This just in: A new study published by the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology has found that “fully straight” people don’t actually exist.
Researchers looked as the eyeballs of straight-identifying men to determine just how straight they actually were. Turns out, every single one of them was just a wee bit gay.
“It’s basically a study that assesses sexual orientation by looking at the eyes and whether they dilate or not,” Ritch C. Savin-Williams, the Director of Developmental Psychology and the Director of the Sex and Gender Lab in the Department of Human Development at Cornell University, told Broadly.
He continues, “You can’t control your eye dilation. Essentially, that’s what the whole project attempts to get at, another way of assessing sexuality without relying on self report.”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Savin-Williams and his team closely monitored the eye dilation of men while showing them a range of pornographic imagery.
Related: G0ys and androphiles and ‘mostly straights’, oh my! 6 sexual identities that came out in 2017
“We show straight men a picture of a woman masturbating and they respond just like a straight guy, but then you also show them a guy masturbating and their eyes dilate a little bit,” Savin-Williams explains.
“So we’re actually able to show physiologically that all guys are not either gay, straight, or bi.”
So what does this all mean?
“There are aspects [of male sexuality] along a continuum, just as we have always recognized with women,” Savin-Williams says. “Men have gotten so much cultural crap put on them that even if a man does have some sexual attraction to guys, they would never say it.”
Savin-Williams says another way of monitoring responses would be by monitoring a person’s genital arousal, but, he says “that gets a little invasive.” So they just stuck to their eyeballs.
Savin-Williams adds that while the study once again confirms that sexuality operates on a spectrum, it also finds that it’s not a binary system, which means that while someone can’t be 100% straight, they also can’t be 100% gay either.
Related: An intimate look at the private lives of “mostly straight” men
Donston
That’s a pretty horrible way of determining someone’s orientation. This might reflect that most people can get at least momentarily excited over certain body parts, but it doesn’t reflect desire, arousal, passion, sexual enjoyment, romantic love, long-term romantic satisfation or any of the other aspects of orientation and contributing factors to “lifestyle”. Nonetheless, most people having some degree or dimension of bisexuality or “fluidity” within their orientation is not a revelation for most or at least it shouldn’t be. But despite these “studies” it won’t kill “majority gay” desperately clinging to some sense of hetero-normalcy. It won’t kill internalized homophobia. And it certainly won’t kill hetero-worship.
Vince
I’m not sure about that. We’re good at deceiving ourselves and others but body parts don’t lie. If the sight of a dick or someone playing with it turns you on then of coarse that would = sexual satisfaction. Romance is an invented term. Were still animals after all.
If you look at the past. Say Greek or Roman. Gay and Bisexuality was looked at as part of the norm. Then the shame cult of Christianity got invented and we’ve been dealing with that ever since.
Donston
Being turned on sometimes by body parts isn’t the same thing as being turned on by the entirety of a gender. I know this for a fact. A woman’s figure can arouse me to some extent sometimes. But the entirety of a woman doesn’t do much for me. And I can’t feel intense and sustained romantic connection with a woman. Nor do I feel genuinely sexually satisfied with a woman. And there’s no real desire there. There can be many dimensions to a person’s sexual instincts, sexual arousal, sexual satisfaction, romantic instincts, romantic satisfaction and passion. Understanding those nuances and being open about them is what will actually lead to progress not hiding behind identities. But yeah, if you’re looking to primarily have sex or relationships with men who are straight-leaning or very straight-leaning sexually and romantically or at least say they are then that’s hetero worship and often a sign of self-loathing or internalized homophobia.
Also, same-sex sexual behavior, particularly between men, was never fully embraced during ancient Greek and Roman times. It was seen as acceptable for a male to sexually engage with an effeminate young man from time to time if he chose. But it was not out in the open. Same-sex relationships were not accepted. And male sexually engaging with another male who wasn’t young and effeminate was seen as shameful. That’s a myth that continues.
Vince
Kind of like in Afghanistan where if they find out your gay they’ll kill you. Ironically it’s perfectly acceptable for men to rape young boys though.
Kangol
Sexual orientation and sexual desire are linked but distinct. There are shadings to the latter. I do think this basic fact is a revelation for some people, especially people who think homosexuality and bisexuality are “unnatural” or just casual choices people make. BTW, I saw another study along these lines the other day and mentioned it on a different thread, yet when I searched online I could not find the link.
jamih
““majority gay” desperately clinging to some sense of hetero-normalcy” – what exactly is this “hetero-normalcy” that the “majority gays” are clinging to? What the hell is “hetero-normalcy” anyway, it seems to be one of your favorite (and completely your own) words. What are they supposed to cling to? How would you want them to behave, screw or generally live their lives to make you happy?
o.codone
Vince. No religion bashing. Please read the updated comment policy.
nil44
Re: same-sex behavior in antiquity – while pedestry was indeed predominant, it had nothing to do with the effeminacy of the younger partner. As we know from primary sources like Plato, it was the most athletic, courageous and headstrong male youths who were deemed most desirable (not typically qualities associated with femininity). If you were a middle aged Athenian politician, you would have your eyes on the youngster who was headed to the Olympics and/or had a prestigious military career ahead of him.
And, going beyond just Greece and Roman, both Aristotle and Caesar noted that the ancient Celts held relationships between two adult men in higher regard than the relationship between husband and wife, with the former at least praising the social benefits of such a attitudes. And as far back as the 18th century, Edward Gibbon (not exactly known for having an agenda to widely disseminate information that could promote the appeal of non-traditional Christian attitudes towards sexual conduct) noted that all but one of the Roman emperors took Male lovers.
Since marriage was a political and social institution, male citizens were expected out of duty to take wives, start families and assume the mantel of paterfamilias (and the Greek equivalent). But it’s rather anachronistic and not supported by the historical record to derive from that fact the conclusion that male-male sexual relationships were not socially accepted or out in open.
Vince
Yeah, I remember hearing about the study. No wonder religion is so desperate right now. The more guys thinking it’s normal the more we have in our camp. Based on this that would be a BIG camp.
Brody
If there are men who are 100% gay (and we’ve all known those who faint at the mere mention of a vagina), then odds are there are men who are 100% straight.
Donston
Just pulling random numbers out of my ass, I would guess that about 30% of men are completely, fully 100% conventionally hetero. While another 60% of men are hetero dominant , straight-leaning or are sometimes turned on by random body parts that a male has to offer. Times did a study a couple years that estimated that close to 8% of men are gay or have gay-leaning orientations. That leaves about 2% of men who are close to 50/50 bi or pan.
Brody
That sounds a little closer to reality, Donston.
o.codone
Donston, let’s play a game. Let ME pull the numbers out of your ass. C’mon.
Donston
o.codone, I’m sorry, but I rarely ever even allow my husband up there.
It’s not too difficult to get a clearer picture on things if you read enough info from unbiased, non agenda pushing sources and actually have in-depth conversations with a variety of people. One of the reasons some people stay in the closet for so long is that they don’t always understand the dimensions of their orientation or the differences between arousal, desire, passion, sexual enjoyment, sexual satisfaction, platonic love, romantic satisfaction and emotional contentment. That’s also partly why identity can be problematic. Getting a hold of those things can take time and experience and self-confrontation. Of course, self-denial, sociology, religious oppression/guilt, internalized homohobia, sado-masc instincts, attractions dominanted by people of an… “inappropriate age groups” are often contributing factors to the closet and identity fickleness as well.
Paco
I can already prove that this study is suspect. I am 100% gay and not aroused by breasts or vaginas.
Pupillary dilation can be an involuntary response to any visual stimuli.
Kangol
I hear you. But have you been tested? That vulva just might open your eyes. LOL 😉
troyfight
My first thought: “eye dilation” isn’t that when we are trying to focus? wouldn’t they dilate at our jobs on certain things? Basically trying to identify something. Yes, that could be sexual, but could not be. I’m no expert with this, but…eh. I agree with Paco. (tho i can’t deny i like the article)
Jaxton
All men have homosexual impulses – all. They might not want to admit it but it’s there.
Most men will choose not to identify or glorify their homosexual impulses because it would usually destroy their chances of finding a female sexual partner. Women – in general – do not wish to have any awareness whatsoever of the homosexual impulse in their male partners.
As to any research that uses pornography in its methods, just be wary. Porn is prostitution. It is a paid model, not a true sexual model, especially when women are involved.
jpcolter
What a load of nonsense
Billy Budd
I can see beauty in a woman, but my dic* would never get up for them. I am afraid of women. So I believe that there may be straight men in the same situation about myself. They can say if a guy is attractive or not, but they are unable to fuc* a man.
If straight guys were not indoctrinated, trained, educated, coerced, forced, to fear same sex attractions, , MOST people would be bisexual, like in ancient greece and rome.
Billy Budd
same situation AS myself.
Mandrake
Alfred Kinsey knew all this back in 1948 from better research than this study. His ‘Sexual Behavior in the Human Male” introduced the continuum spectrum regarding sexual orientation and that it was in no way binary.
alfred
Are you kidding me? Have you looked into Kinsey’s methodology? so dodgy its incredible in this day and age its still quoted as ‘science’ by many people. Seriously, look up Kinsey and his research process and then get back to me. However, the basic principle of a ‘scale’ in terms of straight to gay may well be correct, but it is more chance and ‘massaging’ of his data that made him come to this conclusion. I wonder if we will look back on him the way we now look at the likes of Freud in years to come.
Jaxton
There was no gay identity politics back in Kinsey’s day. Because of this – and despite the illegal status of male homosexual acts – men were more comfortable than they are today talking about them from a personal level.
That’s why close to 40% of men admitted in the 1940’s to having same-sex fantasies, which is much higher than it is today.
Gay identity politics puts great demands on men. It polarizes them against admitting to having same-sex fantasies. Feminism is also partly to blame.
Mandrake
Alfred and Jaxton, you’re both mistaken about Kinsey. His methodology was impeccable for its time and the most extensive study into sexuality ever carried out until Masters and Johnson in the 60’s. There was no gay identity politics then, but the behaviors were still going on much as they are today but without the media coverage and the support organizations of today.
I highly recommend the detailed and Pulitzer Prize-finalist biography of Kinsey by James H. Jones, published in 1997, to you both. I think you’ll find it very enlightening. Much of the sex study and research today is nothing more than inventing the wheel.
alfred
“His methodology was impeccable”….we will just have to agree to disagree. Kinsey was a total hack! I have read several books on Kinsey, thanks. But in his defence, he didn’t ever really claim to have absolute knowledge in this field, and expected others to build upon his work in the years to come after him.
gymmuscleboy
Yeah right. Try telling a lot of gay people there’s no such thing as 100% gay.
gymmuscleboy
Their eyes dilate when they see a guy masturbating and therefore they are turned on? This is absolute pseudoscience!
alfred
I remember the 2015? study that Bailey did on the behest of the American Institute of Bisexuality (after the furore of the ‘gay straight or lying debacle earlier) which showed that some men exhibited a form of distinct bisexual arousal. The author of the article who was summing up the findings in like the NY times or something then took the test. It showed that he too was ‘bisexual’ while the author believed himself to be dimply gay. Quite interesting and does give to pause to all these ‘findings’ (note, for the millionth time, I do believe in bisexuality so dont come for me, just that it is actually more rare and complicated than that these AIB or Kinsey Institute funded studies show) I remember because it was around this time that I started to really analyse my own perceived sexual orientation and was looking for research.
Donston
I believe the Times study you’re referring to was the one in 2014, where they tested 100 bi identifying men. It was determined that all the guys were either gay or straight. I think that study is what ended up pushing the idea of “fluidity” for the “bi agenda”.
I believe in bisexuality/pansexuality. But I don’t believe it’s something special or unique. Most people have some degree or dimension of bisexuality or “fluidity” within their orientation whether they understand that or indulge it, and orientation itself can be quite nuanced. Though this this “study” is a silly and basic way to try to decipher and determine those things. Most studies, including the dated Kinsey studies, do a poor job at deciphering much of anything at all. Ultimately, having authentic, substantial and sustained arousal, desire, passion, sexual satisfaction, romantic instincts and romantic satisfaction towards adult cis men and women is indeed very rare, particularly for guys.
Donston
Furthermore, the biggest problem with the “bi-guy” and “bi-curious” movements is that there’s not enough focus on simply being honest or helping to educate people on the dimensions and degrees of orientation. Too much of the emphasis is on simply trying to tell, show and/or prove that you’re not gay. While that might do with it for hetero worshipping guys or chicks into male homosexual behavior, it leaves most men who have unabashed desire, passion and romantic affection for guys unmoved. I don’t think these types of “studies” is actually gonna help on that front. If anything, it’ll worsen that approach. Though perhaps it will help more gay, homo dominant and gay-leaning dudes gain more self-comfort and be less obsessed with retaining some sense of hetero-normalcy.
Josh447
https://www.livescience.com/22120-eyes-reveal-sexual-orientation.html
Jaxton
Back in e 1940’s, men were more likely to admit that they had homosexual fantasies than they are today. About 40% of men admitted to having them back then, which is much higher than it is today. It’s even more remarkable when you consider that male homosexuality was punishable by jail back then.
What has changed since then to make regular males less likely to admit to having homosexual fantasies? Gay identity politcs and feminism – that’s what.
Gay identity politics creates a lot of baggage for regular guys. It polarizes men with its political demands, making them less likely to admit to anything that may bring them into the identity fold.
Modern feminism is basically anti-male , and thus anti-male sexual freedom, including the freedom to swing both ways.
sreesawa
Here we go again. It’s just like when people say bisexual men don’t exist. WE DO.
Jazpyy
Yet more politically driven, flat earth style science to try and erase gay/bi/srt8 orientations: For real facts https://www.newscientist.com/article/2155810-what-do-the-new-gay-genes-tell-us-about-sexual-orientation/ sexual orientation. Because many genes and other factors seem likely to play a role in sexual orientation, it may explain why some people are bisexual or see sexual orientation as a spectrum.
chris33133
Eye dilation is an indicator of many things (for example surprise) and not just arousal. This study has set a very low standard for determining sexual orientation.
Jaxton
Exactly. The other day, my eyes dilated when I saw a horse and cart on the street. It didn’t mean I wanted to bonk it.
Polaro
The study make 100% sense to me. It explains a lot about how we have constructed this myth around human sexuality. Reality is actually much more flexible and situational than most people think.
RexMovesSlow
Utter nonsense. Most people are heterosexual. Im happy they are straight and I am gay. Why do we have to try to lie to ourselves that everyone else is gay too?
surreal33
No revelation here as I have sucked more “straight” men than I can remember. Men are primal and demand sex without hassles. Women can’t or won’t provide sex on demand whereas gay will with no strings.
phallictomato
So they’re basing sexual arousal by eye dilation? Please. That is the most stupid study I have ever heard of. My eyes dilate depending on light – does that mean I’m sexually aroused by daylight and darkness? No. Also, did they take into consideration perhaps the straight guys were looking at other guys to see who has a bigger dick etc.? Many straight guys look at other guys at urinals, for example, not because they’re gay or attracted to them, but because they’re checking out the competition. Who looks better, etc.
Just like there are 100% gay men, chances are, there would be 100% straight men. Stupid study is stupid. Eye dilation… really!????
Donston
“Studies” like this are usually just driven by self-accepting gay and gay-leaning people looking to indulge hetero-worship or people pushing the agenda of erasing “labels”. Anything can cause pupils to dialate. And dialating pupils have never been connected to sexuality.
inbama
We have so lowered the bar on everything that words no longer have any meaning. Men are women, straights are gay – what was once a political movement is now a cult represented by a string of meaningless letters.
Queerzy
I really can’t help but think that the reason so many guys here oppose the concept of straight men having homoerotic fantasies/urges/experiences being rooted in either the experience of being rejected or missing out on the experience of experimenting with straight guys because their entire social circle is gay dominated.
Most straight identifying guys will never experiment with someone who they conceptualize as gay (regardless of what they know of their sexual habits). Furthermore many will not sexually engage a guy unless they have developed a very close kinship with. Nearly all my friends are male and nearly all of them have had 95+ of their sexual encounters with women. However most of them have had at least 1 sexual experience with a guy. Some of them that has been with me and some of them have turned me down, but 75+% of the ones I have, it has been after 2+ years of hanging out VERY regularly. And this exclusively has resulted in less than 3 sexual experiences total with any given guy.
You can’t just wave your wrist at a straight guy and expect him to drop his pants. Try making friends with them and relating to them on common interests. It’s sad that so many guys think that because they never had the opportunity that it must be be one big lie.