hntnhole

Even as a little (5,6 y's old) I felt that I didn't need to allow things to happen I didn't like. Example: At our church there was an old couple named Swanson, that ran a little vacuum cleaner shop over on Broadway. When I was a little kid (5,6?) there was a coffee hour in the basement, and Lilly Swanson and that pasty-faced husband of hers were always there. Every time she got a chance at "coffee-hour", that old toad would find my grandmother to blab at, and actually pet me under my chin. This happened over and over and over, month after month, and finally I had enough. I tried any number of times to shake free of grandma's hand, get away, but it was crowded, and gram knew I'd probably run into someone, or whatever. One fine Sunday after services (I know I wasn't tall enough yet for my head to be even with grandma's waist, and she was hardly tall), that hideous old crone Lilly Swanson pulled her usual routine, and started the detested stroking my chin. This time, however, I kicked her in the shin as hard as I possibly could. The old bitch screamed, grandma gasped, and my mom grabbed me by the arm and hauled me outta there post-haste. I don't recall if I got a beating for it, but I've never forgotten the thrill of standing my ground, even as a little kid, refusing to accept that which I detested, and kicking that old woman as hard as I could. It's one of my very favorite memories of early childhood. Even as a little kid, there was only so far someone could push me before I pushed back even harder.

I don't, and thus limit "underwear" to one of my favorite cockrings. And I don't mind one little bit when I catch some guy looking.

check your mailbox ....

I stand corrected. I am "an immigrant", for that matter. Still learning is a good thing. Thanks.

As LuxBrit above pointed out, it's "possible" for any guy to perform in either position. That said, it's hardly "natural" for us to assume the position we're simply not oriented to. Example: One of my "partners-in-Lust" was a Top that I'd seen at the big orgies, fucked guys next to while he was fucking, and we saw each other at enough orgies that we became friendly. Not "friends", just friendly. Turned out he lived fairly close by, and when I was keeping that cumdump, he'd come over and add his dna to the mix fairly often. Sometimes he'd call and invite me over when he had some hot piece over there. When covid came along, everyone was afraid to keep up what had been the "normal" routine, and lots of guys either just stopped fucking or settled down with a partner. It was sort of like a mini-appearance of hiv. So, every time I'd seen him, he was Topping, sometimes right next to me doing the same. We talked about what to do, I liked him, and amazingly, he seemed to like me, and we arrived at a solution: we'd get together and do the best we could to weather the covid storm. He didn't ask, but I knew from the orgies that he was a Top, and didn't possess a gigantic Cock. After some hemming and hawing, we agreed that we'd fuck each other one time, to see if it worked, masks and all. Now. I don't like to get fucked. At all. I did it occasionally for my life-partner, of course, but that was just because I loved him more than anything. Frankly, I can't imagine any guy wanting to fuck my ass, but - in the interests of getting to fuck him, I allowed him to fuck me. I didn't like it, but I allowed it in the interests of getting at least some Hole to fuck, and at least I liked him personally. I've never identified as a bottom, but - given the circumstances - I allowed it for that guy (and he's ... well ... modestly endowed) and we got through the worst onslaught of covid together. Once the covid shots were available, it wasn't spreading like initially, we drifted apart, and he finally fell in love and moved away. It was nothing more than two guys that trusted each other, getting through a pandemic with at least some raw hole to fuck. I'd be surprised if he ever thinks of me, and I seldom think of him now. It was nothing more than dealing with a problem, gritting the teeth, and getting through the pandemic together. What we're naturally oriented to do, and what we're able to do under certain deleterious circumstances, are two different things.

I agree. Thus, I don't use that word, as it is too amorphous in and of itself, to convey much of anything. I desire a mug of hot black coffee in the mornings, and I get it every single time I want it. I desire 3 squares a day, and I get them. I desire a new Ferrari too, but I don't have one. Merely desiring something and needing something are two different things. Needs are concrete, they are necessary and crucial to our well-being. Desires are more fluid, can vary from time to time, and are, by definition, unstable. The desire to have sex can be assuaged merely with your fist. The need for food, shelter, well being, overcomes desires every time. You're entirely correct, in that "desire" is fickle and and can move from one thing to another easily. From the Oxford: "a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen" makes clear that there are stronger urges, more foundational orientations than mere desire. "Desire" is, as you describe, quite fickle and nimble. We see a shirt in some store we desire, but can easily walk away when it's out of stock, or costs more than we want to spend, or whatever. Desires can come, they can go, and are too fluid to hang any real behavior-pattern on. Finding the best descriptor isn't always easy, and it can be a chore, but it's useful when we have only typed words to communicate. We're denied our facial expressions, vocal emphasis, all of that. Total Tops don't "desire" being the active partner, they simply "need" to be the active partner. They simply are. Same goes for total bottoms. Interestingly, some are both, like NWUSHorny. We're a widely varying lot, aren't we?

Well, maybe it's an "expanding" energy he's feeling, and you're subsequently receiving. Clearly, you're an important part of his life, and small wonder. If I'm guessing correctly, he's been inculcated with the notion that Men do this and not that, and he figures he's a Man (true), and therefore he "can't" do that. Now that you and he have become close sexually, he's confident enough to want to experiment a bit. Perhaps you've given him enough confidence that he trusts you so completely, he feels able to open up his mind to further sexual acts that (formerly) were so forbidden in his mind, he never dared to so much as try them. The spectrum of our sexuality is - as you well know - huge. I would suggest that he's so trusting of you, so confident in your support, that maybe he's sniffing around something he never dared to so much as think about before meeting, knowing you. Whether that possibility meshes with your expectations/needs/desires is, of course, another matter entirely.

Interesting question ... I think it's more of an "orientation" that encompasses other characteristics in addition to sexual ones. There's a certain amount of self confidence involved, and some measure of humility as well. There's also the - awareness? - that we're all connected, and we're able to "connect" in a very foundational way with our chosen "brothers". "Topping", in and of itself carries a more dominant cachet as opposed to "bottoming", but that's merely a device we've invented to identify ourselves. I don't think intelligence has anything to do with it, rather it's more an emotional bent to leading rather than following. There are Tops that are dull as dirt, and bottoms as bright as Einstein. It's more an awareness, a sense of self, confidence in ones self, hopefully with a big dollop of humility as well. There is a decent measure of self-confidence, of course, but that needs to be balanced with at least an equal measure of care for other's well-being too. Fucking is (or should be) a two-way street, with each guy having something to offer, and something offered to receive; not just the obvious, but also a meeting of the minds. That can apply to a life-long relationship, or merely a hot fuck in some dark corner - provided the Top possesses the qualities that, while not bluntly obvious, are never the less clearly there. Maybe a sense of being capable, being a leader - a follower not so much - self confidence cut with a generous helping of humility. And, obviously, a deep need to share the ultimate act of being "together" - as one - even when it's only for a brief time. You mentioned communication; whether direct or indirect, whether bluntly stated or subliminally apparent, fucking, breeding together is the ultimate "communication", as I see it. You also posit the most interesting, thoughtful questions.

When I moved here, I joined a local Dem organization (lgbtq+) that is mostly comprised of gay folks that were born around here, or at least grew up here (Ft. L.). We meet regularly, local candidates for local offices come and give short addresses as to why they should be elected to whatever local office they're running for, then we vote (via writing the name of our choice) on a little slip of paper), and the results are announced at the end of the meeting. When election time rolls around (here, we just finished the first round), and the results (meaning, the officially-backed candidates that via our meetings), are posted on the website. These are County-wide elections, so we can only vote for candidates in whatever District we live in, of course. There are easily hundreds of members, but mostly quite local. There is also the regular Democratic Organization which I also belong to, but - it's ... well, not as much "fun" as the queer one. 😜

On behalf of our Anglo ancestors, I offer an apology for the use of the word "Indian" (which was, and remains, an error) in referring to Native Americans. It started, near as I can tell, with the invasion of this continent by Anglos, and became a popular slang-term hundreds of years ago, to divide "us" and "them". Re-naming the indigenous probably helped our forbears denigrate those who actually survived the mass slaughter of these people, which device was used to such ill effect in denigrating another group of (enforced) immigrants. When I've commented on threads wherein issues pertinent to Native Americans are being discussed, I've used that term; likewise regarding our African American brothers and sisters, but I wonder if anyone has even noticed. At this point, it's likely useless to attempt to correct this error, but that doesn't excuse the error either.

So did I ... and so did my other half ... for years. Back in Chicago (some years ago - Chgo guys would know the situation now) there were tons of abs's - when one of us had a meeting downtown, it was expected that the drive back home would be a lot longer than the drive downtown. If both of us had to go downtown, all the better. It pissed off the secretary, but cry me a river, bitch. Here in Ft. L., there are (sit down if you're not already) none. There are a couple, out west of here, probably a 30 minute drive, but neither are anything at all compared to what I became accustomed to for all those years. It strikes me as a counter-productive thing for a municipality to shut down the abs's, which only invites locals to fuck in other people's back yards, behind some bushes along some street, wherever. Besides - the cops lose a source of income, in that there was a nicely-stuffed little envelope waiting for them every Friday afternoon at the bars, fuckjoints, and now they get $0.

1. Thank you for offering/providing that crucial service. 2. I am always surprised by those who can't seem to comprehend that basic, obvious fact. The local positions have a very direct impact on our neighborhoods, our libraries, all the necessary services we depend on, from garbage-pickup to guidelines the cops have to follow. Should the local libraries offer The Handmaid's Tale? How often should the streets be swept? How huge do the potholes have to be before they're filled in? Can the cops detain someone merely because they don't like their looks? The large-scale Federal actions impact us, of course, but local elections do so in a far more impactful way, and are a part of our daily lives.

Everyone that wants to be a productive citizen of the US must, therefore, vote. It's a basic duty of every citizen, whether they're voting positively or negatively, as we well know. Thus, even if someone feels "above" the vote/not-vote issue, holding oneself above the fray is nothing but an abject failure as a citizen of the US. Vote for someone, vote against someone, but if someone (who can) doesn't even bother to vote at all, they deserve no further attention from serious-minded citizens. Politically, socially, culturally, they've chosen to become the chaff amongst the wheat, and those who have no inclination to take their words or thoughts seriously can't be blamed. Absolution is easy, when we're the one offering it to ourselves, huh? 😇

You're no slouch at pol-emec's .... and you hide it well, too 😁

I've noticed that too. Science has a way of studying/coming up with treatments for illnesses that affect more folks than fewer. This time, capitalism is the hero.

Agreed. I think that in certain parts of the country (meaning, an appreciable distance from major metro areas), guys always fucked each other raw. Before hiv came along, here were some guys that "fetishized" condoms, but they were few and far between. Every (gay) guy that had sex, had it raw. Tons of guys stopped having sex altogether at first - and only gradually started fucking again, but always with a barrier. And, when treatments/preventative measures became available, condom-use plummeted. For the great majority, using a condom was merely an effort to preserve their health, as well as their very lives, and still maintain some shred of their former sexual-lives. I don't believe that for the vast majority, condom-use was ever the preferred way to fuck. Using condoms was only a way to keep on living, and once there were other options, barriers disappeared altogether. That said, I've always lived in big cities (Chgo) or magnet-cities for raw sex (Ft. L.). I haven't so much as seen one on another guy for literally decades.

Perfectly said .... thanks !!!

Our system of government depends on the act of choosing politicians, which is obviously a personal and confidential act. While it's true that we're (usually) spared having to add cultural fervor into the mix, the fact remains that we can vote for whoever we feel is best for the nation, and reflects our own world-view the most. It's a good thing that we have the ability to share our views, consider the views of others, and arrive at what seems the most intelligent choice for leaders. Everyone gets the same measure of respect, regardless of how "hot" the discourse gets. If, however, we believe that angry or judgmental arguments/counter arguments/counter-counter arguments will further convince those who believe other than what we personally believe, the process of electoral coming to choices tends to turn sour. Speaking only for myself, I very much enjoy the discourse on many topics and issues of the day here on BZ with guys I've never met, yet share an important personal link with. Politics is always interesting to me, as well as countless other guys here, but it's always best to exchange viewpoints in a positive and embracing way. If we devolve into a "can you top this" type of discourse, we all lose the benefit of considering other's viewpoints dispassionately. Even when we're diametrically opposed to other's views, we can at least maintain some measure of good will in that discourse. I know I've read & re-read my own contributions (before) clicking "submit", and often revise the more scintillating (and blunt) text, in favor of a less inflammatory flavor. Wouldn't it be cool if every single guy on BZ could spend Election Night in some giant hotel, rawfucking each other (after we've voted, of course), and no guy would even know until the next the last Hole had been fucked full, the last pair of balls drained, who won? 🤗

I've spent some time looking back at responses in this thread, and this^ is the closest I've come to what I commented about. I'm quite familiar with usage of the English language, particularly the Americanized version, and I've never lived (nor done much business) with what must be a Canadian dialect. Thus, if I misunderstood some colloquialism, please accept my apologies. My point was, and remains, no one "chooses" their sexuality. The only "choice" is whether we sublimate it for various (and negative) reasons, or we embrace it (our gay sexuality), know in our hearts (emotionally) and minds (intellectually), that we gay folks are not intrinsically evil, bad, wicked, but rather that our innate sexuality is basically a cypher in determining what kind of human being we choose (emotionally/intellectually) to be. Thus, those who accept, embrace, celebrate their innate sexual orientation have made the choice to be the men or women they were born to be, and able to live honest and productive lives without wasting all the effort to be closeted. I enjoy reading your responses, since it's obvious you're an intelligent and caring man. I also enjoy the discourse, the sharing of viewpoints of what seems to be around 80,000+ other guys, just as you do. Peace.

Perfectly said. It's what we do that counts.

I respectfully disagree: Whether we're "gay" or not is not a choice, it's an inborn, naturally achieved inclination. The only "choice" involved, is whether we accept our nature and act upon that inclination or not. In some parts of the world, some may feel repressed enough (culturally, religiously, whatever) to avoid their truth, and pretend to be what they're not (or worse, foreswear any sexual activity at all). That's not an invalid choice, it's merely a choice somewhere on the scale of regrettable-to-tragic.

I don't think it was your bottle .... MINE seems a little emptier than usual !!! 😁

That's excellent news !!! I'll buy you a beer or whatever next time ....

Or, for that matter, in any choice or situation.

per the above ^ .... There's a new theatrical production opening soon, about that tragic event at Ford's Theatre in DC. Maybe the Orange-utang will find his interest piqued, and oh ..... decide to sit in the Presidential Box of Ford's Theatre in DC. Some say history repeats itself, but that's more an old wives tale than anything else .....