Power Mouth? Tongue Slut?

[arpeejay]

OK, I'll admit it, I need some help!

Word help, that is.

It is perhaps hard to imagine but the fact is some gay men just aren't into anal sex. Which makes dealing with the inevitable question -- "top or bottom?" -- a bit tricky, e.g.:

"No, I'm not a top."

"Oh, so you're a bottom?"

"No, I'm not a bottom."

"Oh, OK, you must be versatile."

"Well, no, 'versatile' means you like both -- I'm not interested in either."

"?!?!?!?!"

"Yes, it's true. Some gay men are NOT interested in anal sex. I'm 20 times more oral than I am anal."

Which is why some of us have been known to say:

I'm not a top.
I'm not a bottom.
There's a not a part of a mans' body I won't lick or suck,
preferably for hours on end,
or until his eyes roll back in his head,
and he begs for mercy.
Get it?

So, that being the case:

Can any of you think of a pithy, 1 or 2 word phrase that perfectly captures the spirit of the "been know to say" above?

Thanks in advance for your creativity!

xoxo

Richard

[Aikuchi]

--
I'd be curious to know what anyone could come up with too.

I, myself, am not partial to anal interaction. I don't mind it - but I can certainly have a romp without it!

---

[anpuZA]

NonAnus?

And I thought I was the only one... I remember my highschool fling (more like f*buddy) wanted me to give him oral to the point of climax once he'd arrived in the general vicininty via some rather vigorous anal. To which I exclaimed: Not until that thing has been washed, dettoled, irradiated and steam cleaned.

I'd rather taste test every last inch of a hot man (like Alexei Lesukov) than have him bf me. Not that I'm off it completely... but yeah.

[philat99]

How about "You're my all-day lollipop!" or "You're my never-ending ice cream cone!"
Mike

[Mad Dog]

Maybe it's just because I haven't had any yet, but anal sucks is indeed the last on a list of things I'd like to do/have done to me.

[arpeejay]

Originally Posted by Mad Dog

Maybe it's just because I haven't had any yet, but anal sucks is indeed the last on a list of things I'd like to do/have done to me.

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it is usually what I tell people. There are plenty of reasons for it to be incredibly popular, in both directions. It just that it...

Doesn't do anything for me!

I don't know why, wish it did! But it doesn't!

Definitely not an ewww! ick! issue on my part.

xoxo

Richard

[musclegrowthdm]

I could do without anal. Most of the guys I would date want to be the top, and I would prefer it. I also haven't ever topped. just experienced bottom.. and yeah. not so much for me.

I think it would be called the Oral Boy or something.

[mann007]

Originally Posted by Mad Dog

Maybe it's just because I haven't had any yet, but anal sucks is indeed the last on a list of things I'd like to do/have done to me.

Oh, can you see the irony in the phrase "Anal sucks"?

Oh and... Arpeejay, you can suck me just anytime :P

[Wynfrith]

Thank goodness for this thread. I'd always been made to feel like a freak for not caring for anal...anything!

LOL @ anpuZA! You hit the nail on the head. I usually add "sprayed with bleach"

[Stoneman]

"g0y" (spelled with the number zero): alternative sexual identity for men attracted to other men but avoiding anal sex in favor of non-penetrative sex.

From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G0y

What a stupid name. How do you even pronounce that?

[arpeejay]

"g0y" doesn't quite work for me, I'm afraid.

I'm not into anal, perfectly happy with oral / frottage / mutual j.o. I know "top" and "bottom" are sometimes used with respect to oral but "vers oral" invariably raises the "oh, are you vers anal, too" question.

It also sorta kinda looks like "goy" and I'm sorta kinda thinking penetrative anal sex isn't the exclusive province of Jewish men! :-)

xoxo

Richard

[musclegrowthdm]

I guess that is what I should be thinking of when I'm talking to gay men hehe. Got to use that one. Just hot to say it instead of type it. that is the question lol.

[Mdlftr]

Originally Posted by arpeejay

"g0y" doesn't quite work for me, I'm afraid.

I'm not into anal, perfectly happy with oral / frottage / mutual j.o. I know "top" and "bottom" are sometimes used with respect to oral but "vers oral" invariably raises the "oh, are you vers anal, too" question.

It also sorta kinda looks like "goy" and I'm sorta kinda thinking penetrative anal sex isn't the exclusive province of Jewish men! :-)

xoxo

Richard

I have to admit I don't have anything to contribute to this discussion, but I do have a question (as a straight guy):

Why is it so mandatory/urgent/important/wanted in the gay dating scene to delineate one's sexual preferences/activities when meeting someone?

Does this imply that some people "are more gay than others?" Meaning, 'hey, I partake in the full menu of options from head to toe, so I'm full-service gay, whereas the guy over there is strictly a "name-your-subset-dude" so he's not "really" gay, or he's only "dipping a toe in the water" so to speak, so he's "less gay"?

The reason this question occurs to me is that much of the correspondence I see seems to start with the a priori question: 1. Is he gay?
Then, having ascertained a "yes" to that, the conversation proceeds down this laundry list of "options". The emphasis on the options seems to imply that "what makes you gay" is what you do/participate in sexually. This flies in the face of the whole "gay virgin" experience, in which people profess, "Oh, I've never had sex, but I'm definitely ____, not _______"

Many/most people who voluntarily choose lives of celibacy know where they are on the continuum of human behavior innately, without participating, so they have some asbstract sense of what they are giving up by choosing celibacy.

In the gay culture, it seems as if one has to
1. either self identify or be "outed", then,
2. Have their sexual actions listed out like a Chinese restaurant menu, then
3. have their orientation further "verifed" by reference to their physical body type or build: "muscle man" "twink" "queen" etc.
4. Further validated by external reference: gossip, declaration, pictures on BigMuscle, marching in Pride parades, posing for magazines, etc.

For what? What are you trying to prove? That "homosexuality" exists?

Why are you guys making this so hard?

Puzzled,



Mdlftr

[arpeejay]

:-)

Mdlftr, darling, WE didn't make it hard; WE developed coping mechanisms to deal with an oppressive, rejecting, occasionally murdering (straight) society.

A few things to keep in mind:

(1) Sexual orientation is not the same thing as sexual behavior. You can self-identify as "gay" and have sex with a woman (as I did during my marriage); you can self-identify as "straight" and have sex with men (either because you're in a same-sex community, like a monastery or a prison, or because some aspect of having sex with a guy in stead of a woman really turns you on.)

(2) Closetedness / outness do not correlate with sexual behavior. You can be a closeted sex pig and a flamingly out, virigin. In fact, it OFTEN works that way. Closetedness / outness is a reflection of the degree to which you're willing to let other people deal with your gayness.

(3) Sexual behavior / sexual preferences. As I alluded to above, these don't really depend on sexual orientation or outness / closetedness. Plenty of gay men have sex with women (on occasion, or lots), fewer straight men are inclined to have sex with guys (but that doesn't address the whole "just a sixpack away" and "men who have sex with men" phenomena.) Sexual preferences (top / bottom / versatile / anal / oral etc.) very definitely ARE about sexual experience; if you're a virgin, you can TALK about what you PREFER but unless / until you've actualy done it you're just blowing smoke.

(4) Other qualifiers. Masculine / butch, effeminate / sissy, twink, bear, Goth, leather, muscle, sub / dom, slave, etc. For some people, these probably actually constitute sexual identities. Closeted / out often DO apply; I think it's safe to say I was more embarrassed about my muscle lust than I was about the fact that I was gay. There are people, for that matter, who would claim that they're a matter of orientation as well as identity; that strikes me as going a bit far, inasmuch as (from my opinion) any of these can be taken up or discarded through the course of one's life. Likewise, these "identities" tend to be shared across gender / orientation lines; you will find gay men, straight men, gay women, straight women who consciously or unconsciously relate t one or more of these identies.

Why does it matter?

It doesn't...except that I really would not be interested in having a relationship with a closeted, "I'm straight but I only have sex with men" guy who was only interested in anal sex and wanted me to be his slave.

I probably just made things much more confusing. If so, I apologize. I'd write more but now I need to go buy some vegetables (and a pumpkin!)

xoxo

Richard

[Mdlftr]

Arpeejay,
Thanks for the response.

1. You're right, your response is somewhat confusing due to the 'stream of consciousness' format.
2. If the behavior described is a "coping mechanism" due to past opression, what is evolving to replace it? Not to overplay the current relatively relaxed and accepting climate, but, if society at large is generally, overall, moving towards a climate of more acceptance (yes, I know there are still many tough areas of oppression) why can't gay men looking for a date just ask, "Hey,wanna go play golf /go for a drink/ grab a cup of coffee/whatever" without it being a big, major deal?

I'm not trying to denigrate anyone's experience or trauma or fear or realistic sense of self-preservation. My main question is, what purpose is served in delineating one's putative sexual list to someone you've just met/ never met/on an anonymous posting?

Whatever happened to: "gee, what do I have in common with this person" as opposed to, "let's get our rocks off together"! That's so '70s!!

Mdlftr

[arpeejay]

Next time I'll try to make sure my stream has a little more consciousness in it!

Your second question reminds me that I overstated the case. For one thing, sexual orientation (towards same sex, opposite sex, both sexes) and sexual behavior (sex with same, sex with opposite, sex with both) didn't evolve as copiong mechanisms; presumably they've always been with us. Closetedness / outness are definitely constructs related to society at large; likewise, the whole butch / femme thing seems to me to be extremely culturally dependent.

As for your main ("what purpose is served...") question:

Well, why not?

I think it's a personal preference thing. Would you rather go to Saturn to buy a car with a set price or do you want to go haggle with someone at the Cadillac dealership?

I put it all out there but that's mostly (1) a personality quirk on my part and (2) a sense that some people would like to be able to share certain parts of their lives but feel like they can't. So I feel, in some ways, that I'm also representing gaydads and gay widowers who would have a hard time claiming either of those experiences.

The other thing to remember is that there's a difference between saying "hey, this is who I am" and insisting on knowing all the details about someone else first. Guys whose first question is "top? bottom? what u into?" usually don't get much out of me. It's clear that they're more interested in where to put their dicks than they are in finding out anything about me. Which is very different from, "Hey, very cool to see another gay dad on here -- hard to balance gym and child-rearing, isn't it?" which is a note I received earlier today from a hottie on Realjock.com.

OK, I'll stop rambling.

xoxo

Richard