# Is ball-to-ball contact the indicator of when an act is gay?



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

Standard sexological theory states that an act is gay only when one or more balls from one person comes into contact with one or more balls from another person. Until that point, the act is not gay. Do you think that this theory is true? On one hand, it provides a bright line rule as to when something is gay. On the other hand, it runs the risk of being underinclusive.

Note: Even though this idea has strong connections to "New Atheism" (Dawkins, Harris, etc) I don't want this to turn into a discussion about religion, that's best suited for another topic.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Jun 25, 2010)

When a naked man has rough sex with or around other naked dudes, while potentially dripping sex-juice and touching testicles and penises, it might be an indicator of gayness. But then again, what if Lance Armstrong got a blowjob from Tom Green inside a truck stop next to a catholic church?

Ok -- I'm going to stop.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

I think in order to be gay, a person has to be sexually attracted to someone of his or her own sex. A person can have disinterested, experimental sex with someone of the same sex without being gay, as I have. A virgin, or someone who abstains from all sexual contact can still be gay. A person who has disinterested sex with someone of the opposite sex, but who only has crushes on members of the same sex, is still gay.


----------



## Oleas (Jul 22, 2010)

Since when have gay women had balls?


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

what is this i dont even


----------



## Everyday Ghoul (Aug 4, 2009)

Gayest. thing. ever. So, so many balls touching...


----------



## Ti Dominant (Sep 25, 2010)

Totally gay.


----------



## phoelomek (Nov 28, 2010)

This is a srs "sexological theory?" :crazy:

What about wrestling? Sweaty men in spandex all up in each others' junk? Manly? Gay? A manifestation of repressed homosexuality played out in the socially acceptable heterosexual man-arena of sports? :crazy:

But, no. Gay is being romantically/sexually attracted to the same sex. 'tis it really. The preoccupation with, or "srs studiez" of what constitutes "gay" and "not gay" is really pointless and irrelevant at best, and offensive at worst. Why make it out to be MORE than what it is? I can easily see how this could cause (or is it the effect?) unnecessary prejudices. 

Though I have no idea where the connection between this and "new Atheism" (wtf izzat?) is, this does, in a way, remind me of atheism, and people (atheists and theists alike) who attempt to attribute things to it that really have nothing to do with the actual position of atheism on its own--"lack of belief in the existence of god." Period. It's a negative position (not in the sense of value) so anything more than that, and you're wandering into the territory of personal beliefs where self-proclaimed atheists think that justifying their lack [!] of a belief in a god with personal opinions about other things that're related to religion somehow makes them MOAR of an atheist or is what and why exactly they're an atheist (which might be the case for an individual, but that doesn't have to do with "atheism" peiod.) There are no "tenets" of atheism.There are different "types" of atheism (positive/negative/implicit/explicit) and here, it would be acceptable to assign other things after it has been stated which a person identifies with. Saying you're an atheist is saying you don't believe there is a god[s.] That's it. It's not saying WHY you don't believe, or even that you believe/don't believe in an afterlife or anything else (There are commonalities and trends OBVIOUSLY, but having them doesn't mean you are or aren't an atheist.) Is that what you meant?


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

"Ball-touching" is a totally arbitrary indicator  It's all about intent.


----------



## Morpheus83 (Oct 17, 2008)

This is a joke, right? :laughing: Isn't this 'theory' used by some closeted homophobes who indulge in 'creative' gay sex without wanting the 'stigma' of being called 'gay', 'queer' or whatever?


----------

