The forced gay success thread...

[redhotpump]

I also think one that involves faces would be good, or one that involves the whole male form.

Although I think that CFG is starting to have some affects, it is still hard for me to move from fantasy to reality. I also mainly feel that I am gay when I am horny, and still feel str8 when I am not horny.

I've recently started listening to CSG some - from the comments sounds like can help me with some of these issues

[ftslave67]

How 'bout a file that would make one dominant/a top for a specific time period or on hearing a trigger? There's some safety factor in knowing a change is only temporary--might make it more easily accepted.

[AlanH26]

It is odd how many of us have become bottoms. I certainly am. Maybe it's because when we were straight we had to effectively be tops and being gay gives us the opportunity to be different. I'm glad I'm a bottom anyway.

[xavious]

Perhaps if it's new or unfamiliar territory (gay sex) that people assume a more passive role because they want to be guided in how it should be and would be unsure if they tried to top. A change in the sexual dynamics of "I have the penis, my partner doesn't, therefore I'm expected to be the active partner" to "we both have a penis, but I don't know what to do with mine in this situation, so I can let my partner be the active one", muddying the expectation.

It could also be a mental expectation of gays being more passive due to stereotypes i.e. "camp".

[JackDrago]

For the already gay guys, I already have two files to make you more top. Both [url=http://www.warpmymind.com/Files/8135/Stroke-Manly.php]Stroke Manly[/url] and Manhood Blessing are useful for turning a gay man into a butch, dominant top.

I have a bunch of personal hypnosis to do for now, but a "forced gay top" file is first on my list for when I get to writing files for other people.

[convinced]

I just thought I'd leave my response for the sake of it.

For the past three years I've exposed myself to Cursed Forced Gay(and recently tried out Cursed Stroke Gay, which is surprisingly good), and as of a week or two ago I can definitively have a strong sexual interest in men, something that was either not noticeably part of me before.

I came across the Straight-to-Gay concept due to my existing interest in unlocking more potential of one's mind and my interest in material(including hypnosis) related to that. I originally used the file because I wanted to challenge myself to see how far outside information could modify/manipulate my existing mind--------even if I was consciously aware of such influences.

For quite some time I thought the file was worthless as it wasn't making any noticeable impact on my attraction to women or my (at the time) still almost non-existent attraction to men. For a time I even forgot the file existed, and when I remembered I began using it again, that time attaining a minimal attraction to men----which is better than nothing.

From then on, the next few months involved me making a more dedicated effort to listening to the file----and also seeing how my arousal to men would change over time. Surprisingly, it did change quite drastically, and eventually I could get turned on by men just as easily as women. It was at this time I began concerned about the psychological effects of this file, as I noticed my behavior becoming increasingly flamboyant/metrosexual-like. Not that it bothered me----those attributes didn't really conflict with my existing personality----but I began to fear that I might also adopt a more submissive/beta personality(traits that did actively conflict with my naturally impulsive, confrontational, proactive, and hotheaded personality). The problem for me was that a lot of hypnosis files I was aware of had some submissive/beta command tacked onto them, and I figured if this file could actually make me gay, it could have me pick up those attributes as well.

Thankfully, as time passed, my concerns about picking up traits (besides becoming more flamboyant/flamer-y) never really happened, and my interest in women (at least compared to to my interest in men) is pretty low, and I'm now much more prone to getting turned on when I see a magazine of a hot guy, passing a hot dude on the street, or generally gay porn.

This file is definitely effective, even if the effects aren't immediately noticeable.

[bostonmarc]

I just thought I'd leave my response for the sake of it.

For the past three years I've exposed myself to Cursed Forced Gay(and recently tried out Cursed Stroke Gay, which is surprisingly good), and as of a week or two ago I can definitively have a strong sexual interest in men, something that was either not noticeably part of me before.


This file is definitely effective, even if the effects aren't immediately noticeable.

So do you think that the addition of Cursed Stroke Gay made a difference?

[subdad36]

It is odd how many of us have become bottoms. I certainly am. Maybe it's because when we were straight we had to effectively be tops and being gay gives us the opportunity to be different. I'm glad I'm a bottom anyway.

AlanH26, I wouldn't have it any other way, but i also think a lot of us are bottoms because natural tops wouldn't really sign up for and allow themselves to be changed in such a serious way. Or we are just the ones the file works on? Does that make sense?

[Dreamin4Men]

I became a bottom as well. I think it's focused on bottoming because for me at least, its easier to get off with a cock in the mouth than anything else.

[broerk]

Been reading here for a while and decided to try the file for myself.

I decided to try the file because I am curious about hpow effective it truly is. From what I've read from this thread it is truly effective. However there is no better experience then first hand experience. I am as far as I'm aware completly sthraight so if I do turn out gay after two weeks I'll know this file works. Or....you know...have been in denail for most of my life :wink:.

There is also another reason for me to try this hypmo file. I have a panic disorder which revolves around the fear of being gay. Please don't get me wrong. I have nothing against gay people in general. I apperently fear being one myself though. Weird I know.

Anyways the idea behind it is that what better way to get over your fears then to face them head on. So if this file does work and I become gay. I can experience what it is like and experience that it is nothing to be afraid of. If however the file doesn't work on me well then I hope it will help my mind let go of this fear.

[MasterJack]

There is also another reason for me to try this hypmo file. I have a panic disorder which revolves around the fear of being gay. Please don't get me wrong. I have nothing against gay people in general. I apperently fear being one myself though. Weird I know.

Anyways the idea behind it is that what better way to get over your fears then to face them head on. So if this file does work and I become gay. I can experience what it is like and experience that it is nothing to be afraid of. If however the file doesn't work on me well then I hope it will help my mind let go of this fear.

I wouldn't do it, it could make your panic disorder worse. The thing is this file turns you gay and makes you horny for men, but it doesn't take away negative worries about being gay.

There was someone deep within this thread somewhere who loved it when he was horny, but hated himself afterward every single time. He would flip back and forth and really stressed himself out and getting depressed, posting like this for months.

I think the only people who should use this file, are people who don't care if other people (friends and family) found out they were gay or not.

Basically this file changes the attraction, but doesn't change the worry. Look for this guy in this thread, people were recommending he should go see a psychiatrist because of how he was feeling and posting.

[broerk]

I think the only people who should use this file, are people who don't care if other people (friends and family) found out they were gay or not.

Thing is though. If this were the only criteria I'd be a perfect fit. I don't care if my friends and family would find out if I were gay. For the thought of never getting to be with a girl apperently freaks me out. That is where for as far as I can tell the panic is coming from. Hence why I thought that if I were to go gay if even for a while I'd learn it's not as scary as my mind makes it seem.

I have seen a pshyciatrist about this and he pretty much started our talks from a pov of me being gay in denial. However he told me that I defanitley wasn't gay as the replies I gave were nothing like those of people in his care who did turn out to be gay. So it's pretty surely an panic disorder.

anyways enough about that. If you would advise me not to do it this way then perhaps I shouldn't. So thanks for the advice.

[MasterJack]

The decision is totally yours.

I understand why you would panic of not getting a girl. Gay's are more promiscuous and that's a fact, and only the PC (politically correct) folk would try and deny this.

The majority of men never play hard to get, most of the time they're grateful to be able to get some action, especially from the person they wanted to. The majority of women always play hard to get, their emotional aspect nearly always takes precedence over their horniness.

A gay man will sleep with you when they're horny, because they don't care what other people think too much. While a women, even if they're horny and do want to sleep with you, will not do it, if they care what some other people might think and who'll find out.

Even though sex is so much more casual for women these days. You still need game to pull women in clubs (or where ever else). While to pull a guy in a gay club is pretty easy.

These are both generalizations of men and women, but they are true for the majority of men and women, I'd say 95% of the time, and the other 5% are the exceptions to these generalizations. Only femenists or the PC crowd would try to blur the lines that men and women are pretty much the same in all things, which just isn't true.

Hell the PC crowd would never believe it's possible to change sexuality through means such as hypnosis, as people are born that way, and their sexuality never changes, but we know otherwise.

So it's your decision. But if you're panic disorder is about not getting a girl, rather than judgements from family and friends, or the fear of the stigma of being gay, then I'm sure this file will help you. But be sure that it is before trying the file, because as many will tell you, once you try it, there's pretty much no turning back for most people.

[broerk]

I do agree with alot of what you posted above this post masterjack.

However I think you misunderstood. What I actually mean with not being able to get with girls is not about girls being harder to get or anything like that. I ment it more in the sense of if I were to be gay I would never get to be with a girl anymore. As gays while not necesarily hating girls. Just don't feel that way about girls. So bassicaly I guess It's a fear of even being incapable of falling in love with an girl even if I wanted to(which btw I do).

But be sure that it is before trying the file, because as many will tell you, once you try it, there's pretty much no turning back for most people.

This does make me rethink it though as it isn't in my plans to turn permanently gay. I just want to expereince it for a while so I can show myself it's nothing to be afraid of. After that however I would prefer to return to girls.

[MasterJack]

Why not do the cursed force bi file then?

[xavious]

Gay's are more promiscuous and that's a fact, and only the PC (politically correct) folk would try and deny this.

I'd like to see some ratified evidence of this, especially since "gay" includes women who may not be all that sexually active, as you yourself appeared to claim, and modern societies hook-up culture at bars, online, etc, sees tons of opposite sex encounters and there's a much greater percentage of heterosexuals, so it's hard to say if a minority are sexually active enough to overwhelm the exploits of such a vast majority.

I typically like you a lot MJ, but I feel you've pushed yourself a bit beyond your bounds making such unsubstantiated claims and then painting anyone who might disagree as "PC".

Heck, this 2010 study suggests you're completely wrong (scroll down): http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/

[MasterJack]

Firstly when I was talking about being gay, I was referring to gay men. I thought this was self evident in the context I was speaking in (the differences between men and women), as well as posting under this specific topic (cursed forced gay, which is a gay file aimed at men). So let's not get hung up on that detail.

Secondly I don't want to get into a heated argument about this. I'm stating my own repeated observations on human sexuality, and the data and statistics I've researched (there are plenty which say gay men are the most promiscuous).

You find one study from a dating website that claims it's statistics prove gay men aren't any more promiscuous. Well I don't think a dating website, who's majority demographic are of people who are looking for love and serious relationships (rather than hookups), is really the best place to do a survey which "prove" gay men aren't more promiscuous.

All I have to do is go to Craigslist, who's majority demographic are of people who want to hookup (rather than love and serious relationships), and do the same survey, and I'm sure my statistics would prove the opposite case to be true (that gay men are more promiscuous).

I believe general observations are enough for most people to see this.

Because:

1. The majority of men are horny bastards with less hang ups when it comes to sex.

2. It's easier to hook up with men than it is women.

I don't even necessarily think it's a gay thing either. I think it's a man and women thing. If women were as easy as men when it came to pulling, then straight and gay men would be just as promiscuous. This is why I was talking about women being most likely to let their emotions and judgements hold them back from hooking up, while men are less likely to do so.

Let's be honest here. If I wanted to get laid today, right now. I could put the word out that I'm horny and I wanna fuck (or give oral). One ad worded for men, and another ad worded for women, on all sorts of websites, whether dating or hookup sites. With the male ad I would be inundated with responses (I know I've tried this before). While with the women ad I would be lucky to get 1 response. i.e. The majority of women need a lot more than being horny to sleep around, while men usually don't.

So I think that's why gay men are the most promiscuous. Because getting laid with other men is easy. If straight men could lay women just as easy, I'm sure the numbers would be the same or similar.

Lastly notice I never said anything about promiscuousness being a bad thing. I was just stating gay men are more promiscuous and that's why you don't have to worry about sex in that department as you do with women. You're the one who's found offense to it. But this is the general observation I've made, and so have a lot of people.

It's like me stating that women are physically weaker than men and aren't ideal for work that requires heavy lifting; and then feminists having a go at me saying I'm a misogynist. Fuck off you PC bitches. Never did I imply physical weakness was a bad thing, you implied that. But I am stating men would be ideal for a heavy lifting job, while women wouldn't be.

Hell I'll even go one step further and state, if a war was fought where country 1 had an all female army, while country 2 had an all male army, and both had the same equipment and training. Country 2 would win. Why? Because men are generally more aggressive (usually due to higher testosterone), are more stronger and physically fit (better for close combat, loading weapons, climbing, running while carrying heavy equipment), and are more easily able to detach themselves from the devastation to take the shot (because they usually have a better control of their emotions).

You see me using words like generally and usually and majority. Reason being, these are the general observations of the world, society, sexes etc... They all have there exceptions, but they are still the general observation we can't deny. For example the majority of people are straight, I don't think anyone would argue this is not the case.

Hell I bet I could say the majority of users on this website are men, and the minority are women, and I wouldn't be wrong. But I wouldn't be bashing women either for saying it.

So I've never said being gay is a bad thing, or being promiscuous is bad thing. But I have said, and will stand by it, that gay men are more promiscuous than other sexualities. Only you can decide if saying that was a bad thing, and then that's your problem.

Anyway I've said what I've wanted to say on the subject. You can reply how you like, but I'm not going to argue about this specific topic anymore. To be honest I think we're arguing about nothing. I apologize to everyone if my beliefs or opinions have offended you, but I'm not here to be liked by everyone, so just don't like me if you don't like what I believe, simple as.

[xavious]

All you've provided is a wall of text and not a single shred of evidence, yet you feel that my evidence, that I was under no onus to provide because YOU made the original claims, wasn't good enough, because "reasons". Why should anyone trust a single thing you are saying?

You cannot just make sweeping statements followed by painting any detractors as wrong using a pejorative, and then expect anyone to remotely trust or respect you.

You've essentially self-proclaimed yourself an untrustworthy tist with this unprofessional tirade, and falling back on weasel words doesn't make it any better.

[MasterJack]

All you've provided is a wall of text and not a single shred of evidence, yet you feel that my evidence, that I was under no onus to provide because YOU made the original claims, wasn't good enough, because "reasons". Why should anyone trust a single thing you are saying?

Evidence? Observations are the basis of evidence.

The fact that you're using 1 survey, yes 1 survey as the end all of evidence to this question. A survey that is taken off a dating website which is primarily aimed at people looking for serious relationships than hookups, is utterly ridiculous. Let them do the exact same survey on a hookup website like Craigslist or Grindr, and see how that pans out.

Also surveys aren't 100% hard evidence. Why? Because PEOPLE LIE! They have been known to be quite an unreliable way to gather data on personal matters, especially matters to do with sexuality, sex, and relationships. You'll find surveys where men bloat the number of women they've slept with, and women lowering that number. You find surveys of penis size which are self measured by men, always come out with a higher average than every other survey done in a controlled environment (results gathered under scientific observation). So then the data becomes skewed doesn't it? You would need to do multiple surveys on the subject in various environments (not just 1 dating site) before you can come to such a conclusion that this is the final proof.

You cannot just make sweeping statements followed by painting any detractors as wrong using a pejorative, and then expect anyone to remotely trust or respect you.

Like I said in the previous post, I can find plenty of studies which would prove my point, I've studied them in the past, I know they exist, I just didn't bother searching for them and posting them here. But for your sake I guess I will.

Research indicates that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime:

The Dutch study of partnered homosexuals, which was published in the journal AIDS, found that men with a steady partner had an average of eight sexual partners per year.[12]

Bell and Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having one thousand or more sex partners.[13]

The same study revealed that homosexual men have to a great extent separated sexuality from relationship. The survey showed 79% of the respondents saying that over half of their sexual partners were strangers. Seventy percent said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. It should be noted that this survey was drawn from the San Francisco area at the height of the celebration by that gay community of its freedom from the restraints of "puritanical, middle-class values” and before the AIDS epidemic struck. [13]

In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101-500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1,000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than one thousand lifetime sexual partners.[14]

A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than one hundred sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than one thousand sexual partners.[15]

13. A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), pp. 308, 309; See also A. P. Bell, M. S. Weinberg, and S. K. Hammersmith, Sexual Preference (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981).

14. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354.

15. "Sex Survey Results," Genre (October 1996), quoted in "Survey Finds 40 percent of Gay Men Have Had More Than 40 Sex Partners," Lambda Report, January 1998: 20.

So even a gay magazine did a survey for homosexual men, and 24% said over 100 partners, and 40% said they had over 40 sexual partners. These are high numbers, this is promiscuity. You'd be lucky to find anywhere near that percentage for straight men. I'm not saying it's not possible. But to be a straight man, you need a lot of GAME and EFFORT to pull most women, and just for simple no strings attached sex (forget serious relationships). And trust me, the majority of straight men don't have the game or effort to do such things.

Like I said, I believe the reason for this is men come with less hang ups when it comes to sex than women, which makes pulling other men much easier. But if women were just as easy to pull as men, then I'd believe the statistics would be the same or very similar.

But I guess now all my evidence and observations are just wrong or bigoted some how. Your 1 study from OK Cupid is supreme above all.

I could probably dig out more studies, but whats the point, arguing about whether I believe gay men are more promiscuous or not is going to continue to upset some people here, and it was never meant to turn into an argument. I was just advising broerk that I understood getting girls were harder, while getting men was easier.

broerk: For the thought of never getting to be with a girl apparently freaks me out. That is where for as far as I can tell the panic is coming from.

MasterJack: I understand why you would panic of not getting a girl. Gay's are more promiscuous and that's a fact, and only the PC (politically correct) folk would try and deny this. The majority of men never play hard to get, most of the time they're grateful to be able to get some action, especially from the person they wanted to. The majority of women always play hard to get, their emotional aspect nearly always takes precedence over their horniness.

I misinterpreted his question anyway, it was a double entendre. He was saying he was scared he'd never end up with a girl or start a family if he was to try the file, not that he'll never get one because they're difficult to pull. The phrase could be interpreted both ways hence it being a double entendre. The point is, I'm trying to show how silly this argument has gotten, if I interpreted his phrase the other way, there would have been no mention of gay men and promiscuity.

Also I never added any bad connotation to being gay or being promiscuous. I never judged anyone for either; for pete sake I make hypnosis files on turning men into shemales that get fucked by men. But I believe some people will add this themselves (it feels like that's what you've done), and then I get the flack for saying something I and many people believe is true, even though we were saying it without judgement.

I'm pretty sure on the other side of the coin, there are plenty of people who think being gay and having sex with lots of men is really a positive thing. I mean being straight and having sex with lots of women is pretty much considered a positive thing today.

So whatever negativity you got from me saying gay men are more promiscuous, it's in your head, because I never said it was bad a thing whatsoever.

You've essentially self-proclaimed yourself an untrustworthy tist with this unprofessional tirade, and falling back on weasel words doesn't make it any better.

Haha this is what really makes me laugh. This is totally unrelated to the argument we were having. Now I'm not allowed to have a belief oropinion that is contravening to yours! Because if I do, it makes me an "untrustworthy tist" with an "unprofessional tirade" falling back on "weasel words". WOW, just wow. Nice way to personally and professional attack me, just because I try to put my argument forward of why I believe gay men are more promiscuous. I think I'm not the one using "weasel words" here.

So go fuck yourself xavious. That's a straight up personal attack to you which doesn't need to be hid behind so called "weasel words".

I'm not going to attack you as a tist, as it's totally unrelated to us having different opinions on gay men and promiscuity. Sure if our opinions were on the ethics of making hypnotic slaves give us money, I'd understand the attack on my profession. But having different opinions on whether gay men are more promiscuous? Barely the opinion needed to judge whether someone is professional a good tist or not. So I'm not going to do it to you, you might be a brilliant and professional tist, I can't say that you're not, but as a person, you're a number 1 a-hole.

[lego]

I'm afraid I have to agree with MasterJack on this. Men are horny bastards who would love to have sex if given the chance.
Source: myself. :P

[ftslave67]

The perception is certainly out there that gay men are more "promiscuous" than the population at large. Has there been a solid scientific study? I haven't seen it. Certainly there are also reasons why that might be true--not being able to marry, until recently in most states. Also, maybe since gay relationships are not "traditional", there's no real societal pressure to conform to the "norm" of monogamy.

[gayblake]

Hi everyone, got scared off the first time, but I'm gonna give it another go soon. Warming up with lots of gay porn, then I'll be back into the CFG!

[gayblake]

Well I finally had my first gay encounter! After the urges built up for so long I couldnt help myself. We met through grindr, and he came over. It was such a good feeling holding another man's penis in my hand, and even better in my mouth! Well time to listen to some CFG to reinforce my gayness!

[CyrilMtl]

Nice, that was a lucky guy :) being the first for a cute ex-hetero twink like you.
How do you define yourself in the gay world ? Versatil/top/bottom/sub... ?
Do you plan to continue listening to cfg ? Or wait and see if you slowly switch back to the girls side :)
Some people here seems to switch back and for, waking up one day liking pussie, the next day dick ...

I am looking at cfg to reinforce my gay side but i am a little afraid that it push me more in the sub/bottom role. I have to read the script.

[gayblake]

Well thank you! I'm definitely a bottom/sub twink, although I've only sucked so far, I would love to take a cock in my ass! I've heard once you take a cock, there is no going back, that's when you know you are are truly gay. I'm gonna keep listening, I'm thinking of trying another challenge and go fully gay for a month, but we'll see, it's so hard.

P.S. I love how you describe me as ex-hetro! So liberating!

[Fomicry]

God I love a sub/bottom twink... Im actually drooling Haha

[Kurokotsu]

The decision is totally yours.

I understand why you would panic of not getting a girl. Gay's are more promiscuous and that's a fact, and only the PC (politically correct) folk would try and deny this.

The majority of men never play hard to get, most of the time they're grateful to be able to get some action, especially from the person they wanted to. The majority of women always play hard to get, their emotional aspect nearly always takes precedence over their horniness.

A gay man will sleep with you when they're horny, because they don't care what other people think too much. While a women, even if they're horny and do want to sleep with you, will not do it, if they care what some other people might think and who'll find out.

Even though sex is so much more casual for women these days. You still need game to pull women in clubs (or where ever else). While to pull a guy in a gay club is pretty easy.

These are both generalizations of men and women, but they are true for the majority of men and women, I'd say 95% of the time, and the other 5% are the exceptions to these generalizations. Only femenists or the PC crowd would try to blur the lines that men and women are pretty much the same in all things, which just isn't true.

Hell the PC crowd would never believe it's possible to change sexuality through means such as hypnosis, as people are born that way, and their sexuality never changes, but we know otherwise.

So it's your decision. But if you're panic disorder is about not getting a girl, rather than judgements from family and friends, or the fear of the stigma of being gay, then I'm sure this file will help you. But be sure that it is before trying the file, because as many will tell you, once you try it, there's pretty much no turning back for most people.

I'm sorry. I was browsing the thread, as a gay man, and this post actually bothers me. Gays are not more promiscuous. Men have a higher rate. It's actually a horrible stereotype that gays are promiscuous. They tend to be publicized more, but heterosexual males are often just as bad. Look at high school/college culture of sleeping around and frat houses, and you'll see it. To say gay men follow their libidos that much is, quite frankly, ignorant. It's the kind of message spoon-fed by the media, and I find it very disturbing to come across something of that sort here.

[MasterJack]

Well if you bothered to read the posts after that, where I clarify my position and reason more, you would see I agree with you on the straight men being just as promiscuous.

But as you couldn't be bothered to read my reasons and evidences I posted in a couple posts after that one, I can't be bothered to reiterate them here. They are literally all on the same page in this thread, Page 121, go back and read them first before replying again.

And if you're still offended after reading them, then that's your problem.

[OxyFemboi]

There are problems with making generalizations. What is generally true of a population (especially when comparing two populations) is not necessarily true of a specific person of that population (compared to another specific person of another population). As an example which will not arouse arguments: "women are, in general, less strong than men." However, I knew one woman, Olivia, who was employed by a coal mining company; she worked in the coal mine as a miner, not in an office as an office worker. She was definitely stronger than most men (including me ... and since I was lifting weights at the time, I was fairly strong, especially in my lower body (my upper body strength has always sucked). She also looked extremely feminine, not extremely muscled like most Ms Olympias (or even most Mr. Olympias) of the time.

One cannot reason from a general principle to a specific example without a lot of qualifications. Similarly, one cannot reason from a specific example to a general principle without much qualifications. These are problem in logic which often lead to fallacies.

[MasterJack]

I totally disagree.

Women, in general, ARE less strong than men. That generalization is true.

You can't use an exception to disregard a generalization, as that doesn't make any sense. A generalization is something that happens usually and often, but not always (which are the exceptions), that's all it is.

In most parts of the world, you can generally see the stars at night. Places which have a lot of air pollution or light pollution would be the exceptions.

[OxyFemboi]

MasterJack wrote
I totally disagree.

Women, in general, ARE less strong than men. That generalization is true.

You can't use an exception to disregard a generalization, as that doesn't make any sense. A generalization is something that happens usually and often, but not always (which are the exceptions), that's all it is.

You also totally missed my point.

Regardless of the truth value of a generalization -- it is accepted that, in general, "males are stronger than females" -- you cannot use that generalization to make a specific statement about the relative strength of one member of the males population and one member of the female population. The best you can say is that, in general, any given male is more likely to be stronger than any given female.

You cannot state "every male is stronger than every female" as an absolute fact. In fact, I gave an example of one female who was stronger than one male who was weight training fairly heavy weights which disproved the stronger version of the statement: "every male is stronger than every other female". The bell curves overlap, so there will always be some females who are stronger than some males ... regardless of how much some males may wish otherwise.

In a similar manner, you cannot make a statement such as "every gay male is more promiscuous than every straight male" or even "gays are more promiscuous that straights" ... even if you back it up with accepted scientific studies. Even if it is true in the general case -- and I'd love to see references to scientific studies published in reputable peer-reviewed journals -- the way you stated it implies (and/or allows other people to infer) that what was meant was "all gay males are more promiscuous than all straight males." The last statement is insulting ... which is why others disagreed with you so vehemently.

[jamwest]

Hi room,

Long time reader of this thread and been listening to all the associated files on and off for years. Getting urges, binge listening, then going off it, but each time it gets a bit stronger and I go a bit further (sure you know the deal). Now I am having the urges again and have even started chatting to guys on grindr, but always too afraid to go through with meeting etc. Get a thrill out of chatting and sharing pics though.
Feel very submissive and what I think could help push me over the edge is some kind of guide (preferably dominant but not necessary at all) to exchange emails/messages with and to help encourage and push me to keep going further. Happy to share images, talk in detail about stuff, whatever you like. So if anyone is interested in helping me go further with this please write me here or at jamwest360@yahoo.com Looking foward to talking and going further down the rabbit hole. By the way I'm 26, male and athletic.
Thanks so much for reading. This thread is amazing.

xx James

[MasterJack]

You also totally missed my point.

Regardless of the truth value of a generalization -- it is accepted that, in general, "males are stronger than females" -- you cannot use that generalization to make a specific statement about the relative strength of one member of the males population and one member of the female population. The best you can say is that, in general, any given male is more likely to be stronger than any given female.

What the hell are you talking about. And that last sentence you wrote, means exactly the same as what I said: "Women, in general, ARE less strong than men".

You cannot state "every male is stronger than every female" as an absolute fact. In fact, I gave an example of one female who was stronger than one male who was weight training fairly heavy weights which disproved the stronger version of the statement: "every male is stronger than every other female". The bell curves overlap, so there will always be some females who are stronger than some males ... regardless of how much some males may wish otherwise.

Did I say every male is stronger than every female? NO I did not. You're just putting words into my mouth and completely ignoring the English word "general" or "generally". I used these words specifically for the purpose of their definitions.

Here is the definition according to Google:

generally
?d??n(?)r?li/
adverb
adverb: generally

1.
in most cases; usually.
"the term of a lease is generally 99 years"
synonyms: normally, in general, as a (general) rule, in the general run of things, by and large, more often than not, almost always, in the main, mainly, mostly, for the most part, in most cases, most of the time, predominantly, on the whole; More
usually, habitually, customarily, standardly, routinely, regularly, typically, ordinarily, commonly, conventionally, traditionally, historically
"the summers were generally fairly good"
antonyms: occasionally
2.
in general terms; without regard to particulars or exceptions.
"a decade when France was moving generally to the left"
synonyms: overall, in general terms, in a general sense, generally speaking, altogether, all in all, broadly, on average, principally, basically, substantially, effectively
"France was moving generally to the left"

I've underlined them for you.

Let's put them in a sentence shall we.

1. Women, in most cases, usually, are less strong than men.
2. Women, in general terms, without regard to particulars or exceptions, are less strong than men.

How you can accuse me of saying

"every male is stronger than every female" as an absolute fact.

is ridiculous.

In a similar manner, you cannot make a statement such as "every gay male is more promiscuous than every straight male" or even "gays are more promiscuous that straights" ... even if you back it up with accepted scientific studies. Even if it is true in the general case -- and I'd love to see references to scientific studies published in reputable peer-reviewed journals -- the way you stated it implies (and/or allows other people to infer) that what was meant was "all gay males are more promiscuous than all straight males." The last statement is insulting ... which is why others disagreed with you so vehemently.

I guess you ignore the posts afterward which I clarify my statement. I'll post it here for you.

I don't even necessarily think it's a gay thing either. I think it's a man and women thing. If women were as easy as men when it came to pulling, then straight and gay men would be just as promiscuous. This is why I was talking about women being most likely to let their emotions and judgements hold them back from hooking up, while men are less likely to do so.

Let's be honest here. If I wanted to get laid today, right now. I could put the word out that I'm horny and I wanna fuck (or give oral). One ad worded for men, and another ad worded for women, on all sorts of websites, whether dating or hookup sites. With the male ad I would be inundated with responses (I know I've tried this before). While with the women ad I would be lucky to get 1 response. i.e. The majority of women need a lot more than being horny to sleep around, while men usually don't.

So I think that's why gay men are the most promiscuous. Because getting laid with other men is easy. If straight men could lay women just as easy, I'm sure the numbers would be the same or similar.

But to be a straight man, you need a lot of GAME and EFFORT to pull most women, and just for simple no strings attached sex (forget serious relationships). And trust me, the majority of straight men don't have the game or effort to do such things.

And as for scientific studies, I'll repost the 3 I found (not from Christian universities), and the gay magazine survey I found.

Research indicates that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime:

The Dutch study of partnered homosexuals, which was published in the journal AIDS, found that men with a steady partner had an average of eight sexual partners per year.[12]

Bell and Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having one thousand or more sex partners.[13]

The same study revealed that homosexual men have to a great extent separated sexuality from relationship. The survey showed 79% of the respondents saying that over half of their sexual partners were strangers. Seventy percent said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. It should be noted that this survey was drawn from the San Francisco area at the height of the celebration by that gay community of its freedom from the restraints of "puritanical, middle-class values” and before the AIDS epidemic struck. [13]

In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101-500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1,000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than one thousand lifetime sexual partners.[14]

A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than one hundred sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than one thousand sexual partners.[15]

12. Xiridou, 1031.

13. A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), pp. 308, 309; See also A. P. Bell, M. S. Weinberg, and S. K. Hammersmith, Sexual Preference (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981).

14. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354.

15. "Sex Survey Results," Genre (October 1996), quoted in "Survey Finds 40 percent of Gay Men Have Had More Than 40 Sex Partners," Lambda Report, January 1998: 20.

So even a gay magazine did a survey for homosexual men, and 24% said over 100 partners, and 40% said they had over 40 sexual partners. These are high numbers, this is promiscuity. You'd be lucky to find anywhere near that percentage for straight men. I'm not saying it's not possible. But to be a straight man, you need a lot of GAME and EFFORT to pull most women, and just for simple no strings attached sex (forget serious relationships). And trust me, the majority of straight men don't have the game or effort to do such things.

The reason you and other people are getting upset, is because I refuse to change my views on something I believe is true. I've given logical reasoning's and studies to back up my view, if you don't like it, you don't have to believe my view. But I'm not going to change my view of what I think the truth of the matter is because it upsets people.

I opted to remain silent on the matter after my posts so this thread could go back to it's original purpose (talking about the file. But other people keep bringing the subject up again and again, while incorrectly accusing me of things I never said or conveyed, because they can't be arsed to read all 3 or 4 posts properly on 1 page of this thread (page 121). If they read all of them, rather than just the first 1 (which needed clarification, and my position was clarified in the posts thereafter). I wouldn't be arguing in circles for no reason, because everything that's been brought up so far again after those posts, would've been answered already.

I also think some people here either don't understand how to read the English language correctly. Or are purposely trying to confuse things. Rather than people saying I said this, and I said that, just quote the part of the post you accuse me of saying and which annoys you. And I will readily admit to it. and tell you yes, that's exactly what I meant. Or I'll quote another part of my posts that clarifies that sentence/paragraph, so you can't interpret my post the way you're trying to paint me to everyone else.

[joe-cat1]

Mmmm, i wanna be ex-hetero but i still have urges for females sometimes. That said i have SO MUCH GAY PORN on my computer now! ah! i just love dreaming about a boy taking me to gay pride in some tight underwear. yummy

[OxyFemboi]

joe-cat1
Mmmm, i wanna be ex-hetero but i still have urges for females sometimes. That said i have SO MUCH GAY PORN on my computer now! ah! i just love dreaming about a boy taking me to gay pride in some tight underwear. yummy

The best way to make this dream come true is to join a gay club (there are clubs for everything these days ... running, swimming, bridge, ..., probably even knitting ... along with oldermen/younger men clubs) with lots of young (younger than you, anyway) gays and arrange to march in a Gay Pride parade near you (or further away if you're not out yet). Most of the bigger cities have Gay Pride parades now. Or advertise on Craigslist (or wherever) for someone to march in the parade with you ...

[Dreamin4Men]

Mmmm, i wanna be ex-hetero but i still have urges for females sometimes. That said i have SO MUCH GAY PORN on my computer now! ah! i just love dreaming about a boy taking me to gay pride in some tight underwear. yummy

You should do us all a favor and post some of your favorites from that porn stash ;). The curious straight boys will see what the future holds for them, and us turnees will get an amazing wank or two out of it :)

[hunkhunter]

Mmmmm it's so hot reading about all the dick dodgers turning to the gay side thanks to CFG. I really hope you turnees are happier now and have no regrets. My boyfriend was turned gay by CFG and tells me gay sex is million times better then sex with women. I wish all you turnees luck in finding a partner rather it be just for fun or a relationship.

[Convinced2]

Made a similar username for this since I forgot my old account password, but I thought I'd give an update:


I'm primarily turned on by men and I've been wearing more flashy clothes. I'm not sure if they'd be considered feminine cloths by most, but it is a change in fashion for me regardless.

Again, I'm really happy this file hasn't changed me psychologically, I'm still the person I always was but now my dick gets hard for men.

...Also, lol, what's with all the shitposting and baiting on this page?

[ftslave67]

Everyone has an agenda. Even if it's only to reinforce/restate their beliefs, right or wrong.

[hunkhunter]

I'm curious not all, but a lot of straight men seem to have a negative opinion of us gay men. So I wanted to ask what some of the men who have been turned by CFG thought of gay men before using the file and what made you decide to try CFG? Don't get me wrong I'm happy to hear of so many turnees I'm just interested in the mindset that makes a person want to risk turning their sexual orientation.

[Convinced2]

I'm curious not all, but a lot of straight men seem to have a negative opinion of us gay men. So I wanted to ask what some of the men who have been turned by CFG thought of gay men before using the file and what made you decide to try CFG? Don't get me wrong I'm happy to hear of so many turnees I'm just interested in the mindset that makes a person want to risk turning their sexual orientation.

For me it was curiosity more than anything else. I can't say I've been repressing gay thoughts growing up or whatever----I really was just curious to see if I could become sexually attracted to men.

But with regard to my opinions of gay men(or lesbian women) as a whole before this shift in preferences? That really hasn't changed, at all. I've never thought lowly of someone because of their sexuality or even outgoing behavior alone.

That said, a very general attitude I've seen from people who are skeptical/critical of gay men is because of their perceived submissive/flamboyant attitudes.

[OxyFemboi]

Convinced2 wrote
Made a similar username for this since I forgot my old account password, but I thought I'd give an update:

I'm primarily turned on by men and I've been wearing more flashy clothes. I'm not sure if they'd be considered feminine cloths by most, but it is a change in fashion for me regardless.

Again, I'm really happy this file hasn't changed me psychologically, I'm still the person I always was but now my dick gets hard for men.

The only difference between gay man and straight men is how a man likes to have sex and with whom. CFG should not affect any other differences. If some other things change, that is solely due to an individual belief that those differences are part of being gay, so the file accomodates that belief.

[joe-cat1]

I don't know what it is, but this pic just makes me so hard. I wanna be a guy's puppy dog!



And every queer dog needs a firm-handed master!

[Convinced2]

[quote="OxyFemboi"]

The only difference between gay man and straight men is how a man likes to have sex and with whom. CFG should not affect any other differences. If some other things change, that is solely due to an individual belief that those differences are part of being gay, so the file accomodates that belief.

I know, but if some random person interested in this file-----with no prior knowledge of other people's reactions to it-------came across this forum and spent 30 minutes to an hour reading through it, it would be understandable and easy to come to the conclusion that this file drastically changes you on many levels, not just preference.

An inaccurate assumption, of course, but you can see where people like that are coming from.

[joe-cat1]

whoops

well here's link anyway

https://gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.net/8019B6/data.tumblr.com/fbde891cc81f6f7d7ebb9d7d99344517/tumblr_neu3crknYz1u3t1o6o1_1280.jpg

[Convinced2]

Hi everyone :)
For now I'm still supporting her in her studies. I don't see my old friends anymore but I'm meeting guys and it seems as if a whole new world has opened to me.

What studies? She getting a major for something?

Just curious, what's with the shift in friends?

[Scodel13]

I'm thinking about starting to listen to CFG, anyone have any advise?

[bostonmarc]

I'm thinking about starting to listen to CFG, anyone have any advise?

Yes,... start at page one of this thread :twisted: