Huh? A big pile of gay men would qualify as a “gang bang” and any gay man could be “spit roasted”.
Only if you think of the woman as a piece of meat. While technically true, most people do not like being thought of that way.
Who the hell makes these rules? Though my preference is MMM…, I can easily envision an MMF, in which the two guys aren’t interacting with each other. If they are each interacting with the woman in a different way, it would not be as if the other guys isn’t there. Especially since she’d be reacting to both of them at the same time, but differently.
I remember being in an MMM in which two of us were attracted to the third guy, but not to each other. It was still very different than if the other guy weren’t there.
IMO, they really are overrated; especially if you view sex as an intimate emotional bonding experience, not just something you do because it feels good.
And who the fuck came up with that definition? I am a perfect “6” on the Kinsey scale, but it has nothing to do with any attraction to cocks. In fact, I do not enjoy having anyone’s cock inside any part of me.
I am gay because I’m attracted to men, not cocks.
I was referring specifically to the “two girls, one guy” analogue, rather than three guys. Should have been clearer, sorry.
Or even if you do.
Would you be attracted to a man with a vagina?
For anybody who thinks this is purely a hypothetical question, search the web for Buck Angel.
Well, that’s different.
It’s SEX. If this man was in a threesome and got called the meat in a sandwich, he wouldn’t mind - in fact, he’d like being thought of that way.
Hell, if two women want to have sex with me at the same time and call me a fuck - not even meat, just a fuck - I’m not going to get all pissy. In fact, I’d have a boner as big as all outdoors.
As big as all outdoors, do you hear me!?
I don’t disagree with you. I was just commenting on how ridiculous it is that (what I thought was) a simple question about threesomes got derailed into great debate about how many dudes can be in the room before it’s considered something else. Were there three people involved? Great, then it’s a threesome.
Oh, fine. I just think we need words for each specific scenario. It’s a crime that the language of Shakespeare doesn’t have a word to describe each combination of holes one can be poked in, and/or each specific appendage can be used for such pokery.
Hey, let’s stop all the pointless chatter about defining threesomes so we can hear all the juicy details from the four ladies who responded as participants in FFF sexual encounters. I wonder if three of these women were in the same session. Hot hot hot Doper-on-Doper-on-Doper action!
Before seeing this poll I had totally forgotten I was involved a handful of years ago in a threesome with two other female-to-male transpersons. It was a fun night! First time having sex with fellow transboys and with folks not born male.
As a teen I was also involved in a gay cruising area with two guys but since it was only oral for me it doesn’t really count.
Doc…
…
Wow.
I got nothing. That’s something you don’t really see everyday.
My wife and I have had a few, with a (male) friend of hers, some years ago. It was a semi-annual thing until the science fiction convention near him shut down. They were fun. Would do it again if my wife wanted to.
It was a MMF threesome, but the other man and I never did anything directly to each other that could be considered sex. That might make it not a threesome by some definitions. On the other hand having sex with someone else watching and participating, though not directly with me, is different than the two of us having separately had sex with her. I still consider that to count that as a threesome, even if it’s just the exhibitionism/voyeurism aspect the third person adds.
Do horses count?
Was it in costume? Kirk, Spock and Uhura? Who got to be Uhura?
No, and not interested.
I’m in a LTR now, and only had one sexual partner before. My man and I would never consider such a thing, and in the future, if we weren’t together, I wouldn’t enjoy having sex with another person besides a committed partner. I’m just… vanilla. No problem. And no, having sexual contact with a person of the same sex does not make you ‘gay’.
In my book:
Only having sex/relationships with the same sex=homosexual.
Only having sex/relationships with the opposite sex=heterosexual.
Having sex/relationships with both sexes at different times in your life=bisexual, experimental period, or product of circumstances (prison, the navy, etc)
No, AndrewL said this was at a Science Fiction convention.
Would, nothing; I am. And, for what it’s worth, I’m not attracted to women in the corresponding situation.
Seriously, for you, is it just the vagina? Aren’t you attracted to the woman? Would you be attracted to a man with a vagina, just because he had one?