Say it ain't so! But according to this frank interview with him and his wife, he is.
First a few pics ...
Reese Rideout is the top in every image. And not only is he manifestly having no problem getting an erection, but in the last picture he is quite clearly also in ecstasy ( or is a consummate actor. In a manner of speaking.) He says, in the article I linked to above:
Now I watch footage of women or think about Beckie while I'm filming.O-o-o-o-kay .... If you say so.
It's always been easier for lesbians to "pass" than for gay men. Women are not expected to "perform", unlike the man. Because the fact of the matter is that a man can't force a hard-on: if at some deep level you're not turned on, you won't get hard. A woman, by contrast, can always pretend to be aroused. But Mr Rideout has no problem getting hard, as these images attest. So at some level, he must find men a turn on, or at any rate, he must be turned on by the men he's filmed fucking. Admittedly, they are kinda hot. But still.
I don't care that he calls himself straight. I know there are many men who do not define themselves as "gay" because they see it as a cultural definition rather than a clinical one. Maybe it's time for a new label: straightish -- you call yourself straight but you can easily have sex with men. Or perhaps straight but not strait or strict (all three words are of course cognate and have come into English via three different other languages)
The question I have for any Kinsey 6's reading this is whether you could get hard for sex with a woman. And for any Kinsey 0's (why are you reading this blog, I ask myself ), could you get hard for a man?
Meanwhile, straight, strait, bi, gay or just gay-shaded, he has a magnificent body.
Maybe we can use another term I heard a while back. "Straight but not narrow" Would this term work? Reese as you said has to have some innate and deep affection for men. Men just do not get hard unless they are thinking of something sexually exciting to them.
ReplyDeleteThat's actually what "straight but not strait" means! But I'm still not sure that it accurately describes the phenomenon. I remember once talking to a know-it-all psychiatrist who was rabbiting on about the Freudian explanations for gayness ("homosexuality") and I pointed out ancient Greece. "Oh," he said, as quick as a flash, "But that was cultural " -- or perhaps he said " situational " -- "homosexuality."
ReplyDeleteAnd the difference is what, exactly? In cultures where gayness is accepted, lots of men who would in our culture be "straight" have sex with and get fond of -- more than fond of -- other men. No doubt he meant (if he actually thought about it seriously at all) that Freud explains gay men who are gay despite societal pressures. Or perhaps not.