hntnhole

It's mutual, PBW ....

You're being most gracious in that description, blackrobe. I think the fact is, there aren't enough naturally-inclined Tops around to keep their bottoms satisfied. To your question above though, pleasing oneself above pleasing both partners has, I think, always been an issue for gay guys. Not because we're innately selfish, but more because we don't have the benefit of culturally-acceptable "family trees". Only in the large, major population centers do we find organizations dedicated to - and for the advancement of - men who hear (and answer) the Call to Dominance. I was fortunate, living in Chicago, to find and associate with a couple of those kinds of organizations, and benefitted from those experiences. Maybe that can be replicated (to some degree) in online organizations? We could most likely start one here on BZ, if enough guys would be interested. It wouldn't be like the in-the-flesh memberships in Leather or Bd/Sm clubs of the past, but these days nothing is like it used to be. You mention the issue of appearing "performative", and that's an astute perception. I'm not really sure how many (percentage-wise) men there that even remember those in-the-flesh membership organizations. For example, I well-remember being corrected years ago by a Master at CHC, when learning the proper way to handle a flogger. A Master observed me, interrupted me and then corrected me, and watched me continue to make sure he'd corrected the issue. Interesting that you comment about the appearance of being "performative"; for some guys, it isn't much more than that, and who needs to perpetuate that mess? I think that in any group setting, some measure of "performative" acts will take place, mostly by those men who aren't quite secure in their knowledge of self, which is reflected in their skills. I see you're in Seattle - are there any gay newspapers, periodicals in your area which would carry ads, announcements of Leather/Bd/Sm organizations? That would be a good start, and I'll cross my balls that there are (since obviously, my fingers are busy now). I'm not conflating the Leatherlife with Bondage or Sadomasochism; they are often related, but also have different goals. If you'd like, maybe further discussion via private message would be most appropriate?

That's a most laudable goal - lots of cumdumps are what I guess we'd call "toned"?, but not many are what we'd call a muscle-cumdump. I have nothing against a soft-ish ass - far from it - but rutting in a well-bred musclehole is a rare treat. Butch-as-nails guys need loads too !!!

Patel is reportedly (google) 5'9". He looks shorter though, because of that deflated-inner-tube-like belly. However, to the O.P., if running around the world to attend sporting events is the only misstep he makes, he's the paragon of virtue compared to his fellow cabinet members - Bottle Blondi, somehow leaps to mind. The "kava bag" Ice-clown isn't far behind either.

First, congrats on figuring out who and what you need to become. You might want to check out a couple of gyms in your area; see if there are any guys lurking around with a matching fetish. Breeding a muscle ass is hot - and one full of loads off prior cocks is something a lot of guys can only dream about ...

I'm the farthest thing from a medically trained guy, but I can imagine a scenario where a bottom (or a Top, for that matter) that's accustomed to regular, frequent raw sex could get a bit gnarly when, for one reason or another, he's not able to feed that insatiable need. Females have an excuse every month: I think it's only fair that if, for whatever reason, WE experience a dearth of action for a while, we get the same break.

That fund-raising devise is as old as the hills. I too am on a number of "beg-lists", but it bothers me not one whit to ignore them. (Very) occasionally I'll actually hear back from someone at that candidates headquarters, and have a bit of a chat. But unless I feel like it, or think the candidate deserves it, no moolah.

I went out to the privacy of my back yard and performed the Ancient Swedish Breeding Dance* on your behalf, which will hopefully help your "frame-of-mind" issue. Fuck every last one of em, and the better ones twice !!! *which is terrible to actually witness, but the Breeding Deities don't give a rats ass about that part ..... all they care is that we actually do it 💦

I don't think I possess any real racial preference, but to an uninformed onlooker, it may appear that way ..... Possessing virtually zero body-hair myself, naturally it's something I love on others. It seems that guys from the warmer climates seem to have more of that lovely attraction, but I don't think there's a racial quality to it - they're just hotter than men that look like me.

Reminds me of that old nursery-rhyme .... This little piggy this, the other little piggy that, and the third little piggy hollered FUCK ME MORE all the way home .... ❤️❤️❤️ Have a GRRRRRREAT TIME !!!

Sure, and thanks for asking; I can't say I know exactly why, but a lot of guys that prefer to Top have received the notion that Topping = Masculine = Aggressive = Domineering vs Dominant. That notion is, to my mind, completely false. Needing to be the "active" partner has never translated as outlined above, except in the instance of a Bd/Sm hookup. Rather few Topmen these days are at all familiar with the proper way to conduct that kind of formal "negotiation", so I won't go into that here. I'll merely address the issue of Tops that simply don't know how to be good Tops, irrespective of the Bd/Sm ancillary issues. 1. Showing a measure of care for one's sexual partner, whether a life-long relationship or a 'spur of the moment' fuck in some fuckjoint, is demonstrating the strength-of-character that Top has achieved. Failure to acknowledge the mere "human-ness" of a potential fuck in some pigpen, or when involved in a more durable relationship could be compared to a loud horn, trumpeting one's lack of experience. How, one may ask, does it diminish a Top's stature to ask a bottom's favorite way to take loads? Or if any particular sexual act is preferred, or to be avoided. Even in the backrooms this can be accomplished within seconds, and only demonstrates that our Top possess some measure of care not only for his own pleasure, but also some measure of care that he give his bottom a great fuck. That small, little bit of communication can make both men have a far better breeding than if neither mentioned anything to the other. Who, I wonder, has laid down the "rule" that Tops are to be incommunicative, bottoms are to remain silent, neither mentioning anything to the other. 2. The "strong, silent type" is often merely a disguise for a guy that doesn't know what he's about, and worse, doesn't give a hoot about the other guy(s) either. If neither guy has any particular "likes" or "dislikes", great. If one of them does, but is concerned about mentioning it, not so great. Too often, Tops aren't mind-readers, they're hole-readers. As in "grrrrr ... can't wait to get in that cumhole", when there may be other issues to discover first. In some backroom where a lucky bottom is taking all cummers, merely getting in line is enough. But, those events are relatively few and far between for most guys. Therefore, Tops need to be aware enough to want to know what turns the bottom's crank. Take the time to ask him, for petes sake. Give the bottom permission (indirectly) to mention anything that he needs to communicate to the Top, and pay attention to what the bottom says. Aslk any questions you minght need to ask. It doesn't have to be more than a few phrases, but giving the bottom the chance is important. 3. Tops should never misrepresent their skills. Be honest, for chrissake. If there's x quality in the bottom you're not attracted to, merely say some innocuous, non-judgemental thing and move on. Bottoms are precious - they're humans that need what Tops have. Respect them, don't demean them. Treat them well, as you yourself would want to be treated. They don't deserve maltreatment, just to make yourself feel puffed up. They're just as human as any guy - so treat them that way. Only fearful men pretending to be bold do shit like that to their peers. Coda: Always be respectful, since that's the mark of a real man; a "mench", as some here will recognize. Whether T, b, or switch; being observant of others humanity is always the right thing.

Agreed. But, there are measures to be taken to remove the source of the ever-increasing meanness. One substantial measure comes up in just a few months .......

I've noticed that the line between aggression and Dominant skill in Tops has become more blurred as well. For my money, there are too many men that enjoy Topping, but simply haven't learned their craft, and too many bottoms that will accept that deficiency. I blame - at least partially - or dependance on the ether to communicate, rather than in-person cruising (which can give each guy the opportunity to at least get some kind of idea what type of man the other is). While compu-cruising, or the fuckapps is easy, convenient, all of that, it's no match for in-the-flesh meeting, and a brief exchange can go miles farther than trying to get a feel for a guy via the electronic means. That way, there's no hiding behind some make-believe persona some guy has cooked up (or worse, convinced himself he's actually become the imaginary guy). Sometimes, "convenience" isn't all it's cracked up to be.

First, welcome, DanMac - we're glad you've joined up. To the quote above: That may be the case, but bear in mind that 1 in 12 males have some version of color vision deficiency, so depending on color(s) may not be all that reliable. For instance, I'm red/green, and had to learn to look for which light on a traffic light was actually lit up, rather than what color it was. I could always see the yellow one though. And, I can't recall seeing polka dots at all - regardless of preferred sexual depravity or position. Maybe it's a special "Aussie" thing? Most things about Aussie's are rather special anyway .....

Same fuckjoint as usual .... so far, it's never been a disappointment 😉

Do you mean that guys carry different colored glow sticks to indicate what they're prowling for? I hope things haven't sunk to that - please please please say NO .....

I can't remember being asked at all. Not sure why; I think I look like any other guy in the fuckjoints - even back in Chgo I don't recall being asked, and around here, I'd be stunned if a guy would ask. It wouldn't surprise me if there were more poz guys than not at Slammer.

Thanks for the responses, you guys. I always enjoy reading responses to thought-trains, hoping to read something worth pondering. Sometimes, it actually works, too.

Best wishes for a fan-fuckin-tastic time in PS. I'll go out to the (very private) back yard and perform the Ancient Rtualized Breeding Dance to hopefully help bring you good fuckluck !!! That dance can be dangerous though - just don't slip in all the loads it might bring you 😇

Interesting point: If you're referencing some hiring practice instituted by some governmental entity, I rather doubt that many entrepreneurs would do that (at least in the world of "small business"). Implicit in the quoted statement is a perception (on the part of the would-be employer) that an "underrepresented condition" equals an under-qualified potential employee. That may be the case, in about the same measure as it might exist in the general population, which demonstrates that inclination to be invalid. Talent can does exist across the spectrum of candidates, and despite perceived lack of professional training. I rather doubt that a small business owner (or, large one, for that matter) would employ a less-than qualified person solely for the reason of cultural identity. Talent, ability to do the job, references to that effect, would all trump (and do pardon the usage) any affinity or inclination to hire someone solely because of an underrepresented quality they may possess. I don't believe any business other than a huge conglomerate (with the financial ability to employ under-talented folks for reasons other than their business-model would dictate). It's not at all difficult to employ persons of ability, regardless of ethnicity, which is why the governmental suggestions in this area of concern are not difficult to satisfy - at all. "Underrepresentation" does not equate with inability to do the job, (with the caveat of assuming equal educational opportunities in the pool of potential employees).

Could have been, I suppose. For me though, the "challenge" has to be unmistakable - not a vague, kinda-sorta, wishy-washy comment. The kind of "challenge" that makes a cock even harder ...