMOSEXUAL

Investigating the sexuality of great personalities of the past is not always easy, for some the documentation deriving from private correspondence is very limited but explicit, as in the case of Torquato Tasso, for others, who have left a considerable amount of private correspondence, the documentation is sometimes really encrypted and difficult to interpret, as in the case of Niccolò Machiavelli.
Reading the private correspondence between Machiavelli and Francesco Vettori, ambassador of the Florentine Republic to the Papal Court, we are often perplexed, because we reach the end of a letter with the clear impression of not having understood exactly the meaning that is hidden behind the words.
Machiavelli was a person of considerable political importance and the letters he sent, even the private ones, were subject to some form of encryption in order to make them difficult to interpret for anyone who did not possess the right keys to read. The discourses contained in particular in the private correspondence with Vettori, sometimes apparently vague and incomprehensible, are actually full of implications and metaphors that can be deciphered correctly only if one is very familiar with that form of correspondence.
So let’s get into the subject.
Machiavelli was born in Florence on May 3th, 1469.
On May 23th, 1498, when Machiavelli had just turned 29, Fra Girolamo Savonarola was hanged and burned in Piazza della Signoria. Between mid-June and mid-July Machiavelli was elected secretary of the Second Chancellery and also became secretary of the Council of Ten that was responsible for the policy of territorial expansion of Florence and for the affairs of war. In 1501, at age 32, a decidedly mature age for the time, Machiavelli married Marietta Corsini, with whom he had 7 children. It could be argued that there is no more convincing proof of Niccolò’s exclusive heterosexuality, however, many years later, Francesco Vettori, writing to an almost 54-year-old Machiavelli, on April 17th, 1523, will say: “we sometimes accuse the nature itself as a stepmother when, instead, we should accuse our parents and ourselves: if you had truly known yourself, you would never have taken a wife; and my father, if he had known my desires and habits, would never have joined me to a wife, as one who nature had generated for play and for fun, not eager to make money and in the least worried about his wealth. But a wife would have forced me to change, which, however, cannot be accomplished happily for anyone.”[1]
Vettori’s speech seems to allude more to heterosexual adventures, both of Machiavelli and Vettori, both very free in sexual behavior, rather than to homosexuality, but, as we will see, Machiavelli certainly did not disdain even homosexual adventures and probably a similar discourse could also be done for Vettori.
That Machiavelli was not only a married heterosexual, who limited himself only to sexual intercourses with his wife but that he went to look for sex for “foia”, that is for lust, even with very low-level female prostitutes is evidenced by his letter of December 8th 1509, when Machiavelli was 40, to Luigi Giucciardini (brother of the historian Francesco Guicciardini). In fact, Machiavelli tells Guicciardini that he had gone through an irrepressible craving of sex (affogaggine) with a very ugly woman, an authentic monster, only because there was just a bit of light that didn’t allow to see her clearly, but then, taken an ember from the fire he lit up the lamp, he saw how ugly she was and felt a very strong sense of rejection. [2]
On May 27th, 1510, an anonymous connoisseur put in a hole of anonymous denunciations this denunciation: “I notify to you, Eight gentlemen (police authority), that Niccolò of Messer Bernardo Machiavelli fucks Lucretia colled “la Riccia” (“The woman with curly hair”) in the ass”. [3]
Machiavelli was therefore accused of sodomy with that prostitute named Lucrezia called la Riccia (“The woman with curly hair”). The accusation is about sodomy but with a woman, the vox populi (popular rumor) who tries to discredit Machiavelli, a politically important man, married and with several children, does not therefore contain any reference to homosexuality, which would have been, on the other hand, not very credible.
The political fortunes of Machiavelli are linked to the Florentine Republic and to the pro-popular conceptions of Pier Soderini, perpetual gonfalonier. On September 16th, 1512, after the escape of Soderini, the Medici resumed control of Florence and the fate of Machiavelli precipitated. On November 7th he was deposed from his offices, on November 10th he sentenced to a year of confinement within the Florentine territory. Suspected of having favored the conspiracy of Agostino Capponi and Pietropaolo Boscoli to restore the Republic, on February 12th, 1513, he was arrested and put to the rope torture.
Machiavelli quickly tries to mobilize his powerful friends and gets results. While Capponi and Boscoli are put to death, Machiavelli is condemned to pay a large deposit, which he is not able to pay, but still comes out of prison in a short time because on March 11th, 1513, Giovanni de’ Medici, son of Lorenzo the Magnificent, already created cardinal at the age of 13, becomes Pope Leo X. Leo X’s election is followed in Florence by the general amnesty and Machiavelli, released from prison, takes the prudent decision to disappear from Florence and retire to the farm of the Albergaccio, in Sant’Andrea in Percussina. Machavelli was then 44 years old.
On December 19th, 1513, Machiavelli wrote to Vettori a letter, cryptic in the first part but very interesting in the second, from our point of view. Let us limit ourselves to the analysis of the second part, which also suggests a reason for the so encrypted first part.
Machiavelli remembers that Vettori had written four verses about a certain Riccio (“a guy with curly hair”), a guy available to homosexual contacts, also indicating the names of those who had been put “in berta” (had been ridiculed) because they had gone with Riccio. Machiavelli recited those verses from memory to Giovanni Machiavelli, thus accusing him of homosexual activities. Giovanni Machiavelli took it badly and tried to insist, saying “that he does not know where you have found that he touches (touching means having homosexual relationships in the cryptic jargon of Florentine homosexuals)”. Vettori had not accused Giovanni Machiavelli of homosexuality, but it was Niccolò who, by changing the names, had given the impression that instead he had done so. Giovanni Machiavelli wants to give and ask for explanations and Niccolò laughs at the insult he has made. It should be noted that the verb “to touch” is fundamental because, as we shall see, it is necessary to correctly interpret a discourse that Machiavelli makes about himself. [4]
In the same letter Machiavelli mentions a Franciscan friar who makes politics preaching and throws words of fire from the pulpit. Machiavelli writes, not without pungent irony: “These things shocked me yesterday so that I had to go this morning to be with the Riccia, and I did not go there; but I do not know, if I had had to be with the Riccio, if the effect of the words of the friar would have been the same. I didn’t hear the preaching because I’m not used to such things, but I heard it repeated like this from all Florence. [5]
On January 5th, 1514 Machiavelli wrote a very interesting letter to Vettori.[6] He begins by observing that men are blind in the things in which they sin as they are bitter persecutors of the vices they do not have.
So, then, Machiavelli wrote to Vettori that had shown him that he was worried about the fact that having hosted in his house ser Sano, a well-known homosexual, could discredit him through the gossip of Filippo Casavecchia, and explains to Vettori that Filippo Casavecchia, another well-known homosexual and friend of Machiavelli, would never have criticized Vettori even if ser Sano had remained at his house from one jubilee to another, and indeed he would have congratulated Vettori for the choice. And the Brancaccio then, another well-known homosexual friend of Machiavelli, wouldn’t have dared to comment even if Vettori had taken home the whole brothel of Valencia, indeed he would have considered him a great man more for this than if he had seen him talk better than Demosthenes before the Pope.
Filippo Casavecchia would have thought it unseemly that Vettori would bring easy guys home, but not someone like Ser Sano who was prudent and Brancaccio would not like to see Vettori in the company of cheap whores. However, if Vettori had followed their advice, removing Ser Sano and the easy women, Casavecchia would have wondered where Ser Sano had gone and would have done everything to get him back. Machiavelli adds, to make things even clearer, a discourse that sounds more or less like this: if I had happened in Vettori’s house when he had chased away Sano and the easy women from his house, “I, who am running next to both guys and girls [7] would have said “Dear Ambassador, you will get sick because it does not seem that you take any fun, here there are no guys and there are no women, what the “cock”-house is this?”
On February 25th 1514, Machiavelli wrote to Vettori a very interesting letter [8], I quote the full text in a note and transcribe some parts here, simplifying the descriptions of the places, very detailed in the text, and trying to report the real meaning in a language more understandable at first reading. “I received your letter the other week and I waited until now to answer you because I wanted to have clearer information about a fact that I will tell you below and then I can respond appropriately to your letter. A kind thing happened, or to call it by its real name a ridiculous metamorphosis, which would be worthy of being noted in the books of the ancients. And since I do not want anyone to complain about me, I’ll tell you it hidden under allegorical forms.”
Machiavelli, in the introduction, then tries to tickle the curiosity of Vettori and is preparing to tell the story in the manner of Boccaccio’s novels.
Giuliano Brancacci, eager, so to speak, to go to the bush [which means to go in search of homosexual contacts], one evening a few days ago, after the Ave Maria, seeing that the weather was overcast and windy and that it was beginning to drizzle (all things that you can well believe that every bird [obscene allusion to homosexuals] waits), back home, put on a pair of big shoes [like those used to hunt], tied the game bag to the belt, took with him a lantern and the tools to hunt the birds, and went away for a while snaking through the alleys that lead to the center of the city, and not finding birds waiting for him, he went to the parts of the goldsmith that you know, he went a little further and, looking very carefully at the places where the birds used to hide, he found a beautiful young thrush and caught him using his tools to capture birds and took him to the bottom of the ravine, under the cave where Panzano used to stay.
He then stayed with the young thrush and, finding that he had the “vein” wide (obscene allusion to the ass), after having kissed it several times, he re-stuck two feathers of his tail and put it in his back bag.” [The Italian text is very ambiguous and clearly allusive to an anal intercourse: “Si intrattenne quindi col giovane tordo e, trovando che aveva la “vena” larga, dopo avergliela baciata più volte, gli riacconciò due penne della coda e lo mise nel carniere di dietro.”]
So far the metaphor, then Machiavelli continues more or less like this [even here I render the text more comprehensible]:
“Since I cannot lengthen the subject too much, I will proceed in clear and go bevenayond the metaphors. Brancaccio, who had found the thrush, wanted to know who he was and asked him and the boy replied that he was Michele, nephew of Consiglio Costi. Then Brancaccio said to him: “You are the son of a good man, and if you can do it, you have found your way.” So the Brancaccio [feeling that he could ran the risk of being involved in dangerous affairs] told the boy [lying] that he was Filippo Casavecchia [9] and he also told him where he had his shop [that of Casavecchia, of course]. Since I have no money with me now, come or send someone directly to the shop tomorrow morning and I will pay you.
The next morning, the boy, who was more lascivious than stupid, sent another to Filippo Casavecchia with a slip of paper, asking him to pay his debt and reminded him of what he had promised. Filippo read the note and made a sad face and replied: Who is he and what does he want from me? I have nothing to do with him, tell him to come to me. The boy who had brought the note came back to Michele, who had sent him and told him about Filippo Casavecchia’s answer. The boy did not even get a little scared and went to Casavecchia, reminded him of the benefits he enjoyed and concluded that if the man thought he could deceive him that way, he would have no problem to publicly blame him.
After that answer Filippo felt himself squeezed, let the boy in the shop and said: – Michele, you have been cheated, [but not by me!] I am a very moderate man and I don’t care such squalid things, so you have to think rather to find who deceived you, so that who has received pleasure from you pay the due to you, rather than to insult me in this way without you get any advantage. Now go back home and come tomorrow to me and I’ll tell you what I’ve come up with. –
The boy went away all confused and accepted the idea of returning the next day to Casavecchia. Casavecchia, left alone, was very worried about the fact and did not seem to be able to get out easily and felt as agitated as the sea in front of Pisa when the Libeccio  [a warm southwest wind] blows strongly. He said to himself: – If I’m good and quiet and I keep Michele good with a florin, I end up being blackmailed by him, I recognize myself his debtor, I confess the sin and from innocent I became guilty, but if I deny without finding the true guilty I could be compared with the boy, I should justify myself with him and also with others and the wrong would be all on my side. If I try to understand how things really went, however, I should still blame someone, I might not be able to blame anyone, I would make enemies and with all this I would not come out clean anyway of all this. –
While he was so anguished, he chose the last hypothesis as less unpleasant and was so fortunate that he addressed the first idea that came to his mind to the right target! And he thought that it was Brancaccio who had made him that bad joke, because Brancaccio was one who hunted for boys (“macchiaiuolo”, he gave himself to the bush, in the double sense of the word) and other times he had deceived him.
He then went to see Alberto Lotti, told him the fact, told him also what he had in mind and asked him to speak reservedly with Michele, who was one of his relatives, to see if other matches could be found. Lotti, who was used to those things and knew them very well, immediately thought that Casavecchia had seen right and promised that he would do everything possible, then sent to call Michele and after talking to him for a long time, he came to this conclusion. He said to the boy: If you heard the one who pretended to be Filippo Casavecchia, would you have the courage to recognize him by his voice? – The boy answered yes and Lotti took him to sant’Ilario where he knew that Brancaccio often entertained, saw the Brancaccio who sat among so many people telling stories, and shrewdly had the boy approached behind Brancaccio in such a way that he heard him speak, then they appeared before him and Brancaccio saw them, changed his attitude quickly and went away and everything was clear to everyone. Filippo Casavecchia came out completely clean and Brancaccio was covered with insults. And in Florence in this last carnival nothing else has been talked about, except: – Are you the Brancaccio or the Casa{vecchia}? – And this story was very well known to anyone. I think you already had news of it but I wanted to tell you the same in detail, because it seemed my duty.
As for you, I can only tell you to follow the love at loose bridles because the pleasure you can take today you cannot take it tomorrow, and if the things are as you have described them, I envy you more than the king of England! I beg you to follow your own inclination and do not let anything escape for any reason, because I believe, believed and always will believe really true what Boccaccio says: that is better to do and repent, than not to do and repent! “
So far, as we have seen, Machiavelli makes homosexuality a theme for spicy stories in the manner of Boccaccio, also hints at his “touching” that is at the fact that he does not disdain homosexual activities, but so far lacks the emotional dimension of homosexuality. Machiavelli is now 45 years old, has a wife and seven grown-up children and still behaves like a young man who goes into a cheerful brigade hunting for adventures.
However, a letter to the Vettori of August 3th, 1514 [10] shows that Machiavelli also felt the affective side of homosexuality. He congratulates Vettori for his romantic adventures in Rome and tells him that he (Machiavelli) has found correspondence “in a creature so kind, so delicate, so noble, both by nature and by accident, that I could neither praise nor love her so much that she could not deserve more.” The pronouns are used to the feminine because they agree with the term creature that is of female gender, this does not however have to deceive on the sex of that creature. 
Machiavelli adds: “And do not believe that Love to take me used ordinary ways, but knowing that they would not have been enough, he followed extraordinary ways, from which I didn’t know, and didn’t want to beware. It is enough that, already close to fifty years, neither these suns offend me, nor the harsh streets crush me, nor the obscurities of the nights amaze me. Everything seems easy to me, and I adapt myself to every appetite, also different and contrary to what should be mine. And although I seem to have entered great labor, nevertheless I feel so much sweetness in it, for what his so rare and suave appearance produces in me, and also because it puts aside the memory of all my troubles, so that if I was able to free me, I would not.”
We do not know who the “creature” is so kind, so delicate, so noble, but certainly it is the first time that Machiavelli does not use the tones of the Boccaccio satire but those of love.
If there is still any doubt that it is a homosexual love, it will be easily dispelled by a letter from Vettori to Machiavelli dated January 16th, 1515 [11]. Vettori writes to Machiavelli:
“Dear main man. I have no letters from anyone that I read more willingly than yours, and I would like to be able to write many things, which I know cannot be entrust to the letters. It’s been several months since I understood very well how you loved, and I was to say, “Ah, Coridon, Coridon, quae te dementia cepit?” [Coridon, Coridon, what madness took you?] Then, thinking within myself that this world is nothing but love, or, to tell it more clearly, lust, I held back; and I have been considering how much in such things men have their hearts far from what they say with their mouths.”
The Latin quote is taken from the second Eclogue by Virgil (Bucolics II, 69). “Ahi, Corydon Corydon, What madness took you?” Corydon’s Madness was the love of the beautiful Alexis. Corydon was already in the times of Virgil one of the most known myths related to homosexuality and certainly Vettori was well aware of that when he quoted Corydon and the second Bucolic in relation to Machiavelli. Corydon assumed such a symbolic value that André Gide (a character to whom I will soon dedicate an article) called “Corydon” a dialogue published in 1924 which contains a first attempt to demolish the respectability that condemned homosexuality. Gide writes in Corydon: “The important thing is to understand that, where you say against nature, it would be enough to say: against costume”. After the publication of Gide’s Corydon, Paul Claudel, a Catholic intellectual, stopped speaking to Gide. Current Catholic homophobia has distant roots.
________________________
[1] nos aliquando naturam ipsam tamquam novercam incusamus, cum potius parentes aut nos ipsos incusare debemus: tu, si te ipsum bene novisses, numquam uxorem duxisses; pater meus, si ingenium, si mores meos scisset, me numquam uxori alligasset, quippe quem ad ludos, ad iocos natura genuerat, lucris non inhiantem, rei familiari minime intentum. Sed uxor filie me mutare coegerit, quod nemimi feliciter succedere potest.– Niccolò Machiavelli, Tutte le opere a cura di Mario Martelli, Sansoni Editore, Firenze 1971 
 
[2] Niccolò Machiavelli a Luigi Guicciardini
Verona, 8 dicembre 1509
Spectabili viro Luigi Guicciardini in Mantova tanquam fratri carissimo.
Affogaggine, Luigi; et guarda quanto la Fortuna in una medesima faccienda dà ad li huomini diversi fini. Voi, fottuto che voi havesti colei, vi è venuta voglia di rifotterla et ne volete un’altra presa; ma io, stato fui qua parechi dì, accecando per carestia di matrimonio, trovai una vechia che m’imbucatava le camicie, che sta in una casa che è più di meza sotterra, né vi si vede lume se non per l’uscio. Et, passando io un dì di quivi, la mi riconobbe et, fattomi una gran festa, mi disse che io fussi contento andare un poco in casa, che mi voleva mostrare certe camicie belle, se io le volevo comperare. Onde io, nuovo cazo, me lo credetti, et, giunto là, vidi al barlume una donna con uno sciugatoio tra in sul capo et in sul viso, che faceva el vergognoso, et stava rimessa in uno canto. Questa vechia ribalda mi prese per mano et, menatomi ad colei, dixe: Questa è la camicia che io vi voglio vendere, ma voglio la proviate prima et poi la pagherete.
Io, come peritoso che io sono, mi sbigotti’ tucto; pure, rimasto solo con colei et al buio (perché la vechia si uscì sùbito di casa et serrò l’uscio), per abbreviare, la fotte’ un colpo; et benché io le trovassi le coscie vize et la fica umida et che le putissi un poco el fiato, nondimeno, tanta era la disperata foia che io havevo, che la n’andò. Et facto che io l’hebbi, venendomi pure voglia di vedere questa mercatantia, tolsi un tizone di fuoco d’un focolare che v’era et accesi una lucerna che vi era sopra; né prima el lume fu apreso, che ’l lume fu per cascarmi di mano. Omè! fu’ per cadere in terra morto, tanta era bructa quella femina. E’ se le vedeva prima un ciuffo di capelli fra bianchi et neri, cioè canuticci, et benché l’avessi el cocuzolo del capo calvo, per la cui calvitie ad lo scoperto si vedeva passeggiare qualche pidochio, nondimeno e pochi capelli et rari le aggiugnevono con le barbe loro infino in su le ciglia; et nel mezo della testa piccola et grinzosa haveva una margine di fuoco, che la pareva bollata ad la colonna di Mercato; in ogni puncta delle ciglia di verso li ochi haveva un mazetto di peli pieni di lendini; li ochi haveva uno basso et uno alto, et uno era maggiore che l’altro, piene le lagrimatoie di cispa et e nipitelli dipillicciati; il naso li era conficto sotto la testa arricciato in su, et l’una delle nari tagliata, piene di mocci; la bocca somigliava quella di Lorenzo de’ Medici, ma era torta da uno lato et da quello n’usciva un poco di bava, ché, per non havere denti, non poteva ritenere la sciliva; nel labbro di sopra haveva la barba lunghetta, ma rara; el mento haveva lungo aguzato et torto un poco in su, dal quale pendeva un poco di pelle che le adgiugneva infino ad la facella della gola. Stando adtonito ad mirare questo mostro, tucto smarrito, di che lei accortasi volle dire: — Che havete voi messere? —; ma non lo dixe perché era scilinguata; et come prima aperse la bocca, n’uscì un fiato sì puzolente, che trovandosi offesi da questa peste due porte di dua sdegnosissimi sensi, li ochi et il naso, e’ m’andò tale sdegno ad lo stomaco per non potere sopportare tale offesa, tucto si commosse et commosso operò sì, che io le rece’ addosso. Et così, pagata di quella moneta che la meritava, ne parti’. Et per quel cielo che io darò, io non credo, mentre starò in Lombardia, mi torni la foia; et però voi ringratiate Iddio della speranza havete di rihavere tanto dilecto, et io lo ringratio che ho perduto el timore di havere mai più tanto dispiacere.
Io credo che mi avanzerà di questa gita qualche danaio, et vorre’ pure, giunto ad Firenze, fare qualche trafficuzo. Ho disegnato fare un pollaiolo; bisognami trovare uno maruffino che me lo governi. Intendo che Piero di Martino è così sufficiente; vorrei intendessi da lui se ci ha el capo, et rispondetemi; perché, quando e’ non voglia, io mi procaccierò d’uno altro.
De le nuove di qua ve ne satisfarà Giovanni. Salutate Jacopo et raccomandatemi ad lui, et non sdimenticate Marco.
In Verona, die viii Decembris 1509.
Aspecto la risposta di Gualtieri ad la mia cantafavola.
Niccolò Machiavegli
http://www.classicitaliani.it/machiav/p … s.html#170 Niccolò Machiavelli, Tutte le opere, a cura di Mario Martelli, Sansoni editore, Firenze 1971.
 

[3] “Notifichasi a voi, signori Otto, chome Nicholò di messer Bernardo Machiavelli fotte la Lucretia vochata la Riccia nel culo.”

[4] Quelli quattro versi che voi scrivete del Riccio, nel principio della lettera di Donato, noi li dicemmo a mente a Giovanni Machiavelli; e in cambio del Machiavello e del Pera vi annestammo Giovanni Machiavelli. Lui ne ha fatto un capo come una cesta; e dice che non sa dove voi avete trovato che tocchi, e che ve ne vuole scrivere in ogni modo; e per un tratto Filippo e io ne avemmo un piacere grande.

[5] http://digilander.libero.it/il_machiave … ttere.html Edizione di riferimento: “Tutte le opere storiche e letterarie di Niccolò Machiavelli”, a cura di Guido Mazzoni e Mario Casella, G. Berbera Editore, Firenze, 1929.
“Queste cose mi sbigottirono ieri in modo, che io aveva andare questa mattina a starmi con la Riccia, e non vi andai; ma io non so già, se io avessi auto a starmi con il Riccio, se io avessi guardato a quello. La predica io non la udi’, perché io non uso simili pratiche, ma la ho sentita recitare così da tutto Firenze.”

[6] Niccolò Machiavelli, Tutte le opere a cura di Mario Martelli, Sansoni Editore, Firenze 1971.
Niccolò Machiavelli a Francesco Vettori
Firenze, 5 gennaio 1514

Magnifico oratori florentino Francisco Victorio benefattori suo observandissimo.
Magnifico oratore. Egli è per certo gran cosa a considerare quanto gli huomini sieno ciechi nelle cose dove e’ peccono, et quanto e’ sieno acerrimi persecutori de’ vizii che non hanno. Io vi potrei addurre in exemplis cose greche, latine, hebraiche, caldee, et andarmene sino ne’ paesi del Sophi et dei Prete Janni, et addurreve’li, se li exempli domestichi et freschi non bastassino. Io credo che ser Sano sarebbe possuto venirvi in casa dall’un giubbileo all’altro, et che mai Filippo harebbe pensato che vi desse carico alcuno; anzi gli sarebbe parso che voi dipigneste ad usar seco, et che la fosse proprio pratica conforme ad uno ambasciadore, il quale, essendo obbligato ad infinite contenenze, è necessario habbia de’ diporti et delli spassi; et questo di ser Sano gli sarebbe parso che quadrasse appunto, et con ciascuno harebbe laudato la prudenza vostra, et commendatovi insino al cielo di tale electione. Dall’altro canto, io credo che se tutto il bordello di Valenza vi fosse corso per casa, non sarebbe stato mai possibile che il Brancaccio ve ne havesse ripreso, anzi vi harebbe di questo più commendato che se vi havesse sentito innanzi al papa orare meglio che Demosthene.
Et se voi havessi voluto vedere la ripruova di questa ragione, vi bisognava, senza che loro havessino saputo delli ammonimenti l’uno dell’altro, che voi havessi fatto vista di credere loro, et volere observare i loro precepti. Et serrato l’uscio alle puttane, et cacciato via ser Sano, et ritiratovi al grave, et stato sopra di voi cogitativo, e’ non sarebbono a verun modo passati quattro dì, che Filippo harebbe cominciato a dire: Che è di ser Sano? Che vuol dire che non ci capita più? Egli è male che non ci venga; a me pare egli uno huomo dabbene: io non so quel che queste brigate si cicalano, et parmi che egli habbia molto bene i termini di questa corte, et che sia una utile bazzicatura. Voi doverreste, ambasciadore, mandare per lui. Il Brancaccio non vi dico se si sarebbe doluto et maravigliato della absenzia delle dame, et se non ve lo havessi detto, mentre che egli havessi tenuto vòlto il culo al fuoco, come harebbe fatto Filippo, e’ ve lo harebbe detto in camera da voi a lui. Et per chiarirvi meglio, bisognava che in tal vostra disposizione austera io fussi capitato costì, che tocco et attendo a femmine: subito avvedutomi della cosa, io harei detto: Ambasciadore, voi ammalerete; e’ non mi pare che voi pigliate spasso alcuno; qui non ci è garzoni, qui non sono femmine; che casa di cazzo è questa?
Magnifico oratore, e’ non ci è se non pazzi; et pochi ci sono che conoschino questo mondo, et che sappino che chi vuol fare a modo d’altri non fa mai nulla, perché non si truova huomo che sia di un medeximo parere. Cotestoro non sanno che chi è tenuto savio il dì, non sarà mai tenuto pazzo la notte; et che chi è stimato huomo da bene, et che vaglia, ciò che e’ fa per allargare l’animo et vivere lieto, gli arreca honore et non carico, et in cambio di essere chiamato buggerone o puttaniere, si dice che è universale, alla mano et buon compagno. Non sanno anche che dà del suo, et non piglia di quel d’altri, et che fa come il mosto mentre bolle, che dà del sapore suo a’ vasi che sanno di muffa, et non piglia della muffa de’ vasi.
Pertanto, signore oratore, non habbiate paura della muffa di ser Sano, né de’ fracidumi di mona Smeria, et seguite gli instituti vostri, et lasciate dire il Brancaccio, che non si avvede che egli è come un di quelli forasiepi, che è il primo a schiamazzare et gridare, et poi, come giugno la civetta, è il primo preso. Et Filippo nostro è come uno avvoltoio, che quando non è carogne in paese, vola cento miglia per trovarne una; et come egli ha piena la gorga, si sta su un pino et ridesi delle aquile, astori, falconi et simili, che per pascersi di cibi delicati si muoiono la metà dell’anno di fame. Sì che, magnifico oratore, lasciate schiamazzare l’uno, et l’altro empiersi il gozzo, et voi attendete alle faccende vostre a vostro modo.
In Firenze, addì 5 di gennaio 1513.
Niccolò Machiavelli

[7] “tocco et attendo a femmine”. 
To touch is a specific verb that indicates homosexual activities. “Tocco” and “attend” are not synonymous and we have already seen a clear example of this in the letter previously examined.

[8] Niccolò Machiavelli a Francesco Vettori
Firenze, 25 febbraio 1514
Magnifico oratori florentino Francisco Vettorio apud S. Pontificem suo observandissimo. Rome.
Magnifico oratore. Io hebbi una vostra lettera dell’altra settimana, et sono indugiatomi ad hora a farvi risposta, perché io desideravo intendere meglio il vero di una novella che io vi scriverrò qui dappiè: poi risponderò alle parti della vostra convenientemente. Egli è accaduto una cosa gentile, o vero, a chiamarla per il suo diritto nome, una metamorfosi ridicola, et degna di esser notata nelle antiche carte. Et perché io non voglio che persona si possa dolere di me, ve la narrerò sotto parabole ascose.
Giuliano Brancacci, verbigrazia, vago di andare alla macchia, una sera in fra l’altre ne’ passati giorni, sonata l’Ave Maria della sera, veggendo il tempo tinto, trarre vento, et piovegginare un poco (tutti segni da credere che ogni uccello aspetti), tornato a casa, si cacciò in piedi un paio di scarpette grosse, cinsesi un carnaiuolo [cerniere], tolse un frugnuolo [lanterna da caccia], una campanella al braccio, et una buona ramata [strumento per la caccia agli uccelli]. Passò il ponte alla Carraia, et per la via del Canto de’ Mozzi ne venne a Santa Trinita, et entrato in Borgo Santo Appostolo, andò un pezzo serpeggiando per quei chiasci che lo mettono in mezzo; et non trovando uccelli che lo aspettassino, si volse dal vostro battiloro, et sotto la Parte Guelfa attraversò Mercato, et per Calimala Francesca si ridusse sotto il Tetto de’ Pisani; dove guardando tritamente tutti quei ripostigli, trovò un tordellino, il quale con la ramata, con il lume, et con la campanella fu fermo da lui, et con arte fu condotto da lui nel fondo del burrone sotto la spelonca, dove alloggiava il Panzano, et quello intrattenendo et trovatogli la vena larga et più volte baciatogliene, gli risquittì [riacconciare le penne agli uccelli] dua penne della coda et infine, secondo che gli più dicono, se lo messe nel carnaiuolo di drieto.
Ma perché il temporale mi sforza a sbucare di sotto coverta, et le parabole non bastano, et questa metaphora più non mi serve, volle intendere il Brancaccio chi costui fosse, il quale gli disse, verbigrazia, essere Michele, nipote di Consiglio Costi. Disse allhora il Brancaccio: — Sia col buono anno, tu sei figliuolo di uno huomo dabbene, et se tu sarai savio, tu hai trovata la ventura tua. Sappi che io sono Filippo da Casavecchia, et fo bottega nel tal lato; et perché io non ho danari meco, o tu vieni, o tu mandi domattina a bottega, et io ti satisfarò. — Venuta la mattina, Michele, che era più presto cattivo che dappoco, mandò un zana a Filippo con una poliza richiedendoli il debito, et ricordandoli l’obbligo; al quale Filippo fece un tristo viso, dicendo: — Chi è costui, o che vuole? io non ho che fare seco; digli che venga a me. — Donde che, ritornato il zana a Michele, et narratogli la cosa, non si sbigottì di niente il fanciullo, ma animosamente andato a trovare Filippo, gli rimproverò i benefici ricevuti, et li concluse che se lui non haveva rispetto ad ingannarlo, egli non harebbe rispetto a vituperarlo; tale che parendo a Filippo essere impacciato, lo tirò drento in bottega, et li disse: — Michele, tu sei stato ingannato; io sono un huomo molto costumato, et non attendo a queste tristizie; sì che egli è meglio pensare come e’ si habbi a ritrovare questo inganno, et che chi ha ricevuto piacere da te, ti ristori, che entrare per questa via, et senza tuo utile vituperare me. Però farai a mio modo; andra’tene a casa, et torna domani a me, et io ti dirò quello a che harò pensato. — Partissi il fanciullo tutto confuso; pure, havendo a ritornare, restò paziente. Et rimasto Filippo solo, era angustiato dalla novità della cosa, et scarso di partiti, fluctuava come il mare di Pisa quando una libecciata gli soffia nel forame. Perché e’ diceva: Se io mi sto cheto, et contento Michele con un fiorino, io divento una sua vignuola, fummi suo debitore, confesso il peccato, et di innocente divento reo: se io niego senza trovare il vero della cosa, io ho a stare al paragone di un fanciullo, hommi a giustificare seco, ho a giustificare gli altri; tutti i torti fieno i mia. Se io cerco di trovarne il vero, io ne ho a dare carico a qualcuno, potrei non ivi apporre, farò questa inimicizia, et con tutto questo non sarò giustificato.
Et stando in questa ansietà, per manco tristo partito prese l’ultimo; et fugli in tanto favorevole la fortuna, che la prima mira che pose, la pose al vero brocco, et pensò che il Brancaccio gli havesse fatto questa villania, pensando che egli era macchiaiuolo, et che altre volte gli haveva fatto delle natte quando lo botò a’ Servi. Et andò in su questo a trovare Alberto Lotti, verbigrazia, et narratoli il caso, et dectoli l’oppenione sua, et pregatolo havesse a sé Michele, che era suo parente, vedesse se poteva riscontrare questa cosa. Giudicò Alberto, come pratico et intendente, che Filippo havesse buono occhio, et promessoli la sua opera francamente, mandò per Michele, et abburattatolo un pezzo, li venne a questa conclusione: — Darebbet’egli il cuore, se tu sentissi favellare costui che ha detto di essere Filippo, di riconoscerlo alla boce? — A che il fanciullo replicato di sì, lo menò seco in Santo Hilario, dove e’ sapeva il Brancaccio si riparava, et facendogli spalle, havendo veduto il Brancaccio che si sedeva fra un monte di brigate a dir novelle, fece che il fanciullo se gli accostò tanto, che l’udì parlare; et girandosegli intorno, veggendolo il Brancaccio, tutto cambiato se li levò dinanzi; donde a ciascuno la cosa parse chiara, di modo che Filippo è rimaso tutto scarico, et il Brancaccio vituperato. Et in Firenze in questo carnasciale non si è detto altro, se non: — Se’ tu il Brancaccio, o se’ il Casa? —; « et fuit in toto notissima fabula coelo ». Io credo che habbiate hauto per altre mani questo avviso, pure io ve l’ho voluto dire più particulare, perché mi pare così mio obbligo.
Alla vostra io non ho che dirvi, se non che seguitiate l’amore totis habenis, et quel piacere che voi piglierete hoggi, voi non lo harete a pigliare domani; et se la cosa sta come voi me l’havete scritta, io ho più invidia a voi che al re di Inghilterra. Priegovi seguitiate la vostra stella, et non ne lasciate andare un iota per cosa del mondo, perché io credo, credetti, et crederrò sempre che sia vero quello che dice il Boccaccio: che gli è meglio fare et pentirsi, che non fare et pentirsi.
Addì 25 di Febbraio 1514.
Niccolò Machiavelli in Firenze
http://www.classicitaliani.it/machiav/mac64_let_06.htm Edizione di riferimento Niccolò Machiavelli, Tutte le opere a cura di Mario Martelli, Sansoni Editore, Firenze 1971.

[9] Notoriously homosexual. Of Filippo Casavecchia, in Florence, the relationships he had with Niccolò Machiavelli are better documented, to which he was bound by strong bonds of friendship. The familiarity between the two, which dates back to before 1500, results in particular from a group of five letters sent by Casavecchia between 1507 and 1509, during the stays at Fivizzano and Barga, and by the references that appear in letters by Machiavelli to common friends.
 
[10] Niccolò Machiavelli a Francesco Vettori
Firenze, 3 agosto 1514
A Francesco Vettori in Roma.
Voi, compare, mi havete con più avvisi dello amor vostro di Roma tenuto tutto festivo, et mi havete levato dallo animo infinite molestie, con leggere et pensare a’ piaceri et alli sdegni vostri, perché l’uno non sta bene senza l’altro. Et veramente la Fortuna mi ha condotto in luogo, che io ve ne potrei rendere iusto ricompenso; perché, standomi in villa, io ho riscontro in una creatura tanto gentile, tanto delicata, tanto nobile, et per natura et per accidente, che io non potrei né tanto laudarla, né tanto amarla, che la non meritasse più. Harei, come voi a me, a dire i principii di questo amore, con che reti mi prese, dove le tese, di che qualità furno; et vedresti che le furono reti d’oro, tese tra fiori, tessute da Venere, tanto soavi et gentili, che benché un cuor villano le havesse potute rompere, nondimeno io non volli, et un pezzo mi vi godei dentro, tanto che le fila tenere sono diventate dure, et incavicchiate con nodi irresolubili. Et non crediate che Amore a pigliarmi habbia usato modi ordinarii, perché, conoscendo non li sarebbono bastati, tenne vie extraordinarie, dalle quali io non seppi, et non volsi guardarmi. Bastivi che, già vicino a cinquanta anni né questi soli mi offendono, né le vie aspre mi straccano, né le obscurità delle notti mi sbigottiscano. Ogni cosa mi pare piano, et a ogni appetito, etiam diverso et contrario a quello che doverrebbe essere il mio, mi accomodo. Et benché mi paia essere entrato in gran travaglio, tamen io ci sento dentro tanta dolcezza, sì per quello che quello aspetto raro et suave mi arreca, sì eziam per havere posto da parte la memoria di tutti e mia affanni, che per cosa del mondo, possendomi liberare, non vorrei. Ho lasciato dunque i pensieri delle cose grandi et gravi; non mi diletta più leggere le cose antiche, né ragionare delle moderne; tutte si sono converse in ragionamenti dolci; di che ringrazio Venere et tutta Cipri. Pertanto se vi occorre da scrivere cosa alcuna della dama, scrivetelo, et dell’altre cose ragionerete con quelli che le stimono più, et le intendono meglio, perché io non ci ho mai trovato se non danno, et in queste sempre bene et piacere. Valete.
Ex Florentia, die III Augusti 1514.
Vostro Niccolò Machiavelli
http://www.classicitaliani.it/machiav/mac64_let_06.htm Edizione di riferimento Niccolò Machiavelli, Tutte le opere a cura di Mario Martelli, Sansoni Editore, Firenze 1971.

[11] Francesco Vettori a Niccolò Machiavelli
Roma, 16 gennaio 1515
Spectabili viro Nicholò Machiavelli in Firenze.
† A’ dì 16 di Gennaio 1515.
Caro compare. Io non ho lettere da nessuno che io legha più volentieri, che le vostre, e vorrei potere scrivere molte choxe, le quale conosco non potersi commettere alle lettere. E’ sono più mesi che io intexi benissimo in che modo amavi, e fui per dirvi: « Ah, Coridon, Coridon, quae te dementia cepit? ». Poi, pensando intra me medesimo che questo mondo non è altro che amore, o, per dir più chiaro, foia, mi ritenni; e sono ito considerando quanto li huomini in questo chaxo son dischosto chol chuore a quello dicono cholla bocha. Ha un padre il figluolo e dice volerlo nutrire honesto: non di meno gli chomincia a dare un maestro che tutto dì stia con lui et che habbi commodità farne a suo modo, e gli lascia leggere qualchoxa da fare risentire un morto. La madre lo pulisce, lo veste bene, acciò che piaccia più: quando chomincia crescere, gli dà una camera terrena, dove sia cammino e tutte le altre commodità, perché possa sguazare a modo suo, e menarvi e condurvi chi gli pare. E tutti facciamo choxì, et errano in questo, più quelli a’ quali pare essere ordinati: e però non è da maraviglarsi ch’e nostri giovani sieno tanti lascivi quanto sono, perché questo procede dalla pessima educatione. Et voi et io, anchor che siamo vechi, riteniamo in qualche parte e chostumi presi da giovani, et non c’è rimedio. Duolmi non essere chostì, perché potessimo parlare insieme di queste choxe et di molte altre.
Ma voi mi dite choxa che mi fa stare admirato: d’havere trovato tanta fede e tanta chompassione nella Riccia che, vi prometto, li ero per amor vostro partigiano, ma hora li son diventato stiavo, perché il più delle volte le femmine soglono amare la fortuna et non li huomini, et quando essa si muta mutarsi anchor loro. Di Donato non mi maraviglo perché è huomo di fede, e oltre a questo pruova del continuo il medesimo che voi.
Io vi scripsi che l’otio mi faceva innamorato et choxì vi raffermo, perché ho quasi faccenda nessuna. Non posso molto leggere, rispetto alla vista per l’età diminuita: non posso ire a solazo se non achompagnato, e questo non si può far sempre: non ò tanta auctorità né tante facultà che habbi a essere intratenuto; se mi ochupo in pensieri, li più mi arrechono melanchonia, la quale io fuggo assai; e di necessità bixogna ridursi a pensare a choxe piacevole, né so chosa che dilecti più a pensarvi e a farlo, che il fottere. E filosofi ogni huomo quanto e’ vuole, che questa è la pura verità, la quale molti intendono choxì ma pochi la dichano. Fo pensiero a primavera ridurmi a voi, se mi fia lecito, e parleremo insieme di questo et molte altre choxe. Racomandatemi a Filippo, Giovanni e Lorenzo Machiavelli e a Donato. Christo vi guardi.
Francesco Victori oratore in Roma

http://www.classicitaliani.it/machiav/mac64_let_07.htm Edizione di riferimento: Niccolò Machiavelli, Tutte le opere a cura di Mario Martelli, Sansoni Editore, Firenze 1971.

If you like, you can join the discussion on this post on Gay Project Forum: http://gayprojectforum.altervista.org/T-machiavelli-homosexual

GAY GUYS WHO HAVE A GIRLFRIEND

Hello Project,
I feel a little embarrassed to send you an email but the doubts are so many and I have to try to find answers because I don’t know who to turn to.
 
I’m 16 and a half years old. For more than a year I started to have doubts about my sexual orientation. I’m not afraid of being gay and if I’m gay I do not think I would have big problems with my family. My parents love me, probably nothing would change.
 
I started to masturbate at 13 and discovered masturbation by myself, without anyone’s suggestions. I did very little to understand that it was sex and that I was sexually developed. Before, for me, sexuality didn’t even exist, or rather there was sympathy for other guys and girls, but I didn’t really know what genital sexuality was.
 
At first, masturbation was just a pleasant physical fact, an interesting discovery by which I felt even more adult, but there was no real bond with sexual fantasies. Just a while later, between 14 and 15, came true sexual fantasies, and were all related to a guy, my teammate with whom I was training two afternoons a week.
 
At that time I played sports, although with many limits and went to the gym with a group of other guys and a coach. We had spaces and times dedicated to us, because we were still too young and were not allowed to enter the locker rooms when the gym was crowded by adults. In the locker room however we were alone, the coach was almost never there, but things were quick and I had never had sex fantasies of any kind, but, as I said, from 14 and a half, fantasies have come and with these also embarrassment because I was always about to get a hard-on and had to make great efforts to control it.
 
The gym has become a very important thing for me, I counted down the time missing to the next training and my masturbations were all related to what I saw in the locker room.
 
But then doubts have begun. I saw that the other guys took things completely differently, without any embarrassment and without any real interest. I quickly understood that what happened to me meant that I was gay.
 
In the beginning, this thing disturbed me a bit, but then, in a few days, I told myself that it had nothing to do with pathology and I overcome the problem. I have to say that I’ve learned at home the idea that being gay is not a disease, I learned it from my parents who have gay friends and defend their friends from stupid gossip of various kinds. Obviously from this point of view I was lucky. In practice, I realized I was gay and it did not make me any problem.
 
In a sense, my story matches the classic proceedings of gay recognition and acceptation described in your book.
 
When I was 15 years old, however, I found myself in situations that I had never taken into account. A girl, my schoolmate, began to show interest in me and I was grateful for it, not just because having a girl put me in a more adult position with my friends, but because with that girl I was fine, it was nice to talk to her.
 
She called me on the phone and we talked for hours, we joked about everything, we often went out together in the afternoon, me and her, without other people, in short I also started to have sexual reactions. I got hard-ons when she leaned on me, when she caressed my hand, and so on, slowly, but I must say, also pleasantly, we came to kiss each other, what I never imagined before.
 
The kisses were not bad, the hugs still better, so much that I started thinking that maybe I was falling in love with that girl, but something didn’t fit: I, gay, in love with a girl? Or maybe I was not gay? Now I keep going out with that girl and she calls me on the phone every day, I keep on getting hard-ons when we kiss or there’s a little direct physical contact, which is very common now. I tried to masturbate sexually thinking about that girl but the results were disappointing and then did some other doubts start.
 
In fact, that girl doesn’t attract me sexually, sometimes I think in a few years, I might also have a sexual relationship with her, but that’s what I think in theory because I never made sexual fantasies about her. It seems a disagreeable behavior, but I see her in the early afternoon and she, or probably the situation, excites me a bit, then later in the afternoon I go to the gym and when I come back home I masturbate always and only thinking of the guys I see in the gym, however, Project, I react sexually even with the girl and this should not happen, or maybe I didn’t understand how these things work.
 
My friends don’t react at all sexually with the boys, that is, they don’t react in situations that are very exciting for me. If I understand, a gay should not react with a girl, or maybe I’m a bit bisexual? This would create some problems because I could not have a really satisfying couple life.
 
Then there are a number of questions I would like to ask you:
(1) Do you think I should try with a girl?
(2) Do you think I am at least a bit bisexual?
(3) Do you think I hurt that girl staying with her because perhaps I deceive her?
 
I look forward to your answers, I would also like to know what the boys of the forum think.
Thanks. Manuel
 _________
 
Hello Manuel, I’m not a doctor nor a psychologist but I deal with gay people for many years. You know that there are also gay guys who get married and have children, these guys have a heterosexual life with their wives that might seem normal, and often the wives are not even aware of having a gay husband. This means that a gay may well have sex with a woman and can even do it habitually. Being gay is not a question related to what is objectively done within a couple relationship, being gay is a matter of desire.
 
There are married gay men who have never had any sexual contact with a man and live a heterosexual life that has all the appearance of normality, but those married gays have a masturbation totally related to gay sexual fantasies. The object of their spontaneous sexual desire are not the wives but the guys who populate their sexual fantasies.
 
When couple sex behaviors are typically heterosexual but coexist with masturbation with exclusively gay fantasies, the true spontaneous sexual orientation is gay. Here bisexuality has nothing to do; a bisexual experiences real forms of sexual and emotional love, both for boys and girls. Keep in mind that of course a guy can really get a hard-on because he is in a situation of very strong intimacy with a girl, but when these experiences are soon forgotten and masturbation remains with gay fantasies, heterosexuality is a very unlikely hypothesis.
 
(1) Should you try with a girlfriend? So, in general, there is nothing that “must” be done and the only sensible behaviors are the spontaneous ones. If going with a girl is the fruit of a decision, that is, a way to test yourself, a test to evaluate your reactions when facing that girl, we are already out of the field of true sexuality. I would say that the very use of the verb “try” indicates that it is essentially a test that would be depressing both for you and for your girlfriend.
 
(2) I would exclude at all that you are bisexual, in your post there is nothing suggesting bisexuality.
 
(3) As to the fact that you are deluding that girl, I think it’s a fairly realistic hypothesis. There are girls who cultivate male friendships without any sexual purpose and have gay friends with whom they fully agree, but it is certainly not the general rule. And then the relationship you have with that girl does not have the typical features of a friendship. Frankly, I think she is very likely to consider you as her boyfriend and to expect you to behave sooner or later coherently with that role. I understand that the company of that girl may be pleasing, but your relationship might be based on a misunderstanding, and if so, it would be better to speak clearly, if possible, or keep away not to fuel further illusions.
Project
__________
If you like, you can participate in the discussion of this post on Gay Project Forum: http://gayprojectforum.altervista.org/T-gay-guys-who-have-a-girlfriend