Hey all! New guy in town ;)

[BigBear]

Hey there

everyone!

Been browsing the bord (doesnt every1 say that!?) for ages now, and decided to join to get some help

choosing som of these pheremones!

My question is

DO gay guys have different needs when it comes to these

phereomones? Which stuff should I choose to get guys interested???

I was thinking stuff like the womens

versions, and copulins... but I saw a big cafuffle about it a week or so ago.. htne I wondered if that would work

on guys that werent into woman?

Any help would be great!

Hugs

-----BigBadBear

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[bjf]

You should

do a search because I recall seeing good info on this topic.

Logically, you should avoid rone since it is

associated with the hetero male sig. It may be none that you want to go high on, not sure what role nol plays in

these situations.

With a lot of none, a lot of times you can snse other males reacting to it more than females

(if you are a guy). So this is a good thing, if gay men (unlike straight) react favorably to it.

[Elana]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Logically, you should avoid rone since it is

associated with the hetero male sig.

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Then why do women wear it in

AE/w with great results?

[belgareth]

It

seems to me that to attract a gay male you would want to use the same pheromones you would use to attract a straight

female.

[CJ01]

That´s

right. It´s actually not so much about which gender/sexual orientation. What you need to consider is the type of

(phero) person you are and the one you´re going for. AE or AE/m might do the trick, it´s THE product anyhow

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif IMO
Since you´re going after guys and being a guy yourself,

copulins is a real NO NO for you because it´s (for) `women only´. That´s because only women produce copulins

naturally whereas the other 3 are produced by both.

[bjf]

Then why do

women wear it in AE/w with great results? &gt;&gt;

Elana, I have wondered that too. In fact, I\'ve read a lot

of people wondering about why AE/w would have so much rone, etc.

SOE/w left out the rone for a reason. JVK says

in his research gay male hae less rone than straight, and that their A/E ratios resemble that more closely of a

female.

Maybe the nol and none in AE/w is what brings the results. Rone may just have a neutral affect when worn

by a woman or gay males, rather than subverse, too.

Who knows, it s a good point you raise, it would be nice if

Phil Stone or someone else could talk about their decision for the AE/w formula.

[CJ01]

Remember

that rone increases the effects of nol and none. </font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />


SOE/w left out the rone for a reason. JVK says in his research gay male hae less rone than straight, and that their

A/E ratios resemble that more closely of a female.


<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\"> that´s always

made me wonder, in fact I find it kind of amusing /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[CJ01]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Logically, you should avoid rone since it is

associated with the hetero male sig.

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\"> Don´t see why that´ll be a

problem I mean gay men can also fall for hero guys right? You know how women often end up fancying a gay guy,

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[BigBear]

We only

fall for hero guys /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

-----BBB /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[CJ01]

Yeah and

then even the last decent ones end up being gay, stop it /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Holmes]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Yeah and then even the last decent ones end up

being gay

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Or taxidermists.


Holmes

[bjf]

Good point

CJ.... I was thinking that gay guys are attracted to hetero to, so maybe it doesn\'t matter. Just don\'t know

if it would be a problem with other issues (ie wearing cops can make GFs/Wives think you are cheating).

In any

case, I think women seeking women are supposed to avoid rone.

[CJ01]

yeah but I

also reckon that men already attached don´t use/need cops. The cops can help a certain kind of guy make women more

comfortable around him, a bit like nol does but a man who´s with a woman already doesn´t need this

`foot-in-the-door´effect. Well that´s my theory anyway.

[bjf]

Right, but

would the whole hetero signature ever cause some doubts/trust issues, etc in a male-male relationship?

What if

there is just somebody a guy likes, and he has to worry about making sure the guy can pickup he is gay. I am sure

there are those situations that gay guys have to deal with - figuring out whether someone is gay or not and also

sending siginals to a certain person that they are gay.

Just wondered if hetero signature would interfere in any

of these processes.

[CJ01]

Well lets

see, perhaps htero men do produce more rone, but gay men still produce them too nonetheless, right?

Two knowing

whether or not someone is gay or not is part of our lives anyway If a gay man sends out the right and obvious (non

phero) signals the other guy will just know. For instance straight guys don´t tend to go to gay bars to hang out

(unless they´re lying /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif )


</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Just wondered if hetero signature would interfere in any of these processes.



<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\"> wouldn´t worry too much

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[bjf]

Yea, was

thinking less about gay bars and more about say you are seated at a table at a wedding and interested in a guy, or

at work, etc, where it is less obvious and perhaps less \"safe\" to take the risk. I\'m sure in gay bars nobody

has to think twice.

[CJ01]

yeah that´s

true. It can be difficult sometimes, you think, is he attached ie married or gf, is gay and and attached or single

or is he straight and a wanker or straight and actually worth the time, is he even cirumcised.... yes the kind of

questions we have to answer....... - I´m talking from a womans perspective of course

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[bjf]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
yeah that´s true. It can be difficult sometimes,

you think, is he attached ie married or gf, is gay and and attached or single or is he straight and a wanker or

straight and actually worth the time, is he even cirumcised.... yes the kind of questions we have to answer....... -

I´m talking from a womans perspective of course /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Suddenly, I am

beginning to appreciate how easy it is to be a hetero male /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[CJ01]

Is it? Have

you never fancied a woman who turned out to be gay?

[bjf]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Is it? Have you never fancied a woman who turned

out to be gay?

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

LOL. True. It happened once but I didn\'t have

any emotional attachment, and you know how men are, a split second later and there is another woman we dig.

[OCP]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Is it? Have you never fancied a woman who turned out to be gay?

<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

LOL. True. It happened once but I didn\'t have any emotional

attachment, and you know how men are, a split second later and there is another woman we dig.



<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Yep, any ol\' port in a strom will do for us.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[jvkohl]

It is

becoming more apparent (and easier to support with existing studies) that gay males are most likely genetically

predisposed to respond to pheromones from other men, as if the pheromones were those from women. Basically, the

genetic predisposition involves incomplete sexual differentiation of the olfactory system. When exposed to female

pheromones, less testosterone is produced, which leads to a less masculined/more feminized ongoing development of

the entire reproductive sexual axes, which regulate sexual behavior. Acting on the attraction to another male would

probably result in conditioning of the sexual response cycle to orgasmic reward, thereby helping to coordinate input

with behavior. Of course, it\'s a lot more technical than that, which makes a brief explanation difficult

(especially without using neuroscience jargon). If a paper I submitted on this gets published, some journalist will

be more likely to explain the findings better than I ever will.

Bruce mentioned today that my posts were

comparatively \"stuffy\" or \"snobish\" lately, unlike when I first joined the Forum. I know what he means (no

offense taken), but still find it difficult to post without going overboard. A little knowledge might be good,

compared to too much knowledge, which is not matched by communication skills. Most Forum members explain concepts

for a general audience better than I can. My advantage is being able to speak with other researchers: I plan to

attend and present at the April 2004 Association for Chemoreception Sciences in Sarasota, Florida, if anyone is

interested in attending. In April, it should make for a good motorcycle trip, and I\'m sure I\'ll have a good

time explaining male homosexuality to the neuroscience crowd.

[bjf]

James:

Just remember who, what, why, where, when.

This will help you to remember to explain to the general

audience what they don\'t know yet.

I am sure it is difficult to have to repeat your positions over and over

again, as the same questions, challenges come up, so perhaps sitting down and compiling an FAQ for general audiences

would save time in the long run.

When you re-read, just ask yourself, what would someone with no knowledge

whatsoever of any of this stuff have difficulty understanding, and then supplement it with information in a

non-scientist\'s language.

Sometimes comparisons or slices of life are good for this, when trying to explain

complex ideas.

If you were trying to explain American football to someone, would you tell them you have four

\"downs\" to get 10 yards, or four \"attempts\" to get 10 yards.

Love your posts, btw, you\'ve helped me

put all of this stuff together and understand my own experiences better.

[Gossamer_2701]

I

agree, I find your posts very helpful /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I may not fully understand

ALL of the scientific terms, but I get the overall picture that you paint with your posts. Besides... the other

members that can understand the scientific stuff better, reveal qyuite a bit to the rest of us with their

discussions and debates over what you have written.

Thanks for your insight JVK... personallyI wouldn\'t

change a thing /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Goss

[Friendly1]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />

Bruce mentioned today that my posts were

comparatively \"stuffy\" or \"snobish\" lately, unlike when I first joined the Forum. I know what he means (no

offense taken), but still find it difficult to post without going overboard.


<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

I know a lot of people from around the world read this forum, so it is important to keep the

language clear and natural. But I appreciate your in-depth discussions. I have seen far more jargon-laden stuff

posted elsewhere.

You\'re doing great, in my book!

[DZorro]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Hey there everyone!

Been browsing the bord

(doesnt every1 say that!?) for ages now, and decided to join to get some help choosing som of these

pheremones!

My question is

DO gay guys have different needs when it comes to these phereomones? Which stuff

should I choose to get guys interested???

I was thinking stuff like the womens versions, and copulins... but I

saw a big cafuffle about it a week or so ago.. htne I wondered if that would work on guys that werent into

woman?

Any help would be great!

Hugs

-----BigBadBear /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Use lot\'s of WAGG/m i\'m sure you\'l attract gay men in no time, i

had to quit using WAGG/m for a while since i\'m not interested in gay men,you should then try with 3+ dabs of

WAGG/m, and see how it goes.


DZorro,

[EXIT63]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Use lot\'s of WAGG/m i\'m sure you\'l attract

gay men in no time, i had to quit using WAGG/m for a while since i\'m not interested in gay men,you should then

try with 3+ dabs of WAGG/m, and see how it goes.


<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Are you sure?

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[EXIT63]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
It is becoming more apparent (and easier to support

with existing studies) that gay males are most likely genetically predisposed to respond to pheromones from other

men, as if the pheromones were those from women. Basically, the genetic predisposition involves incomplete sexual

differentiation of the olfactory system. When exposed to female pheromones, less testosterone is produced, which

leads to a less masculined/more feminized ongoing development of the entire reproductive sexual axes, which regulate

sexual behavior. Acting on the attraction to another male would probably result in conditioning of the sexual

response cycle to orgasmic reward, thereby helping to coordinate input with behavior. Of course, it\'s a lot more

technical than that, which makes a brief explanation difficult (especially without using neuroscience jargon). If a

paper I submitted on this gets published, some journalist will be more likely to explain the findings better than I

ever will.

Bruce mentioned today that my posts were comparatively \"stuffy\" or \"snobish\" lately, unlike

when I first joined the Forum. I know what he means (no offense taken), but still find it difficult to post without

going overboard. A little knowledge might be good, compared to too much knowledge, which is not matched by

communication skills. Most Forum members explain concepts for a general audience better than I can. My advantage is

being able to speak with other researchers: I plan to attend and present at the April 2004 Association for

Chemoreception Sciences in Sarasota, Florida, if anyone is interested in attending. In April, it should make for a

good motorcycle trip, and I\'m sure I\'ll have a good time explaining male homosexuality to the neuroscience

crowd.

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Indubitably.