tallslenderguy

Wow, have to admit i am surprised and fascinated by the responses. i do get the submissive part, and i respond deeply to what i call "affectionate degradation," so nothing in my wiring objects to that. But spit to me is not erotic, so i personally have a disconnect there. i was at a gay resort a few years ago and a random guy wanted to spit in my mourh and i declined, He then spit on His cock and offered it to me and i didn't hesitate to take it... and i have likely taken gallons of spit that way, as well as ass juices and cum from where ever His cock has been, so it's obviously an emotional vs rational response on my part. i suspect i could be seduced into it.

Prone is by far the way i have taken the most cock. Especially when CL was alive and well, my most frequent hook up was lying naked and prone on my bed, door open. Top comes in and finds a naked, waiting ass to fuck. Most of the time i never see the guy who is breeding me. i think there is something to be said for that visual anonymity, it seems to free up a lot of Tops who might be otherwise shy or afraid to breed for a variety of reasons because of being seen. i too like the feeling of vulnerability and submission that goes with it. To me, it's the most submission position there is. i do like being on my back too, but that is a lot more selective for me. i am not visually attracted by every guy. But if there is visual attraction/connection, being bred that way can be very powerful with eye contact and kissing.

Waking this thread back up. Covid in not over. It has declined with the vaccine, yay!!. Where i work, the only poz people are those who didn't get vaccinated. The hospital where i work has seen a dramatic drop in cases starting in June. Those who are coming in are non vaccinated people. One of my last Covid poz patients was a 42 year old woman. She was not anti vaccination, just had not gotten a vaccine, and she regretted it. She was in the hospital 20 days, she had a rough go of it, but made it through.

There are religious organizations who believe gay people are "an abomination to God." They are convinced, even in 2021, that they are doing "Gods" bidding to make who we are illegal. It may be hard for someone who has never experienced this. I was arrested in 1998 and charged with a felony for asking an undercover vice cop who was pretending to cruise if he wanted to fuck me (a hundred year old law was used). That's not that long ago guys, and there are plenty of people who are fighting to outlaw us in 2021. Check out this list of groups, then google their actual home sites if you doubt. [think before following links] https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2010/18-anti-gay-groups-and-their-propaganda It's not MC who is making the decision to come after gays. Follow the money. MC and credit card companies want our money, they don't really care how they get it. They are being pressured, and bowing to the pressure, of outside groups. Check out this BBC aritcal . "A letter seen by the BBC, signed by more than 10 campaigners and campaign groups, says porn sites "eroticise sexual violence, incest, and racism" and stream content that features child sexual abuse and sex trafficking. One leading site, Pornhub, said "the letter [was] not only factually wrong but also intentionally misleading." Mastercard told the BBC they were investigating claims made in the letter on pornography sites and would "terminate their connection to our network" if illegal activity by a cardholder was confirmed. The letter was sent to 10 major credit card companies, including the "Big Three", Visa, MasterCard and American Express. The signatories from countries including the UK, US, India, Uganda and Australia have called for the immediate suspension of payments to pornographic sites. The signatories of the letter include the anti-pornography non-profit group the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) in the US, and other faith-led or women and child rights' advocacy groups." [think before following links] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52543508

One of the hazards of online communication is the lack of tone and visual cues that accompany face to face communication, so we all encounter situations where someone infers tone and attitude that are not intentionally implied. Online is not the gentlest of worlds for exchange, i wish more grace was exercised online, given the pitfalls. i too have been guilty of inferring tone that may be unintended by you. On the other hand, you do know how to write and your posts are not devoid of inflection or enhancement that show disdain for certain 'types.' [laughing] i often/repeatedly find myself checking your icon, convinced you're an 'alpha top.' No emotional stereotypical response going on there, eh? You do sometimes come off to me as generally disdainful and maybe a little superior. And honestly, you strike me as one of the deeper thinkers in this community, so i may have higher expectations from you? idk, i am being vulnerable by writing this stuff, i am not challenging you. As expressed earlier in this thread, i do think there are guys who are more sub than bottom. The challenge of words is they can never fully describe the individual. i think the OP's original question and the various answers to it demonstrate that. E.g., just reading this thread demonstrates how many different perceptions there are of the word "pussy." i think we would all do well to honor each individuals perception as theirs, a part of who they are instead of grousing if it doesn't fit our perception (not saying you are doing this, speaking generally here). i too object to people who want to deny who i am as a bottom because i do not conform to their notion or idea of who or what a bottom should be. i do not want or need anyone to conform to my identity as a bottom, or vice versa. i believe you make a great point earlier in this discussion that it is crucial to use qualifiers like: "i think" or "i believe" vs just stating ones opinion/feelings as though they are universal facts that apply to all bottoms or Tops. i think there are a lot of people who simply do not understand how to write, and then others who really believe what they think/feel is universal.

i'm a total bottom, so i just do not relate to wanting to breed anyone. Some of my most intense connections as a bottom have been with black guys though. i've thought about that a lot and have formed a sort of theory about it that has to do with a lack of 'white privilege.' i hate to use that term because it evokes a lot of volatile emotion, polarizes many. But it's a real thing no matter how one may feel about it and it affects us all. my experience has been that many black guys are more emotionally available. i have had to bite my mattress to keep from declaring my love and adoration for the complete black stranger who is breeding me lol. i've had that with white Tops too, but it doesn't seem as consistent or common? It has nothing to do with cock size, it's demeanor, who and how they are, a missing barrier. It has nothing to do with my seeing His color, i'd still feel and sense the difference if i was blindfolded. my guess is this would be the case, Top or bottom? It's something internal, not external. The only thing i can figure is it's because black guys don't have some of the automatic, built in cultural stuff that white guys do? idk, i don't pretend to have it all figured out, i'm still trying to see and understand this. As a white guy, i have found my privilege/color gives me blind spots, among other things. i've found similar stuff with being male vs female. Being gay helps because it gives me some perspective on what it means to be a part of a minority. i know what it means to be treated as "gay" first, and a person second. The thing is, a gay person can hide his gayness in a closet, a black person cannot hide their color, so they cannot buffer their selves from stereotype. It seems to me that a black gay guy gets a double bias (intentional or not) to deal with from white guys who are unaware and not on guard of our cultural conditioning. To the black bottoms (or Tops for that matter), who are particularly attracted to white guys, why? What is it you see or want from a white guy that is different from being with a black guy?

i think it's an internet thing that has evolved over time. There are no ghosts when people are face to face. There are social boundaries that are easy to violate when separated by the ether. The ether makes for ethereal beings, eh? It does show something about the person though. The person who is willing to ghost another is true to the name, without much substance. It's selfish and inconsiderate. i think Gimmiethatload has a point too. There are guys who may be deeply closeted, who would never go to a gay bar or bathhouse or other place where he is exposed. But that same person is also pretty selfish and inconsiderate if his only intent is to lie and lead someone on so can masturbate. If that person is to shy or afraid or not ready to meet in person, they should be upfront about it. There are plenty of guys on a hookup site who are willing to just share fantasies online. Why lie and deceive?

i like this answer and agree, but i am not sure everyone is aware of the distinction? lol, and you have come off as pretty authoritative/matter of fact to me too in some of your posts, but i have a pretty thick skin. A lot of guys do not qualify (or realize) that their opinion is just that, "their" opinion. Ethnocentricity seems a macrocosm of egocentricity to me. Eh, i would not state it as strongly as you, but yeah i notice. i have a particular sensitivity to any form of absolutism having worked my way out of fundamentalist religion. To me, "fundamentalism" can be applied to just about anything, it's the absolutist notion that repels me. How can one have a discussion with someone who is absolutely right and only their to convert or instruct? i get having strong convictions, but i do not see knowledge and belief as the same. i do think there is a subset of guys ("subset" is a double entendre in this case), who put a guys desire above getting fucked. i know this one pretty intimately because i have a decided sub side to my nature/make-up, but i am more bottom than sub and i know and admit that. There are some situations where a Top can touch my penis without violating who i am, but there's a whole psychological side to it for me. i do think there are guys who may be more sub than bottom who would put the Alpha part before the getting fucked/bred part... but my impression is most who identify as "bottom" need/want to be fucked more than they need/want to please their Top. Not that i do not think they want to please their Top, i think they really do, i just believe it is often connected to what they want/need as well, not some altruistic, selfless gesture. Doesn't matter, it's their life. but i know that is not me. i love (need) getting fucked and bred by a Top who loves (needs) to do it, and it's that full connection i crave, not just to 'please my Top' cause i have no other interest. That would be a lie on my part.

i have not experienced my position/view as unique (and i have a fair amount of experience having been fucked by more than 1000 guys). But then, we likely all gravitate towards affirmation. And my perception is derived as much from those Tops i engage with as it is from bottoms... probably more so from the Tops. i would proffer that bottoms on either side of that equation want to get fucked foremost because it is their desire, not foremost because it's their partners desire. The bottoms i know and see want/need to be fucked. Reading the posts of bottoms just on BZ, time and again i read things like "i don't care what i am called, as long as i get their cock and load," or some variation on that theme. Rarely (if ever?) do i read a bottom writing something akin to: " i don't care if he fucks and breeds me, as long as His Alpha nature gets off" lol. As i perceive it, the notion of superiority (on either side) is a thin veil more often than not. i never feel that i have more power. For me, it's more of a dance where i want my Top to lead. i can, of course, deny a Top my hole to fuck, but not "a hole to fuck." To me the essence of interaction i seek between a Top and bottom is the achievement of mutual need/desire.

Maybe bronze the old pair and hang the from the rearview mirror of your car of something. The fact that you've worn out a pair of "fuck me boots" strikes me of a trophy of accomplishment.

i enjoy reading discussion on this topic. For me, it's not so much the word a Top uses, but the attitude and intent behind the expression/s He uses. Personally any hint of bullying or force is a turn off to me. If a top has to belittle me to make his perception of himself grander, well, 'the top doth protest to much me thinks.' To me, that person comes across as unsure of himself and his position/power. i love cock, not cocky. To me, there is nothing more powerful than a Top who looks me in the eyes and tells me He wants my ___________, or even asks for it, while both of us know full well how much i want/need His 'cock' (which to me is so much more than the organ between His legs). It's almost like a tease, like adding salt to make me more thirsty. A Top who has both of His heads in the game is what grabs and gets me. A top who calls my hole a "pussy" with a superior attitude or inferring inferiority on my part, doesn't get to me at all. He may get to fuck me, but only with his body. A different kind of Top, one who really sees me, can call my hole a "pussy" and He'll end up owning it and more. To me, the Top/bottom dynamic is about connection and bonding of opposites. Not about taking control, but evoking the desire, even need, in the bottom to give control over. Not assuming this is universal, but i have connected with enough Tops like this to know it's a thing.

Bigger, more open hole... make the target easier and more accessible? i used to encounter situations where a Top would hit the mark, but bounce off a tight hole, those days are gone lol. Now, once a Top gets close, He's in. Other than that, not sure there's much more of a solution. i'm never quite sure about whether to lend a hand, some Tops appreciate that, others want total control, so that's a role of the dice in my opinion. i suspect for most of us, your hot self included, coupling inevitably happens, no matter the challenge.

i have never thought of it from this angle. i think you make a great point about how the term "rape" has been "canted towards the insert partner." i don't feel i have ever been raped in this way. For me it is more about the frustration of communication. But i think you are right, there are some people who just do not seem to believe those who identify as Total Tops or total bottoms, then there are others that may believe it, but just refuse to accept or respect that they are not the droids they are looking for.

Yes, this. i see "labels" as a starting place, not an ending place. That they are a means of communicating. You identify as "versatile," so it makes perfect sense to me that you would "...feel the labels 'top' or 'bottom' and 'dom' or 'sub' are constricting," because that is not how you are. "It just means you and me have a lesser chance to be sexually compatible" Exactly. We may love and appreciate each other in many ways, but probably would not try to establish a sexual connection because we understand we are not sexually compatible. We cannot have that understanding if we ignore the "(self-) labeling" of another person because it is how they are trying to communicate who and how they are by using it.

We need words to communicate, 'labels' are a part of the communication process. For example, if one goes to the store to get a cucumber and ends up with a watermelon because everything was packaged and not labeled, you'd not get what you were looking for. People are packaged, we cannot tell just by looking at them whether they wanna fuck or be fucked or___________, so we use words and labels to covey or give a sense of who we are and what we want/need. Labels are not perfect, but they at least give us some direction, a starting place. The challenge i have often encountered with versatile guys (and sometimes bottoms) is them wanting me to fuck or in some way penetrate them. i even try to clarify in some of my profiles: "total bottom, i am not versatile." i sometimes refer guys to the Urban Dictionary, it has a decent definition of 'total bottom.' It seems like some guys just do not grasp or believe there is such a thing as someone who is Total Top or Total bottom. my guess is it's because since some guys are indeed wired for both, they just cannot relate to someone not being as they are and they believe everyone can be like them. It seems to me, a lot of time, it's just a matter of some not taking another at face value. i'm sure not looking for a unicorn. i'm looking for a "Top" and that has changed over time to "Total Top" because i really am looking for a TOP, not someone who wants to flip with me... ever. i do not care about how they look, age, etc.. I do not think thats anything like a unicorn. I am trying to avoid shape shifters lol.

i read a profile today on a site i frequent that read: "...no top or bottom labels, i prefer spontaneous...." In his profile though, he still identified as "versatile." This sort of triggers me, i suspect it comes from having escaped a religious culture that insisted there is no such thing as being gay, that it is a choice. It took me a long time to process out of that web. i do not 'know' that being a "total bottom" is a similar situation for me, but it sure feels like it, and it brings back feelings of being unseen when some gay guys seem to believe there is no such thing as 'me' (i.e., a "total bottom"). i know i'm not alone in encountering this. i've read Total Tops who have encountered this as well as total bottoms. i usually won't even hook with a versatile guy unless i know him well enough to know he understands and accepts what it means for me to be total bottom. i take identifiers like "Total Top, total bottom, versatile, etc." at face value. If a guy uses one of those labels, i figure he knows himself better than i do. i'm put off by guys who seem to truly believe that being Total Top or total bottom or versatile is a choice, and imply that one is just being selfish. To me, it feels the same way as the religious people who say one is not really gay, just choosing that. i almost never encounter this from someone who identifies as Total Top or total bottom, it's something i encounter from versatile guys on a regular basis though... to the point where i often don't even try to connect with a versatile guy. i'm curious to read what others think about this? Do you put identifiers like "Top, bottom, versatile, etc." in the category of choice, or is it more just a matter of fact for you? For me, being "total bottom" is a lot more than a physical/sexual position, there's a complex psychological side to it, and i have come to see "Total Top" and "Versatile" the same way. i do subscribe to the spectrum theory when it comes to human sexuality, but for me it has not proven to be very fluid. i can trace my bottom/subish nature back to early childhood, so i do not see myself suddenly becoming top or versatile. Being bottom doesn't really feel like a "choice" to me, though i can choose what to do about how i feel, i still feel that way. How about you? How do y'all see this?

Maybe "ABS"? i've found adult stores to he a great way to hook in rural areas, rest stops as well. Of course that was pre Covid, haven't been to one since Covid started, but i imagine they are starting to open up again more recently. i've also had much more success with aps like Grindr in rural areas than in cities. Maybe also check out Squirt. i've been on Squrit for years and it has the local cruising areas listed. my experience is cruising areas are far better for hookup than aps are. Aps mostly get in the way of sex in my experience.

People are complex, eh? As some have noted, what makes an individual is a combination of nurture and nature and there are no clear lines as to where one begins and the other leaves off. Most of us have grown up in cultures that define things like "good, bad, deviant, etc.." Narrowing it down, i think a lot of gay guys find their nature is in conflict with their nurture. As you state it, there seems to be a part of you that wants a less than clean guy to cum and piss in you. my guess is that is in conflict with how you've been conditioned? i think a lot of us go through a time where we want to be forced to do the things we really want, even crave, because it's a way to get around the conditioning that has taught us we are "bad, deviant, etc.." i used to have an elaborate fantasy where a guy kidnapped me and forced me to be His bottom lover. At the time, i was married (to a woman) and still stuck in a religious web, believing i was 'broken and evil' because of my sexual needs and desires. Once i processed through and accepted myself, fantasies of being forced went away... for the most part. i still fantasize of a Top who feels free to penetrate me any time He wants/needs. A lot of those fantasies involve Him penetrating me when i am asleep. But none of those fantasies involve Him being mean, bullying or forceful, rather they are based on mutual understanding and acceptance of each others needs and desires. i also sitill desire (need?) what i have come to call "affectionate degradation/humiliation,' but again, it's never from a mean or bullying, forceful Mate, but affectionate. i believe a lot of what we experience in these different forms of conflict is our needs/desires are in conflict with our conditioning, but need/desire wins out, and despite the conflicting feelings, we are deeply affirmed.

No & No. i've expressed my views quite a bit about chasing and STI's on BZ, so my "no" answers will come as no surprise to those around here who know me. i've concluded that most of those who write about chasing are fantasizing or are ignorant, or some combination of the two. i do not think a desire or effort to become, or make other people sick, is rational. i believe even most the diehard chasers would have a change of heart once they are in the hospital gasping for breath from pneumonia when their HIV progresses to AIDs. i'm a critical care nurse, and have volunteered to take Covid poz patients since we opened a Covid unit at the hospital where i work in March 2020, i have over 1000 hours of experience taking care of Covid patients. From the start, there were elements of the Covid pandemic that were reminiscent of the AID's pandemic during the 80's. There is a percentage of healthcare workers who refused to care for Covid patients for a variety of reasons as there was during the early days of AID's when healthcare was still figuring things out. On my last rotation, i had a young patient with Covid and the first words out of her mouth when i was examining/admitting her were: "i wish i had gotten vaccinated." i have yet to have one Covid poz patient tell me they would choose the disease over the vaccine in hind sight. There are some who need the reality check of getting sick to sway their emotional disposition... and a desire to catch or transmit a disease is emotional, not rational, as are the arguments that are used to promote the idea.

When i first divorced (from marriage to a woman), i had a lot of dates with guys met online. Almost, to a person, each misrepresented himself about age/appearance. It almost became comical it was so usual. In my prior life, all i'd had was anonymous hook up sex, so i was looking for connection and relationship and being lied to from the start made that pretty challenging. I hit it off with one guy in particular when we were writing back and forth. i love the written word and he was great at expressing himself in writing. He was an actor so his pics were professionally taken and from and age where he weighed much less. i found him gorgeous, but when he opened his door when we met, he was so different from his pics that i found myself searching for any resemblance at all. He knew, but kept up the charade. i'd traveled a long way to meet him, he'd made dinner and had gotten tickets to a play for us. He was really sweet in one sense, but i just could not get past his blatant lying. i spent the night... in his guest room, it was awkward as hell. We went to a yoga class we'd planned on the next morning, and we parted after the class. When i returned home, he sent me a followup email asking for honest feed back. I was very diplomatic about telling him how his pics needed updating. He took me apart, limb by limb, in his reply. He was so venomous, he really hurt me... turns out he didn't really want honest feedback. About 8 months later, he sent me another email sort of apologizing and thanking me for my honesty, admitting that what i had written was true and thanking me for my honesty. He told me he'd been to the gym and had lost weight, etc.. But he had been so cruel and mean in his prior emails, trying to even the turf while in denial. When we had practiced yoga together before i left and i was pretty skinny and he said i was "emaciated" in his email where he asked me for honesty (among other things lol) in his attempt to compensate for his misrepresentation. He ended up showing a side of himself he couldn't really erase. i actually liked him, but even with the apology he was still exercising denial. i could have forgiven him his vitriol, but he glazed over it as if it hadn't happened. Haven't done much online dating since him, my online experiences with actually trying to meet someone for relationship have been dismal.

I appreciate the distinction and correction here, i should have put a qualifier in front of the word "sex." i agree that sex is not harmful in and of itself, but can be made harmful depending on lots of different factors. Your contributions don't t strike me as a 'ramble,' i think you add some great thoughts to the discussion. Particularly i appreciate your thoughts on how "Society vilifies things outside of their defined societal norms and values - deviation from these are by definition deviant." Indeed! Ethnocentricity can apply to sex as much as any other topic. "Society" is a cultural construct, eh?, and 'norms' are often not based on evidence (i find it hard for one to be gay and not be aware of this). Many in some religious circles still consider "gay" and "pedophile" synonymous. Laws supposedly written to protect can be used for violence in the hands of the violent, and some laws are simply wrong. i was arrested in 1998 for asking and undercover 'vice cop' if he wanted to fuck me. He was pretending to be gay as part of his job to entrap. i was then charged with a felony based on a 100 year old 'sodomy' law. 1998 was not that long ago. The judge, thankfully, literally laughed at the notion of it being a felony, but the prosecutor wanted my blood. The then attorney general of VA was of the same religious ilk that the last US vice president was from, and believed gay people to be 'deviant.' i think there are many who have never come up against a sector of culture like this. Many do not realize how, even in the year 2021, many believe that "God" is gonna send all gay people to hell. Many have beliefs where they think they would be doing "Gods" will to imprison (and worse) gay people. Yet, this same religious culture has stories in it's book (the bible) about taking a young girl and putting her in bed with bible hero King David in his old age to 'keep him warm.' It's often not so much the act that is frowned upon, but who is doing it. A lot of the age bias undercurrent in portions of our society is directed at gays.

i appreciate this well thought out reply. Society battles an age old dilemma of letter of the law vs spirit of the law. Laws are of course necessary, but courts exist for the purpose of interpreting those laws. Black and white simply does not work in the colorful, real world. i think a lot of gays have residual internalized homophobia that inclines towards seeking some semblance of acceptance from culture/s that still consider gay as perverse, so one latches onto anything that will 'prove' we're 'okay' (am talking about so much more than age considerations here). The emphasis should be on promoting protection of the individual, and that cuts both ways protecting 'innocence' and also protecting volition. The freedom to choose goes two directions, so kids (people) can only benefit from being informed about things like critical thinking and their right to say either "yes" or "no." i think a system that tests or measures an individuals ability to make decisions would be more fair and inclusive, but will probably never happen... it's just too complicated. So, a random age is picked and applied universally, whether it fits or not. The truth of it is, there are tons of people who endure sexual harm after they turn 18 (or what ever the magical socially determined age happens to be). The day before their 18th birthday one is protected as a child, the day of their birthday, it all changes. It's silly really, it takes no account of the individual. One can be harmed by sex at any age. Age is only one factor, not the only factor in determining maturity or competence.

Ditto what ErosWired wrote. For me, the primary point of bareback is to connect completely with another guy. For me, a condom is a barrier to complete connection. If a guy is fucking you for any length of time, as Eros points out, you're gonna get precum, even if he pulls out when he cums. i suppose if each gets into stuff like facials, there's still a 'connection' happening, but it doesn't work for me. i am deeply disappointed if a guy pulls out when he cums. It's not just the cum for me, it's the complete orgasm. i want him to have and release his full pleasure/orgasm into me. For me, His orgasm becomes mine in that sense, there's a transference where he 'impregnates' me with a part of himself. As for 'cleaning jazz out of' my hole. Hell no! i hold it in and absorb it. i want to keep that part of my top and let it become a part of me. lol, i guess y'all can see i've thought about this.

Hey Guys, just an update to anyone following this. The diabetes thing got my attention. i've always been pretty good with diet never been beyond a 'normal' BMI in my life. i got really strict with my diet after getting an A1c of 7.2 , in February 2021, which is officially diabetic. i am specially educated in reversing certain diseases through diet, type 2 diabetes among them (DM2), so went total Whole Food Plant Based Diet with no added oil (WFPBDNO), with a few cheat meals. For the most part, no animal and kept my daily fat intake under 20grams (fat is what causes DM2). i got another A1c two months later and had dropped it to 6.3, which is pre-diabetic. i stayed on the Biktarvy after talking with my ID doctor, and retested undetectable on all counts. Doesn't look like the BIktarvy was an issue for me, and i'm glad, it has a good record as a med and i have no issues with it from my labs.

One of the things i find challenges the process of meeting, or even just hooking up, is guys who are not specific. Another is guys who think their standards are universal. Specifics? Guys who write nothing about their self, desires or needs in their profile or when writing back and forth. Their profile says something like: "just looking for fun," or: "looking for a hot time," or "looking for hot guys, " or "must be handsome." i'm bemused by the number of guys who seem to think others automatically know and understand what their idea of each of those things is? Or worse, they assume their taste is universal? Another sort of variation on that theme is when guys say they are "great kissers," or "great cocksuckers," or ______________. i'm a cocksucker and say so, but i leave off the descriptor of "great" (or lousy lol) because i have sucked enough guys to know that each individual has a different idea of "great" or "lousy." Some like it hard, some like it soft, and the only way to know is if they find some way to communicate. Some think "great kissing" means swallowing your whole face, while others are more tentative and playful, i.e., some like it one way, others another way. i think some guys are afraid to reveal who they are and what they want or need. Others seem to believe others should just know? i know terms like Top, bottom, versatile are not perfect descriptors, but they are a starting place. i love guys who's profiles have details, guys who like to communicate before getting together. Personally, i think it's a waste of time to just get together with someone and "see what happens." lol, okay. done for now.