Get A Little More Gay? Or At Least, Be Less Vanilla
When showerbeerr tells men “you can absolutely get your girl to do a threesome with you if you just get a little bit more gay” it doesn’t come as a surprise to me at all. I see the TikTok/BookTok ladies talking about this all the time. When they read menage fiction, they want MMF, not MFM — and yes, the letter placement matters. They want “the boyfriends to be boyfriending” or there’ll be no joy in Mudville whatsoever.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence she critiques male erotic “literacy” specifically here:
You can absolutely get your girl to do a threesome with you. You just have to get a little bit more gay. That is the solution.
Because anytime I have a conversation with a man about this, I’m not loving the pitch. To be honest, I’m not impressed. They’re always like, would you be open to something like that? And I’m like, yes, let’s hear it, let’s hear the pitch.
And they get all excited, they’re like, okay, cool. So it has to be with another girl. That’s the only option. And I’m like, ah, like, it’s a little rigid. It’s a little rigid. Don’t you care about what my fantasy is? Cause it’s not necessarily that. I’m open to some other stuff.
And they. They’re like, what do you mean?
And I’m like, well, what about another guy? Two guys? And they look at me like I just asked them to punch their mom in the throat or something. Like I just said something so fucking crazy. And the truth is, like, I’m on some Challengers shit, and they’re on some fluorescently lit video on the homepage of a website they only visit in the incognito browser.
Shit, you know, like if men think that they are so adventurous, that they’re so erotically intelligent, really you’re just trying to recreate something that you’ve seen on the most depraved, exploitative alleyways of the internet. That’s not adventurous. Like, you are fucking vanilla. It’s literally vanilla.
And then, you know, we start talking about it more, and they’re like, okay, fine, fine, fine. We can do two guys. Fine. But I’m not kissing him, I’m not touching him, and I’m not kissing him.
What the fuck do you think this is? What do you think this is? Why would I want that? Why would I want a situation where you guys are not interacting? Seriously? Um, if you are vanilla, that’s totally fine. And most straight guys are. Just admit it. The only literacy you have in the subject is something you’ve seen in a really dark, exploitative fantasy that I don’t wanna recreate. I don’t wanna recreate videos that you’ve seen on the internet.
Right. It’s about being open. It’s about, like, letting the dynamic unfold. It’s about seeing what’s gonna happen and, like, rolling with the punches. And most straight guys just can’t do that. And that’s totally fine, but stay in your lane. Please don’t bring this to my desk ever again.
Probably I should take this moment to remind people that I quote things all the time here on ErosBlog without agreeing with every jot and tittle. Specifically in this case I don’t agree that common porn scenarios are exploitive in general or that (as this commentator implies) the uber-common man-with-two-women threesome-sandwich fantasy is exploitive in specific. But I do agree that it’s somewhat vanilla and boring, especially from a woman’s perspective. I’m not trying to police women’s fantasies when I say this, but I’d guess that at least eight out of ten times it’s fanservice for a man’s fantasy, not a woman’s. If you want to engage her erotic imagination, propose the sort of threesome she’s going to find erotic, duh…
Similar Sex Blogging:
Shorter URL for sharing: https://www.erosblog.com/?p=35734
I think for this to work you need the majority sex to be somewhere on the middle of the Kinsey scale. It sounds like this TikToker is pretty straight.
Agreed.
It seems that, in her mind, the guys are boring and vanilla for not considering some bisexual action, but she is adventurous because she won’t entertain the same thought.
Hmm…
It is my personal experience that willing to be the meat in the MMF sandwich has subsequently resulted (in multiple relationships) in being the top slice, the bottom slice, and club slice in various combinations of FFM, FMF, MFF, FMM, MMF, MFM, FFMF, MFFM, and other variations. You have to stop at 4 because if you get to 5 like MFMFM that’s technically an orgy and we stop giving out labels.
Or to quote Horton “because an orifice is an orifice, no matter how small”…
Fuzzy, on a couple of porn taxonomy projects (I can’t claim personal experience here) where “orgy” had connotations that didn’t seem right for the room or the vibe, we also found the phrase “group sex” quite useful!
A partner you really trust can sometimes make you more experimental. Past experiences have left me with a lot of anxiety about people so I have not tried anything with more than one except hanging out with beautiful naked women at sauna clubs in central Europe.
My partner’s only outstanding fantasy is to be spit roasted. Which I’m fine with, I’d love to see and feel them sucking a cock while I thrust into their asshole. Then I’d really like them to suck me off while I’m on the receiving end.
The problem with that is that there’s a whole load of nervousness on their part about sex with a person we’re not in love with, about separating sex and love in a way that doesn’t impact our relationship while allowing them to admit someone else into our bed. Swinging or group sex is totally off the cards, and polyamory is definitely not something they’d entertain. Ultimately they’re happy to have fantasies and not try to realise them, while I see fantasies as a way to expand our intimacy and prevent staleness.
As to Vagans point about trust, I think there’s an element of distrust because my partner is less experienced than I and nervous that being pan and poly historically I’d break my core rule about openness and adding another cock to our lovemaking might be a threat somehow. Never found a way to deal with that other then step back from encouragement to experiment for a while and be patient till they mention it themselves again.