Poll: What Do You Think About a Girl with Two Guys?

Last week, our Wise Guy Max wrote the following line about female-male-male threeways:

Face it: a lot of guys go by the super homophobic rule of “as long as the balls don’t touch,” so you’re much better off finding two guys that are as comfortable with one another’s body as they are with their joint egos.

It started a long heated debate in the comments section, which we’ve abridged here for easier reading:

Johnny: Not wanting to rub my balls against another man’s balls makes me “super homophobic”?

Rolando: I’m thinking Max was attempting to condemn the homophobic presumption that a man being in any way intimate with or around other men is “totally gay” and to be avoided at all costs, even if it would net you a hot sexual encounter. He was condemning that belief and the “hetero dudes” that share it, not every hetero dude…

Elizabeth: …Just because a man is honestly not interested in a sexual encounter with another man does not make him narrow minded. It just means he knows what he wants. I mean, do you believe someone who chooses that they have no desire to participate in watersports or BDSM or anal sex is narrow minded? I personally believe that sexual preferences are okay… there are certain acts that I will never try, because I know that even if it might feel good, it’s not something I am comfortable doing. I think that I am being true to myself, and the same goes for Johnny. If he knows he has no desire to be with another man in any way, not because it makes him “gay” but because he has no desire for that… it just means he knows what he wants and respects his own boundaries.

Daniel: “As long as the balls don’t touch” is homophobic and I will explain why: to revile the idea of ones balls touching another guy’s (especially in a sexual context) is not disliking the act benignly (”taste”, “preference” or otherwise), it is disliking it because it creates the possibility and most importantly the PERCEPTION the guy might like it, or might have secretly wanted it. It cannot be the act in and of itself that is objectionable, because physical touching is just that, just touching. Ball touching, lips touching, etc. are meaningless physical occurrences. But we give those physical acts meanings, connotations, suggestions. And when one determines an act like balls touching is unacceptable, you have to ask yourself “what is the meaning of the act that I find unacceptable?” And in this case, that answer has to do with a pervasive homophobia that stigmatizes physical touching between men. It is NOT about knowing what you want. Because if you were so secure about knowing what you want, how could your balls touching another guys’ balls derail that? It doesn’t. And the objection otherwise is homophobic.

Elizabeth: …It is possible to not enjoy sexual acts because of the people involved, without it being because of the meaning. Just because a man does not want to sexually interact with another man does not mean he is homophobic. It MIGHT mean that he is… or it could mean that he realizes he does not want to sexually interact with a person he is not remotely attracted to. It’s like saying that if a man does not want his balls touched by a girl who he is not attracted to, he must be homosexual, or else there is something wrong with him. Obviously-that is not true in every situation. Why would the reverse gender maxim be true?…

Rolando: The only problem with [Elizabeth’s] reasoning is that, even if the two men were to never touch, they’d still be joined in a sexual act together. They’d be having sex with the same woman. The ‘balls touching’ “issue” isn’t about who is or isn’t involved, it’s about perception. Specifically the perception of being non-heterosexual.

Elizabeth: …I am sure that for some men, it is about the perception as being seen as homosexual. But I am also sure that for some men, it is honestly about a lack of desire to sexually touch another man. Really, my issue with these comments is the fact that people on here continually make sweeping generalizations about all hetero- men who have no desire to have their dirty bits fondled by another man (or his dirty bits). Generalizations and stereotypes are not ALWAYS true. Often, they aren’t even true most of the time, and it’s not fair to make those kinds of statements.

Johnny: …Let’s get something damn straight: the more boners there are in a particular sexual interaction, the closer that interaction is to being gay on the straight-to-gay spectrum. Not comfortable with that? Will you at least settle for “homoerotic?” Anything wrong with that? Of course not! I’ve done it myself. I look back on that instance and say, “damn… that was kinda gay.” I don’t care. That doesn’t bother me. But let’s call a spade a spade. What’s with all the “there’s nothing gay about two men with boners rubbing their balls together” bullshit? Sounds like some of you aren’t as comfortable with homosexuality as you’d like to think.

Daniel: …I am saying that when a man is in a sexual context with another man, to attempt to create this kind of “scrotal prohibition” speaks to a deep homophobia where even an accidental graze could create a psychological panic. The prohibition says this: “AT ALL COSTS, I DO NOT WANT TO BE THOUGHT OF AS HAVING ANY SEXUAL DESIRES FOR ANOTHER MAN.” The fact that there is such a “no balls touching rule” to even discuss speaks to its male homophobia and crisis of masculinity. If we make the inverse case with MFF thresomes … has anyone ever heard of the “no tits” touching rule between women? Of course not. Why? Because touching tits doesn’t create such an upheaval to the *individual* or social meanings of heterosexuality and femininity.

So what do YOU think?

Can’t see the poll? Click here to take it.


  1. Gosh, a three way is my fantasy. I hope to find a guy someday who has a friend he’s comfortable with and…….

  2. I have to say this all interesting stuff coming out of this post! I am a 23 year-old guy, straight, and was brought up in an enivornment and culture which was deeply homophobic, a culture that has found it hard to adapt to the concept that all people should be treated equally regardless of their sexual orientation.

    But, growing up with a modern way of thinking and as I became aware of my own body I think I’d say that my bringing up didn’t influence my sexuality, which as I said is straight. However, I had always garnered the desire of having a MMF, without really knowing why! But I somehow always found the concept of two men pleasuring a woman an absolute turn-on, and sure enough, when I paired up with a friend and found a woman willing to have this experience, we never looked back, it was every bit as amazing as we imagined it would be!

    Alright, it was a bit weird at first, but it was not due to the “touching a guy’s balls makes you gay” concept, it was simply the idea of being naked, and hard in the presence of someone else other than your sexual partner and being seen as visibly pleasured! Just wanna round off by saying that I do think the porn industry has contributed massively into this MMF popularity, which is where my friend and myself for instance, and our regular sex buddy, got the idea from and wanted to emulate!

  3. I think that two guy pleasuring a woman together and a little accidental touching is a turn on.

  4. Jeez, guys have lots of hang ups when it comes to this. Don’t you think women have the same thoughts, when it comes to FFM? (I don’t want to touch her, I don’t want to become a lesbian!)

    The bottom line is, if you feel attracted (if you are male) to the man in a FMM, you obviously are gay/bi. If you have no attraction to the other guy, you are straight, and the FMM experience is supposed to pleasure the female, because she is in a role of power, over two men. (Only if the two men are straight).

  5. Uh, no. I totally have to disagree. If a man is not attracted to other men, but he has had a FMM encounter and his genitals happen to touch the other guy, or vice versa, it doesn’t make him gay. How do I know this? Well to be gay/homosexual one needs to be attracted to those of the same sex. One would think this was an obvious requirement. It’s like saying someone is a Christian, when they don’t believe in Christ. Kinda missing a fundemental requirement.

    I must touch upon the bisexual issue since it was brought up in an earlier comment. That, and I have strong feelings about ignorance not being confronted. For those who think that there’s no such thing as bisexals, you are sadly mistaken. If a man or woman is attracted to both sexes, then they are bisexual. Period. Even if they’re in a monogamous relationship! If one would do the research and look into the Latin language where these prefixes come from, one would understand how one cannot call someone who is attracted to both sexes homosexual any more or less than they call accurately call them heterosexual. These people like those of different (heter) and same (homo) sex, therefore they like both (bi). Granted, I, too, have noticed that many–not all–bisexuals have a preference, and lean towards one gender a noticeable degree more than the other. It doesn’t mean they’re in denial of being straight or gay and are only having sex with those of their lesser preference because they don’t want to be seen as totally straight or gay. It just means they have a preference. I like cake and pie, however I like cake a bit more than pie, it doesn’t mean that I don’t ever want a slice of pie if there’s cake available. It’s no different for bisexuals. I’m just tried of the stereotypes. They hurt people unnecessarily, and are only propagated though the incessant chatter of the ignorant.

  6. Its not the act of a FMM but the fact that as a man you are fine with having another male having sex with your partner/spouse. You are almost giving up the power and trust in the relationship with involving someone else in your bed. Some people are fine with it & get along fine after that. Ive read stories about others who have left their partners for the people they had sex with in their romp. If my partner ever even asked me for this more than once it would end the relationship since I am not comfortable with it & my doubts would pop up wondering if shes getting it from elsewhere.

  7. Rhonda-Devon says “no straight man wants to be mistaken for gay that doesn’t make him homophobic.” YES IT DOES! If a straight man thinks that “being mistaken for gay” would be THAT horrible, then he is damned well homophobic. If a straight man refuses to have a sexual experience because two other people in the whole world might think he is a tiny bit gay for bumping his balls against another dude WHILE FUCKING A WOMAN (something that gay guys do not make a habit of doing, btw), you can’t tell me that he’s not homophobic.

    Let’s say you avoided other generally appealing activities because you didn’t want to be mistaken for a member of a group that some people hate. You refuse to eat tacos because someone might think you’re Mexican, for instance. Everyone who hears you say that statement aloud is going to think “woah, he really must hate Mexicans.” If you says “I don’t want to be mistaken for a Jew/bisexual/Italian/prostitute/transexual/foot fetishist/homeless person/homosexual/etc.”, you are implying that there is something WRONG with being a member of that group!

  8. Most straight men would say the same as Walter did if they are 100% straight. Its not that they are homophobic, i’m not homophobic what so ever and i don’t want to be mistaken or thought of as bisexual or gay either and i’m a woman. i would never be in a situation where i’m touching any parts of a woman’s body sexually either. I totally get what you said Walter, no straight man wants to be mistaken for gay that doesn’t make him homophobic. Now if that straight man says “Oh i just can’t stand even being around gay men” then thats homophobic 100%.

Comments are closed.