Male lesbian

Post Reply New Topic

Have you heard about the "male lesbian" concept? Apparently there is a small percentage of heterosexual men who believe they would be better off as women, but are not transsexuals or the like.
They want to form a romantic relationship with a beautiful woman and make love to her "as a woman". So it would be like two women making love, where the male imagines that he is a woman making love to another woman.
Does his ring a bell with any of you here? Is it common with aspies?

idk, but sounds interesting

Actually that's most transsexual biological men.

Eddie Izzard described himself as a male lesbian.

I heard about this concept on AVEN

if you were to reverse/obverse this, you'd have the concept of a woman who wishes she were a guy so she could have gay sex with another guy. i wonder if there are any of that sort out there someplace?

I have felt this way before. It usually comes and goes rather quickly. I even tried dating a lesbian, it obviously failed and probably made it worse for me.

Male lesbian is a concept thought of by Talmer Shockley, the author of The Love-Shy Survival Guide, who's an Aspie.

There is a chart of sexual orientations on the following site, which includes Male Lesbian: http://loveshyproject.com/blog/5_nodes_of_sexuality.html

Male lesbian does not mean actual lesbian, or homosexual, or anything like that, but refers to the courtship pattern of such a male being passive, like a female, and that male lesbians tend to wish they were born a woman because courtship would be easier for them due to their passivity.

Male lesbians are love-shy, because of their passivity. As many love-shys are Aspies, it's reasonable to say that many Aspies will be male lesbians.

Keeno pretty much summed it up, although it was Gilmartin (author of Shyness & Love) who first coined the term, not Shockley (I really didn't like the latter's book...too PUA-esque).

I would say I'm probably a male lesbian, yes.

Eek!! I am growing boobs!

I have heard guys say this but it sounded like they were kidding. It is possible, I guess.

I guess this is why I like lesbian porn so much.

It all makes sense now!

I've been called a "Lesbian" by a gay friend, and I was recently told that I "would make a great woman".

I am completely happy/comfortable with my gender and sexual orientation though, I just seem to like some things which are more typically feminine and don't like some things that are typically masculine, especially watching sports.

I think this is what some people mean when they call themselves a ML...

Why? I'd love to have a penis!

yup, i've met one before

The male lesbianism stuff I can see, and understand I guess... but this blog thing that posted...

I really didn't agree with. Its strange, I rarely have definite opinions about things, but I really don't buy this... maybe because of the way she wrote it, maybe because of the lack of any research or any scientific evidence, or that she just seems to be trying to create her own "scientific" system... I don't know, for some reason her blog post irritated me, and didn't ring well at all. Her 3 examples of potential people who may have such "node reversals" didn't even really seem to support her "theories." Maybe if I knew more about them, but then I guess they aren't that good of an example if an average person doesn't know who they are and see where she's coming from. (I mean, I'm sure given some time, I could think of some more well known people who fit various node reversal examples... but then again, maybe these ppl are very well known and my cultural knowledge eluded me again).

That's not to say that I don't believe there are "love shy" guys, or "male lesbians" (which btw, her definition of it differs greatly than OP posts... OP's version hints that the "male lesbian" wants to be like a girl during sex, not just passive but possibly no actual intercourse, whereas her definition is more of a passive and shy person who is not good at initiating relationships, or sex within relationships... mentions absolutely nothing about how they'd act during sex...), its just that her "node"-theory struck a chord within me where I can't help but to feel "bogus." (And I reiterate, this is strange for me... I'm usually extremely open minded, and put personal opinions aside to listen to each side... I just don't see any supporting evidence.) I mean, she opens up stating how human sexuality is "chemical, biological, psychological, and social" then mentions these "nodes," but doesn't describe what physically they are. Are they a tumor? Is it a gene? Is it an actual lump in your brain? Is it chemical? Is it biological? If it is psychological or social why is it called a "node?" A node suggests a physical point in existence (and assuming the brain, but maybe its a gland? I don't know, it wasn't explained.) But then at the end she mentions how a mode can be "switched" in a "fetus." Well a fetus isn't exposed to any social influences yet, and psychology pretty much limited to the mother... so does that suggest it is biological or chemical? Then what does she think these "nodes" are?

Its just the incompleteness I suppose that bothers me. It just the attitude that is getting to me... she's acting like she's an expert and knows all this stuff, when it doesn't have a single supporting fact in it, and doesn't even completely describe it.... maybe if she was more:
"So I was thinking, and came up with this theory that humans have what I will refer to as "nodes." As this hasn't been discovered(/proven) yet, I do not yet know what this physically encompasses. I believe there are 5 nodes which relate to human sexuality, one for gender identity (whether or not one accepts their born gender), one for sexual attraction (whether or not one is heterosexual), one for gender mediated fashion ((side comment: I can't see ones innate attraction to male or female clothing as being a chemical or biological cause... attracted to feminine items in general sure, but just clothing? ok...) whether or not one partakes in cross-dressing), sexual focus (whether or not one is strictly attracted to a single gender, or leans towards bisexuality), and what I will call sexual courtship inclinations (whether one takes the traditionally masculine or feminine role in mating). etc"

If it was more like that, it wouldn't bother me so much because its clear she's hypothesizing, whereas right now she seems to be acting like its fact, and its just a matter of time until some scientist finds her blog and sees it and decides to look for these "nodes" and proves her right. Its that presumptuous attitude that throws me off the most.


Sorry about that, didn't really mean to go that indepth about whether or not I agree with her post (it is a blog after all, just struck a chord).
(And its nothing against you, not sure how you takes things, but its not an 'attack' against you or her, just me explaining how I don't really buy into her hypothesizing, so please don't take offense from my wall o' text .__.)

Back to what the OP was talking about... I am sure there are guys out there like that... I have never met one (that I know of), but I don't exactly go talking to people about what they want in sex anyways.... I wouldn't mind dating one though I suppose, because being asexual, I'm rather disturbed and horrified by sex, and would be a lot "easier" to manage getting through with it if it was more lesbianish than typical male-female sex...

But I can see how that'd be hard to see from an outside perspective... I imagine many guys who feel this way would be too embarrassed to suggest or ask to partake in sex in this manner and force themselves to go through with it the "normal" way even if they wished otherwise... so from the girl's pov, she may never know... (or from his friends, because I doubt he'd ever bring that up to his buddies).

Anyways, I suppose its just a type of "fetish" like guys who want dominatrices so they can be passive and told what to do and stuff. There are so many different blends of human sexuality~