Gay Sex is More Evolved Than Everything Else, Ever

For as long as I can remember I’ve been told, in one form or another, that heterosexuality is “natural” and homosexuality is, consequentially, NOT natural (read: a deformity or abnormality). This assertion comes wrapped in a plethora of unattractive forms. Perhaps you’ll remember it from one of its many cameos in your life:

In American Law:

Remember how we can’t serve openly in the military because if we do everyone will throw up in their mouths when it’s communal shower time?

In Television:

How anyone could rally so fanatically against the most beautiful TV moment in the history of TV is beyond me and the fact that this is still not perfectly ok is further proof of the universally accepted gross-out factor of gay touching.

In Bed:

“Does lesbian sex even count as real sex….wait, does that mean we just had sex?” - Ashley Wright

I could go on but you get the idea: there are many inventive ways that the world tells us that we are unnatural freaks. This argument has gone on long enough. It has been on a destructive rampage for years – ruining the lives of many and justifying the violence of some.

We could continue to respond by aggressively citing the prevalence of lesbian albatrosses (which does come into play later) but I’ve decided to take a more exciting approach and instead just say what needs to be said:

If the penis is so fantastically destined for the vagina then why is a tongue on the clit the one thing that every girl wants[1] and to bone in the butt is the preference of every boy the moment that the lights go out ?


Or to paraphrase Wikipedia:

“The abundance of nerve endings in the anal region and rectum makes anal sex pleasurable for many men and women…men may enjoy anal sex due to the anus being tighter than the vagina…whereas most women can only achieve orgasm through clitoral stimulation.”

If you don’t want to take my, or Wikipedia’s, word for it, then consider that even Trojan condoms – made for penis penetration of, well something, but clearly marketed for people of the penis-vagina penetration persuasion — has tried to befriend the clit by including a vibrating finger in a package of condom.

Seriously.

These days, a girl-boy sex activity seeking guy is told even by Trojan that his machinery is inadequate:

“Sure, buy the condom but you’re going to need this vibrator because clearly the chances of anyone other than yourself cuming from the use of your penis is slim to none.”

Even straight people porn says this. Next time you want to throw up in your mouth, avoid the communal shower and instead go straight to Xtube or IFeelMyself and notice how women in porn reach orgasm. Here’s a hint: their hand is the real porn star, the penis is an overrated stunt double.

So, if the penis is an oh-so-natural fit for the vagina then why the hell did God leave off the vibrating attachment? If PIV is meant to be, why does it so rarely cause pleasure?

I’ll tell you why: Because we’ve been duped!

The heterosexual sex idea is nothing more than, just that – an idea. It’s an idea based on an arbitrarily (or perhaps Machiavellian?) constructed value system that prioritizes procreation over pleasure. But who says making babies is more important than having orgasms? Besides your grandmother?

The moment we re-conceptualize that value system and instead value pleasure before procreation, gay sex wins all the prizes.

There are some people who will try to fight this basic truth at first. I’m sure many of us have spoken or heard the absurd justification from our straight sisters that sex can be pleasurable even when it’s just about his orgasm. But perhaps there are social elements at work there? Perhaps the intoxicating level of acceptance and approval we feel simply by HAVING heterosexual sex is enough to convince us that we enjoy it. But ladies: let’s not confuse the warm embrace of social approval with pleasure.

I don’t mean to discount those ladies unable to acquire male-esque orgasmic regularity, and I’m not here to endorse ehow answers of measured breaths or vagina yoga. My argument offers  much better road to orgasm or sexual pleasure in general: self-acceptance. I’m not suggesting that ALL difficulties are rooted in psycho-emotional feelings of shame but I do know that being gay or doing gay things and self-acceptance are not exactly life partners.

Is this a leap? Maybe. But it’s a leap that enables the blatant truth that gay sex is the biggest pleasure-inducing act ever and the consequential lifting of a lifetime of shame and freakdom from our collective shoulders. It’s another reason for lesbians to feel good about ourselves and another reason why we’re important to the whole world!

Joan Roughgarden, a real live scientist, found that:

“The more complex and sophisticated a social system is…the more likely it is to have homosexuality intermixed with heterosexuality.”

Wha-what?! That is some serious shit.

According to Roughgarden’s findings, homosexuality is a defining feature of advanced animal communities. In other words, Ross Douthat, who recently argued in  this little gem of a New York Times op-ed that:

“Lifelong heterosexual monogamy at its best can offer something distinctive and remarkable — a microcosm of civilization, and an organic connection between human generations — that makes it worthy of distinctive recognition and support.”

can put Roughgarden’s study in his pipe and smoke it.

So now we have two pieces of evidence in our arsenal of  “we’re not freaks” argument:

1. If gays are so unnatural and such demon outliers to society then why is everybody’s most pleasurable position the gay position? Why is gay sex more perfectly designed for pleasure than straight sex?

2. If gays are a threat to civilization than why do the smartest animals on the planet basically live Adrienne Rich’s theory of the sexual continuum?  Were they just brainwashed at Vassar? Possibly.

Personally, I’m quite satisfied with these two bullet points. However, if you bring this argument to the face of a less fully-developed person I guarantee you will be met with a response such as this:

“It doesn’t matter if gay sex feels better. The world requires procreation and only heterosexual sex results in procreation.”

Now we’re back on familiar ground. This is the Darwin argument, otherwise known as “species survival” – everything we do has to result in procreation or else it’s worthless and will eventually die out. But Darwin kinda blew up his own spot on this one. If we accept Darwin’s theory that all traits not useful to species survival will eventually die out, why is it that gays keep increasing in numbers over the last few centuries?

If we’re useless outliers, then why has it been going on forever? Why are there more species that practice gay sex then those that don’t? In fact the only species that don’t gay it up are ones that don’t have any kind of sex whatsoever, like those loser sea urchins. They are so lame.

However, your response to this archived argument should not only be about identifying all the gay animals out there from albatrosses to bonobos – which is where it usually stops – it’s about the next phase: if all this gayness had nothing to do with species survival then mother nature would have corrected it long ago. Therefore, animals who have gay sex must be just as important to our species survival as animals having hetero sex.

This is an incredibly difficult theory for people to accept. Even I have trouble seeing the validity of this theory through my non-scientific and shame-colored glasses.


Does sex without baby-making really make me useful to society? It’s hard to believe, but yes, it’s true!

This is where we go back to the Joan Roughgarden study in where she chronicles the many ways in which gay sex contributes to species survival.  You can read a very fair and comprehensive summary of her studies here but for the sake of this article it’s worth simply noting the connection between pleasure and social bonds.

Isn’t it just a bit of a happy coincidence that the exact mechanics of gay sex are basically the DEFINITION OF PLEASURE?  Maybe those nerve endings are where they are for a reason — because gay people aren’t really supposed to be left out of anything that’s fun in life, ever, and our happiness has furthered the species.

In other words, every time we have gay sex a fairy gets his wings and civilization evolves.

I’m not suggesting the HRC add this new theory to its issues pages, though I’d highly recommend it. I’m just saying that these are the kind of arguments we should make on a regular basis — to ourselves, definitely to our parents, and even to the ‘God Hates Fags’ guy — because if God hates us so much than why did s/he/it lay everything out for us to enjoy?

I’m tired of pretending that we don’t have a good response to the “gay sex is just not natural” argument because we do: there is nothing more natural than pleasure and the tongue is a champion of the masses.


+

[1] But then does that mean that Vassar discriminates against sea urchins, one of the only animals that doesn’t have gay sex?


in-article-A-plus-banner

Profile photo of JennyP

Jenny has written 1 articles for us.

100 Comments

  1. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    Also the whole “we need to have sex to make more people” argument is kinda redundant right now cos, newsflash, there are too many people and its killing the world

    • Thumb up 0

      Please log in to vote

      Yes. After watching that scene I remember asking my sister, Can girls do that? She said, “No, don’t be an idiot.” Jokes on her cause I found out girls can do that! Huzzah!

  2. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    As the 2008 Secretary General emeritus of the Homosexual Agenda Animal Brainwashing Association of Vassar College, I find it problematic that the author of this article would imply we discriminate against sea urchins. As per our charter, HAABA-VC is open to students and animals of regardless of race, gender, religion or sexual preference. I’m going to write a scathing Op-Ed in the Misc or issue a fatwah via the VSA or something.

  3. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    You know what?
    Nope, I’m not buying it.
    I’m a gay lady and I thoroughly enjoy having gay lady sex with my gay lady girlfriend and find it intensely more awesome than sex that I used to have with non-gay non-lady types.
    However, I’m not on board with this notion that it’s better/more evolved/more enlightened/chicken soup for the soul for everyone.
    It us for us, obv., otherwise we’d quit doing it. However, I’m not at all convinced that my straight female friends are just unwittingly blind fools brainwashed into only thinking they like sex with their husbands/boyfriends/exes/friends-with-benefits bartender sexytime guy. That’s like saying they’re too stupid to know what’s good for them, and I don’t hang out with stupid people.
    I also don’t buy that there’s more homos now than there used to be…ok, yeah, from a gross standpoint, yes, there are more, but only because the population is all like gigantor and shit. The percentage I’d wager is much the same as it ever was. It MIGHT have a correlation with the success of the species and that whole not needing everyone to procreate because we’ve done all that a little much already, thanks.
    I DO believe we have sexuality as a social bonding function as well as a reproductive one and I DO believe queer sexuality aides and abets that end.
    I DO believe it is a valid as straight sex for reproductive purposes – in that, if it were allowed to thrive as a normalized and natural part of our general sexual lexicon, more people on the sexual fluidity scale would be indulging in it essentially to get their rocks off without the fears of creating one of those weird little hairless crying and pooping things by accident. I know the fact that I no longer have to fret it out waiting for the Red Flood every month since I’ve been exclusive to the gay lady sex makes me a lot happier.

    However, I’m afraid if I were to try and whip out some arguments in this article when debating someone who says “homosex might be natural but it’s still abnormal,” then it really wouldn’t serve me very well in attaining a win.
    In other words, if it can’t convince me as an actual lesbian, it’s probably not going to convince someone who thinks I’m a goddamn weirdo for being one, either, though I really hope you keep trying.

    • Thumb up 0

      Please log in to vote

      I agree. I like the idea of gay sex being more advanced/better for everyone, but I don’t buy it. Better for me? Yes. Better for everyone? Maybe not. So far so good, though…..

      I’m cool with that. As someone who has had all kinds of sex…. somewhat unfortunately (for everyone else involved, really)… it’s all pretty natural, but some of it (the gay bits, for me) are just waaaay more fun. There’s probably a scientific reason for that but I like to think that’s just how I happen to be, sort of like how I am short. Actually exactly like how I am short but not short like people who lived in the year 5000BC. You know, evolved but not unreasonably.

      I’d go with the either-god-or-natural-systems-of-population-control-have-or-will-increase-gayness argument though. First because it is convenient for me and second because it is a preferable solution to overpopulation-apocalypse-while-we-fight-for-food. As an evolutionary adaptation, homosexuality makes all kinds of sense. I just feel like all the straight women who love them some penis are welcome to it and I can’t really judge because I just don’t get it.

      So… to sum up because I’m sleepy.

      It’s pretty hard to find abnormal sex outside of something abusive (and sadly, statistically some of that is pretty “normal”), so I’m just going to go with evolution happens when it will and I am not about to pretend I’m more special than anyone else, because I hate that shit when it is done to me. Do I have to put a teensy tiny bit more thought into having sex? Yeah, but that’s just ’cause I’m gay and when I was sleeping with men I was also kind of napping/thinking about something else/working on a stupendous fake orgasm. Apparently not ALL the straight girls do that. Who knew.

    • Thumb up 0

      Please log in to vote

      Yeah, also, I think maybe the distinction we maybe should be making is that “sex that is done for reproduction is less likely to be pleasurable than sex that is NOT done specifically for reproduction”, rather than “gay sex >>> straight sex”.

      Because, you know, straight people have clits/prostates too. Really really. And the idea that anal sex for guys, slash oral sex for girls, is just for gay people is a little crazy — those poor straight people should be allowed to have some fun too! Also probs if they’re having straight sex, it hopefully means that this is because they have some kind of connection to the person they’re having sex with and like this person. So, that’s a part of enjoying sex too.

      Anyway, I guess I just want to say that maybe we’re all just the same? Which gets us back to the we should all be treated the same by the governments, equality now, I’m pretty sure I’m not unnatural, and all that — so in basics we agree.

    • Thumb up 0

      Please log in to vote

      I also wouldn’t say that gay sex is more evolved as such. I just think that sex is more ‘evolved’ when people’s perceptions of sex are evolved. Let’s face it, pretty much no straight people do the whole missionary sex with no foreplay. Maybe if they didn’t know what they were doing. Everyone experiments and gets creative (I hope!!) to figure put what makes sex feel best for them. It is arguable that gays have a slight head start with this, because we don’t get given any ‘standard act’ of sex to follow. We have to wing it, and figure all that shit out.
      However, straight people are also perfectly capable of doing this also. I mean almost no straight girl would let a guy get away with ignoring her clit. And I’ve spoken to straight guys who have really enjoyed anal penetration. I think it is better to say that sex as a whole is evolving, and we gays are a part of that movement. However, we do rock, so I amfully gonna claim that our sex is better ;)
      As for the evoltuion thing, population control seems to make sense. But I’m not entirely sure on where I stand when it comes to what makes people gay. It is definitely not a choice, but sometimes I think we’re born with the ability to go either way. Others times this doesn’t seem to make sense. But we are here, we are proud, and damnit, we are aweeeeeesome xD

    • Thumb up 0

      Please log in to vote

      i also like jenny.

      and yes, clearly this article was supposed to be humorous. i mean, it began with a homosexy pic of eminem and elton john. although, having tried both straight and gay sex (and a few things in between) i totes think that gay sex really is better.

  4. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    Whenever people say to me gay sex isn’t natural my response is well that’s why you’re straight. If you were me putting a penis in your mouth seems pretty damn unnatural you dirty straight girl.

    Like really how many of us have had experiences with men that just felt so wrong and forced? Being with girls feels natural and right to me. If it seems wrong or unnatural to another girl then maybe she’s just, I dunno, straight?

    • Thumb up 0

      Please log in to vote

      That is merely a point of view you must remember. We cannot force our views on others, but embrace theirs whilst keeping true to ours.

  5. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    This article doesn’t even need words (although they are hilarious) to make its argument. Anyone who looked at this series of pictures would immediately feel better about gay sex. :) And yay fairies!

  6. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    great! at first I thought I had learned the english word for “sea urchin”. then I looked it up and it wasn’t “sea urchin” that I meant but “jellyfish”, and that one I already knew.

    also, I would like to evolve personally in the near future.
    because nothing beats gay lady sex.

  7. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    I know you’re trying for satire. And it works sorta, kinda. But if you’re going to use biology it helps if you actually understand the words that are coming out of your keyboard. The biology part of this is about what I’d expect from the Creation Science Museum or the Jersey Shore guidos trying to explain quark chromodynamics.

  8. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    Straight guy here. My thoughts:

    (1) Cunnilingus is not just a “lesbian thing.” Surveys indicate that 90% of straight people are doing it, too.

    (2) Most lesbians appear to like penetrative sex too (fingering, strap-ons, etc.), just not sexual intercourse.

    (3) All the information that I have available to me indicates that most straight women like intercourse, and wouldn’t want to abandon it for an all-cunnilingus diet, even if offered.

    Conclusion: Straight women like cunnilingus + penetration. Lesbians also like cunnilingus + penetration (albeit a different form of penetration).

    Lesbian sex is better than straight sex… for lesbians.

  9. Pingback: Same-Sex Desire: You Say You Want an Evolution? | GayLGBT.com

  10. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    I could not get through this article. First of all, being bisexual I can tell you that the most pleasurable sex is one where both partners let go and live out whatever they want, not whether or what touches the clit. Second, I would disagree that sexuality is a genetic trait, this is Darwin’s concern. I don’t think that it’s any more genetic than any other emotional or mental predesposition like optimism vs. pessimism so we can leave him out of it. These arguments are flawed and were I not in agreement with the basic underlying argument I would be gleeful for all the chances to rebut.

  11. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    Maybe Darwin was onto something. Maybe gays have been showing up more and more in the last few decades because our population has increased too much? So now we need it to stop increasing at such a rate. We need more adoptions! But then again, there are a lot of sperm donors out there for us lesbians too, so such more for that.

    Why are there more species that practice gay sex then those that don’t?
    That should be “than” instead of “then”

  12. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    Not to be a biology crazy but…natural selection doesn’t act on things that have “nothing to do” with the passing on of genes to the next generation. It will however, act on things that are a detriment and so if homo=bad for survival, it would have been bye bye, which it is not, so it is not detrimental to survival. SO the “it’s not natural” argument could still be dismantled this way. [This is of course if you’re making a case based on gayness linked to biology arguments.]

    Also, gayness in the positive trait for survival realm could have traction too. Like that one Italian study that found a correlation between men’s gayness and their sisters being more fertile.
    So yay gay, yay pleasure, just wanted to get out the biology.

  13. Thumb up 0

    Please log in to vote

    Gay Sex is COMPLETELY UNNATURAL! The Penis is Meant for the Vagina and that is the END of the discussion!

    You wrongfully assume that just because the fact that Gay Sex is unnatural is agreed upon, that people won’t treat you like people! That Isn’t True! But if you Want to argue that Gay Sex is Right, Then You Are Wrong! Just take a damn Biology class haha

Contribute to the conversation...

You must be logged in to post a comment.