“Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men.”

In 2015, University of California, gender and sexuality professor Jane Ward published a book called “Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men.” In it, Ward discussed what she called “straight homosexual sex” in frat houses, barracks and biker gangs, as well as more mundane settings like suburban cul-de-sacs.

Ward illustrates that sex between straight white men allows them to leverage whiteness and masculinity to authenticate their heterosexuality in the context of sex with men. These sex acts are not slippages into a queer way of being or expressions of a desired but unarticulated gay identity. Instead, Ward argues, they reveal the fluidity and complexity that characterizes all human sexual desire. In the end, Ward’s analysis offers a new way to think about heterosexuality—not as the opposite or absence of homosexuality, but as its own unique mode of engaging in homosexual sex, a mode characterized by pretense, dis-identification and racial and heterosexual privilege.

“If you can get a straight man to talk to you about why he is having sex with men, it’s very likely that he’s going to draw from a small set of acceptable narratives about why straight men do things like that, and I think that’s a really common one, you know, the narrative of constraint — ‘Well, I’d rather be having sex with a woman, but there are no women available,’ or ‘Women are too complicated’ — this kind of thing. But I don’t buy that,” she said in a recent New York magazine interview.

More recently University of Oregon sociology doctoral student Tony Silva wanted to dive deeper into communities that often go overlooked when sociologists look into the whole “straight homosexual sex” thing. After discussing sexual behaviors and interests with 19 straight men who search online via Craigslist for other straight men to have sex with in rural, conservative areas, such as Missouri, Illinois, Oregon, Washington and Idaho, Silva coined the term “bud-sex,” according to New York magazine.

Turns out, the participants all perceived their sexual relations to be more of a courtesy to other guys, essentially relieving their urges and just aiding a friend in a way to get off without developing any deep feelings or emotional connections. Because of this, these men were able to find “normalcy” in their sexual interactions with men and not deem them homosexual at all.

“I was interested to study straight men, specifically, because there is a cultural narrative that they aren’t very sexually flexible. As the participants in this study (and other emerging research projects) demonstrate, many straight men do, in fact, experience sexuality as flexible.” he said in a recent Edge Media Network magazine interview.

4 thoughts on ““Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men.”

  1. I always find the focus on white men interesting. Apparently other straight guys jerking each other off is not newsworthy?

      1. My theory is, it’s about deconstructing a political myth: Rural white guys lean to the right. Rich people also lean to the right, actually farther than l, but in America, our pundits deny that rich people vote for the party of rich people.

        1. Those pundits are correct, and incorrect at the same time.. There are many people of the left, who vote for leftist- and even want socialism… They are rich, and usually celebs. The funny thing about it though, is voting for government, you’re actually hurting yourself, and aiding the elites. Government is expensive, the more of it you have, the more taxes you are going to pay, the more taxes you have to pay, means less money for you, things get harder, and you eventually become stuck economically- a slave.

          In the United States, and in New York especially- we have MASSIVE government. The police are in the faces of the people more, as more laws come with more government, and police are giving out tickets for everything! The state needs the money to continue to support the massive government.. All of this doesn’t hurt rich people.. Rich people can afford to pay the many silly fines, rich people can afford the rising cost of living.. Rich people who get really tired of the high taxes, can pick up and leave.. No it doesn’t bother them, it greatly hinders however the little guy, the guy trying to make it, and its getting harder.. So this is why I find those who support politicians who favor massive government, to be idiots.. You’re hurting yourself, and aiding elites.

          Those on the right, the ones who actually do believe in limited government, and personal responsibility, ect.. They are more about creating prosperity, by allowing the market (people) to control it, and largely keep what they earn.. They believe government has its role, it isn’t evil.. But when it becomes too big, it like a fire can and will become dangerous, and destructive.

          It is a mixed bag on who supports either side.. There are rich who support the left, and rich who support the right.. Those on the left tend to do it because they either feel guilty about their own wealth (which is foolish, unless they did evil things to attain it), and so instead of willingly pay more taxes themselves if they believe in that.. They believe we all should, which again only makes things difficult for the little guy, not the rich guy.

          The rich who tend to support the right, tend to believe in the results, facts, facts, facts, and common sense, is what they care about it.. They see the ideas of limited government, which brings about lower taxes, and more employment for people- equals prosperity.. They tend to have a much greater understanding of the economy, than some silly twit celeb, or phony politician, both of which run on feelings, and not facts.

Leave a Reply