Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/web/public_html/bb/showpost.php on line 215

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/web/public_html/bb/showpost.php on line 220
CRUISING for SEX - View Single Post - Changing Sexual Roles
View Single Post
  #10  
Old 5th October 2015, 11:50 PM
KewlDewd66's Avatar
KewlDewd66
Cruiser
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 400

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonn3 View Post
I really understand this - and I think it is part of what helped me accept that I liked gay sex. As opposed to some buddies that were just fooling around to get off - all that mattered was that they get to cum - I enjoyed sucking cock. It gave me pleasure to give him pleasure.
Sure, a dude wanted to get his rocks off, one way or the other. That comes with the territory. The key cultural trait with East Med societies has been the love of sex, though.

A dude with a healthy right or left hand can shoot his load. Our narrative strongly suggested that you were either one of the guys who had sex with other folks, or you were a loser confined to solitary exploration. So, relatively very few guys thought it satisfactory alone to get their rocks off, and move on. You were a player because you enjoyed the sexual encounter and many of its intricacies. Soon enough, you built your reputation as a good player, and you sure, tried your utmost to live up to it. Outright selfishness was very much shunned by everyone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jonn3 View Post
It is amazing how many things I never thought I would do ("OK - I will jerk off with him but I am not going to touch his." "OK - we will jerk each other off but I am never going to suck his." "OK - we can suck each other but I am never going to let him cum in my mouth..." etc etc etc)

I never had a problem with anyone "sicking to their guns" and saying there are things they do and do not like - but it is also nice when they can say they tried it....
This is where the cultural traits caused a great difference in actual behavior.

Every dude had his limits. But first, and foremost we were all players, and were trying to make sure that the limitations never seriously impacted the play. First off, you were looking for a compatible mate. Second off, you showed some flexibility when and where it was needed. No total top had problems with grabbing his bttm's dick to help him shoot. If your best buddy was a total top, and the two of you were incompatible, you soon found a happy bottom to share, so that the the two tops could kiss, lick, and generally enjoy each other while sharing the same bottom. Once it was aptly shown that both tops were great at what they were doing, and the happy bottom was sent home, one of the top guys would return to bottom for his friend. Naturally, this was a top secret that always stayed just between the two of you. The tops had a vested interest in preserving their image and reputation, so indiscretions here were unthinkable of. Usually, the guy who topped the top felt obligated to show some extra generosity to his mate, too.

Since we were 'the players', kissing was a big part of the game, and no dude ever said, 'sex yes, but kissing no - that'll make me a fag.'

Hardly anyone ever expressed any fear that their m2m sexual encounters were actually making them fags. The idea was to have sex, simple, easy, and plenty of it. As opposed to being a loser who got none.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonn3 View Post
Very true - so many base top and bottom only on size. But sometimes desire is more important than size. I had one buddy - great guy - good looking - fantastic personality - but his cock was not long or thick. Great at blow jobs and a willing bottom. Once when we had a few too many beers he told me he had always wanted to top but no one ever let him. I just asked why he never mentioned it before and told him to go for it. What he lacked in size he made up for with enthusiasm!
We are talking the pre-internet age. The only source of knowledge about sex we gathered came from the stories of our elder brothers, uncles, and some of their friends, in addition to what we were able to gather from the porn. So, we were all growing up in a totally phallocentric culture which equalized man's masculinity first and foremost with the size of his equipment.

So, the bigger guy gets to top by default. And everyone wants to top (at least, for the record), because that's what the men do. A smaller dude, may or may have not liked the 'rule' but the whole thing appeared somehow just to all of us.

Paradoxically, this made bottoming so much easier because you were just assuming the role that the nature dealt you with. We all cracked countless jokes about the bttm dudes but there was hardly any bottom shaming at all.

Sure, bigger was always better than smaller. But the smaller dudes had a role to play, and they were equal players.

All of us were still growing, and a small freshman may have turned into a bigger soph. If he wanted to top, he would hook up with the smaller dudes than himself, and bingo, he had a go, too. Some of his more versatile mates would also let him top them, naturally, in exchange for a face-saving favor, a small gift or a gesture of appreciation. Topping always came with its caveats, and it seemed that we all liked playing it along those lines.

Eventually, the very small dudes who also stayed on the very small side usually felt that m2m sex was a good, possibly only outlet for their pent up energy. Again, we are talking a very phallocentric culture here, and a very small dude (or so was the pervading opinion) simply did not have a chance to start dating girls, get married, have kids, as most of the average and bigger players were planning to do. The guys mostly believed that a very small guy simply did not stand any chance with any of the girls to start with. And besides, why were they going to humiliate themselves and get rejected anyway, when there were all those men around only too happy to oblige?

SC
Quote |