Having taught thousands of sex, sexuality/relationship workshops, written books, continue to have a TV show for the past 15 years—-I’m often immersed in the discussion and attempts by men to get with other men. What often hinders hem are two or three main factors:
They haven’t taken what they have learned about men or make an effort to understand men, particularly men who are not heterosexual. What generally happens is say John has two relationships and 5 friends—-he assumes that his two interactions and the interactions of his 5 friends constitute a vast variety of men.
Imagine John in a group of say 20 men, the 20 men surrounding John. John thinks that’s ALL gay men. But the second ring of 10 men, he really doesn't know that well—-so he’s really judging and misjudging men on 10 or less men that he has secondhand information on.
What I have done for years, suggested and cajoled is for John to see his dating/romantic life from my perspective. It generally involves change your circle, do different activities, go different places——most gay men don’t. Heterosexual men are both socialized and assisted, most times, by friends and family——someone invites you to a wedding or a party or your mother knows someone or you visit friends at a different college—-heteros—— that are involved in having a social life, generally interact with a greater number of people so the chances of them meeting say, #22—-the good guy or girl massively increases.
The way the above correlates to percentages of more masculine acting men to more feminine acting men, seeking men, is that whichever one is along a presentation spectrum—-the more you get out and about, the higher your interactivity numbers will be. Interestingly enough more masculine men do better—-not because they are more masculine in presentation, but because they are more masculine in sociality.
Keith Swain author of Dynamic Duos did a survey of thousands of men into men and found that the numbers roughly fall into 20% being Alphas and 80% being Betas, based upon hormones such as testosterone and estrogen, we are a sexuality difference, yes, but those hormones influence how we act out emotionally, socially, sexually and romantically and also how we are physiologically built—-across all men.
Having workshopped as many and thousands more, particularly from teens to older aged, I can wholeheartedly agree. When I found his book/work in the early 2000s I was using several other assessments and observations, but had come to the same conclusion, if not the same language.
Alphas as we can generally understand are more assertive, more masculine in appearance and attitude, which yes, translates to gay, bi, pan and omnisexual men (and the same for Betas towards more feminine based inclinations/actions/modalities.)
However there are inherent discordances to action and interaction. Swain posits that fro his surveying—-half of all Alphas—-stay in the closet or opt into heterosexual marriages/relationships, in spite of the knowledge of their inherent sexuality, in order to achieve “traditional” relationships and have children. These men tend to also be the Tops.
The above effects there not being more Tops than Bottoms, which most gay men who socialize for any period of time within a “community” setting, will note. It has to do with hormones like testosterone.
So now looking at the skewing that occurs in say 1 million gay men.
- 100,000 of the 1 million will not be Out/available to a healthy homosexual relationship with another man.
- 100,000 will be near exclusive Tops.
- 800,000 will be Betas and conversely Bottoms/Versatiles.
Now lets say it’s 50/50 with some being more to less masculine, more to less feminine. You can see the initial offset/imbalance just in compatible sex numbers—-the majority are looking for the minority (Tops) and the minority (Tops) have their pick of the majority sexually/mating wise so things like looks, appearance, money-resources, education, stability, emotional agreeability are in the Alphas favor—-he can exclude and reject more because he is of a preferred capability, greater if he is masculine, attractive, emotionally, and financially healthy.
In workshops, I often talk to Bottoms and Versatiles and suggest: Besides your sexual positionality—-what else you got? because that is what will tip the favor in you getting the relationship you want. Most Bottoms are single, not because they’re Bottoms/Betas but because they haven’t considered how to be competitive for a man (an Alpha) or made allowances in their sexual positionality to become Versatile—-which would avail them to the other (at least 40% more men) who are Bottoms/Versatile. Instead so many men stick to being strict Bottoms seeking absolute Alphas, shifting themselves into the negative of vying, and then competing with, the whole 80% for 10% of healthy or settling for 10% unhealthy, Alphas.
How To Win
Most winning in any form of competitive practice is generally established by changing one’s tactics:
Act more masculine.
PRO. Masculine men are able to gravitate towards and attract more masculine acting men (which is why so many men try or proport to be masculine acting—-when in fact they are acting. All masculinity and femininity is the acting of a social persona towards gender. But we do it for personal and social gain and resources.)
CON. The more masculine you present, if you are not comfortable or are butching it up—-you will attract more men who are Betas—-socially, emotionally, physiologically—-the harsh term is “bumping purses”. I tease in workshops about two masculine acting men meeting, rushing home to the bedroom, both laying on the bed on their backs yelling—-”Take me!”
Target Rich Environments
PRO. Gay bars, nightclubs, lounges, circuit parties…will be populated by more Betas than Alphas because of sheer numbers. If you’re a Beta looking for an Alpha—-so are every other 8 out of 10 men surrounding you a these places. Which is why it can feel like Betas are only bumping into other Betas. These kinds of places aren’t the constant, continuous social spaces for Alphas. Betas are more relationship and communicative, based upon estrogen—-yes, like women—-which is why so much of the gay community gravitates towards women, feminine aspects, etc.,—-it’s the expression of the estrogen/attraction to the feminine.
CON. Going with you best friends, gaggle of gay friends, being in a group—-of Betas. As women do, you tend to not be approached by as many men because you are surrounded by a group of judging “friends”. You, as a bet, have to go to a target rich environment that is Alpha centered. An Alpha pretty much can go to a gay bar because the numbers mean there are going to be more Betas. What both might have to do, and I teach, is to target interests—-sports, hobbies, activities—-that you like that have gay organizations or go to those non-sexuality specific places and make it clear—-a pin, a hat, a scarf—-that you’re gay, and an Alpha will find you by the signal.
Social Lessons
PRO. There are marriage rights, marriages, adoptions, etc. for gay folk now. That’s wonderful. But that doesn’t change the fact that you were probably raised by heterosexual people and you kept your sexuality a secret for some years and maybe even did heterosexual things to fit in and survive. Maybe not those born after 2000, but definitely those born after 2030, will enter a world where sexuality is less taboo to be non-heterosexual; they will have more open parents and healthy social circles. Everybody alive/born before them are not taught and shown by the society at large how to mate.
That’s really what a lot of the social skills are that your parents teach you—-going into Harville Hendrix Imago work——-which I teach to men and women—-your parents are role models for love/loving.
Now consider that your role models are not the same sexuality as you.
What you would then learn is a mish mash of heterosexual frameworks that you’re trying to apply to non-hetero people/men?
In workshops, I again confront men to this truth, by asking them:
- what their fathers taught them about being the penetrator in anal sex with a man?
- or being penetrated by a man?
- did he give you his wedding band or your mother’s band or tuxedo for when you get married?
All of those things though are conveyed/given/taught in heterosexual to heterosexual parenting/children and even if you don’t get that framework from your hetero parents as a hetero, there are literally millions of other heteros who role model it for you in movies, TV, music, books, etc..
What most non-hetero folk are experiencing in their relationship lack or issues, is lacking a framework, having never been taught one—-two people get together and are trying to feel/figure it out with some hetero guidelines that work, and some that don’t.
Heterosexual men, Alphas and Betas, the hormonal designations and origin apply too, are taught by their fathers, brothers, other men how to seek and find a mate and also then Mothers, sisters, friends, who are female, assist them in finding mates. Now it’s not a perfect system, not every male is helped in the same way but it mostly happens to most hetero men.
Non-hetero men don’t have social assistance in marrying/mating for the same reason that non-hetero men have more sex than hetero men——they are not expected to procreate. Which folds into monogamy and masculinity and femininity.
Men and Monogamy
Not knowing men, nor studying men, the male beast, males in nature, too many homosexual men have a feminine idealized expectation of men, particularly—-absolute monogamy.
- Women expect, demand and even to some degree, need, the stability of monogamy because there is a time period where they might be unable to work—-so they need a committed partner, the co-creator of the child, to pick up the slack.
- Also women need assistance in raising children—-ideally it is the male parent but it can also include extended family, parents, relatives, friends, a female network.
Monogamy for hetero women is therefore related to survival and healthy progress of the woman, children, and the family structure, which then makes up communities, supporting industries by having-supplying workers, and thereby enhancing, enlarging, infusing society.
- Monogamy for hetero men is tied to that community/society in passing the physical more so—- of property, wealth, and even biological genes, to the future, through children.
- It is therefore related to lineage, survival and healthy progress of the family through children and the family structure, which makes up communities, supporting industries having workers and thereby society.
LGBTSGL Lack the Social Structures to Need-Enforce Monogamy
- Men and woman who are non-heterosexual (and don’t want to or won’t immediately have children) do not have the same expectation/burden of continuing the family, community, society upon them as heteros do. The expectation is to be some form of a contributor to society, yes——non-law breaker, non alcohol or substance addict, non sexual offender, non-murderer, a working contributor to the community and society as a whole. Non-heteros are expected to not lessen or burden society in exchange for their inability to, or not, having children.
- Therefore monogamy becomes less of an expectation and necessity and more of choice.
- Most non-heteros again following the framework of heterosexuality assume monogamy with a same sex partner will be maintained or automatically grandfathered in to relationships——as it is assumed and grandfathered in to most hetero relationships (unless there is directed negotiation elsewise.) through their gendered perception: masculine or feminine.
In my workshops, I’ll offer, from thousands of men, that it is assumed as mandatory as a woman assumes it.
This comes from several perspectives—-
- one including a large number of non-heteros now being raised in single, female led households—-so they learn her modality of being, of wanting, of loving—-and one of the things she may need as a woman, a parent is a mate who is sexually limited to her—-as the creation of more children means his resources are now spread away from her children——
- and sexual fidelity in monogamy connoting individual preference, love and loyalty (and potentially non-transmittal of STIs) to that woman, or more expressly to the feminine. Loyalty to the feminine.
Now lean in to it—-if 80% of the non-hetero men we’re talking about in general, have a greater hormonal predilection to the feminine, due to higher estrogen in their bodies, then some of their sensibilities, emotionality and socialized expectations will be to the feminine——though they are in male bodies.
Selection Process
Now with the above in play in men’s lives, who are seeking out other men, to be the masculine principle—-target—-is preferential because of the influence of homophobia—-mixed with misogyny——which dislikes, hates, reviles the feminine or actively being the feminine. Yet other than heterosexuality, it too tied and infused by masculinity, the Other cannot viably co-opt that idea, that default prescription of masculinity to heterosexuality. So homosexuality, non-heterosexuality, is demoted, defaulted to the feminine unless it acts overly, hyper-masculine. Masculine acting.
What this does is it puts homosexual men, bisexual men, pansexual men, omnisexual men and yes, even skoliosexual men, into a bind of confusion. First, what are you? how are you being and how are you acting? Are you an Alpha or a Beta? Are you a Top, Bottom, Versatile, Side or open to options and what the other male partner presents themselves at (welcome to Confusion Land if he presents as anything as well.) What this means is that the buzzword of communication is thrown around a lot by men who might have a situational, social, psychological and even biological hormonal leg up on other men, due to estrogen, in communicating. But it also means that men, regardless of social class or religion or creed or culture, have to deeply investigate into a “community” that has no libraries—-The LGBTSGL community.
A lot of my clarity comes from the fact that I spent a lot of time ad money when I came out at 17 buying books at Barnes & Noble. But I am privileged in the fact that I come from two parents and multiple generations of educated folk—-so research to answer questions is natural. Also my parents upon divorcing, got us into family counseling, the counselor predicting my omnisexuality and my prodigious writing, so I had support in several ways to investigate and answer my own questions.
What discovered personally in selecting mates or being selected is that I am an Alpha male, I will tell you, somewhat obtuse, in understanding men and women when I was younger and dating and experimenting sexually. I turned to devouring as much material as possible on relationships and sexuality—-and while a few hundred books and articles might seem like a cacophony and create confusion, what I’ve found is the more you read and videos you watch, the greater your discernment and ability to pick out useful strategies and information. I also had a high school counselor Tracey Salonities, who talked me through for a year both coming out and then dating in school and outside of school.
Into college, I actually did my first 10 workshops when the campus LGBT organization didn’t show up for dorm talks—-talking to/teaching a few hundred students. I was 21 and had answered a lot of my questions, in depth and so I could answer theirs. Ironically I didn’t date many of my college peers because I entered at 21 so I was slightly older and more mature, and out than the vast majority but I did date older men, over 25 who were adults in the city, off campus. I discovered that I was not feminine though I will offer that there are some things—-art, comforter, etc. that I do like which are feminine but I’m in a big old masculine body with a deep voice and presence. It wasn’t until teaching further and Swain’s work that I understood why Beta’s, in physicality, emotionality, Bottoms, gravitated towards me and I built relationships, even living together with. My first live in boyfriend, in my late 20s was totally Beta, even demonstratively effeminacy enhanced by the fact that he was from Turkey, affluent and had a sort of effeteness that in America translates as effeminacy. But i found him attractive.
Then other relationships I noticed that feminine acting men, whether demonstrative, flamboyant or emotionality didn’t offend me as much as gay male friends talked about. Which i further learned from Swain’s work is how most Alphas feel. Honestly, we see sort of everyone as, men, being feminine in most ways unless absolutely masculine in presentation so we accept it. Most gay men though are ridiculed, excluded, hurt because of being feminine so they not only reject it in themselves but in others, as a a dual defense mechanism.
In relationships I learned that without the parameters of heterosexual couplings, monogamy must be actively, directly negotiated because we are not of the same mind, held to the same strcitures nor expectations—-but that if 80% are Betas they will do so, even if they don’t adhere to it as much as they would like to think.
By that I mean there is about a 70% incidences of non-monogamy amongst heteros; definitely over 80% for non-heteros because there is more social-sexual freedom, or less restrictions, and what I’ve encouraged men to do is stop expecting monogamy and negotiate what it looks like for you. The statistics, also compiled by Swain, suggest that men with men have time periods of being monogamous 3 to 18 months and then by year 3 of a relationship some begin negotiate outside sexual partners with boundaries, until the 7th or 10th years and then they close up their relationship again.
In my own relationships the agreement has been simple, men understand contracts:
- Tell me about it or Invite (no secrets)
- Practice Safe Sex (do not bring home STIs to our relationship)
- No babies created.
- No messiness (don’t interact with someone who will insanely not respect your boundaries and be at my door or on my phone yelling some drama at me; be conscious of boundaries with others)
Now here’s my last thought on monogamy that I look at thousands of men with men (and heteros too) and wonder when you’ll all wake up to the rain falling from the sky. If 70 to 80% of ALL humans no matter sexuality are not exclusively monogamous when in a relationship——why don’t you negotiate different forms, rules about, and agreements to monogamy. To me in workshops it’s like gay men talk about never wanting to get hurt by a car and hurt. Then they put on a blindfold and say they’re going to stroll out onto an active highway.
The selection preferences, lensed through Alphas and Betas, masculine and feminine is evident. The numbers of availability are evident and at the same time, thinking men would alter their social strategies to attract more Betas, as I have as an Alpha, or Alphas, if you’re a Beta. I have also accepted as a given that other men, including myself when I dissect myself, will have more or less, pronounced or subtle feminine tendencies based upon being a Beta or bluntly being a human being (as I an Alpha too have feminine tendencies, more less and casually but still present in my life.) To accept all of the above shifts the numbers of 2 in 10 being Alphas/Tops to possibly 5 in 10 being compatible mates.
Further, I’ve noticed from experimentation that the ratio of finding a partner, compatibility is about 2 in 10. So we’re all working through approximately 8 to 10 people—-but not all in a row—-yes, sometimes it takes 30 or more people to find 1 that you click with and they click with you too. The length f time it takes for this to occur is predicated upon the point I made at the beginning, recognizing what’s working, your target environments and knowing yourself.
If you keep NOT DATING (actively seeking out and inviting men out) you will never find a partner. The internet has created not the illusion, but the delusion that you can pick someone on their specs (or pecs) and not have to put in time, effort, energy, to build a relationship (that’s at leas a few months of dating. That dating process includes Negotiables, Compromisers and No Deals (the extremes of not dating someone—-abuse, addiction, physical harm).
The problem is both masculine and feminine men have not been taught since toddler age to pursue, for them, men. Go to a gay club, notice how all of the Betas are coffee klatched together in the groups they came with (like women do at clubs) and there are some men sort of hanging around silently on the fringes.
What shifts this—-is men being available—going to clubs without their friends, smiling, being available and then men having a semi-plan f what to do once they engage a man. If your engagement plan is just sex—-you have no Game. if you talk to healthy, successfully dating hetero men they’ll talk about romantic things they do, dating, asking girls out—-asking girls out constantly—-rejection being a failure that they use to teach them how to change themselves or their approach. Gay men don’t learn this as quickly or as deeply so they stand around waiting for someone they find attractive to agree to be gay with them. yes, a stand and be pretty/available feminine trait that 80% are acting out. Even if all of the 20% of Alphas engaged, they won’t get to everyone. Betas, more feminine men have to learn how to attract, flirt, not be afraid of, date and seduce men better.
In workshops, I often ask 30, 40, 50 year old men have you ever examined seduction techniques of men—-what works and what doesn’t. Most answer no—-which means they all keep starting from Step 1 or No Skill/Game. being masculine is not a guarantee of romantic success either, demonstrative, consistent, self-correcting action is.
#KylePhoenix
#TheKylePhoenixShow
.jpg)
