The Versatile - the Excluded?

[otebbtop]

Just reading around....contemplating and responding to some posts and giving props on hot pictures, etc.

I'm seeing a good bit of things that are posted asking "What do you like when it comes to X" These are generally preceded by Tops: or Bottoms:

I also run across bottoms that accept tops only, or vice versa (although with much less frequency).

Do some versatile guys accept versatile only?

[seaguy]

I consider myself versatile, have always tried to be that way because it is less limiting. I have had times where I wanted to get fucked and the other guy was bottom only and it was frustrating. So I prefer other versatile guys but I have never looked for or posted an ad saying Versatile only. I just usually go with bottoming if I hookup with a top only vice versa if with a bottom only. I find that posting ads with such specific demands is limiting in that you're automatically telling those who are not versatile only that they are not welcome. I would rather have a larger pool of potential guys than narrow it down rather than have such specifics listed because I find those kinds of ads annoying, people who list all kinds of no's like no fems, etc...

[otebbtop]

I also like to broaden the horizons

Maybe more should start saying "versatile guys shall never be turned away"

[rawTOP]

I'm seeing a good bit of things that are posted asking "What do you like when it comes to X" These are generally preceded by Tops: or Bottoms:

That means when you top, when you bottom - so vers guys could answer both questions.

I also run across bottoms that accept tops only

Bottoms often look for 100% tops because they're considered "cleaner" (less likely to have STDs, less likely to be poz). Also - as Max Sohl once told me - bottoms are bottoms, vers bottoms are bottoms, vers guys are bottoms, vers tops are often bottoms, only tops are really tops. In other words, if a bottom just wants to get fucked and doesn't want the guy to ask the bottom to fuck him- then the only safe bet is a strict top.

[wood]

Also - as Max Sohl once told me - bottoms are bottoms, vers bottoms are bottoms, vers guys are bottoms, vers tops are often bottoms, only tops are really tops. In other words, if a bottom just wants to get fucked and doesn't want the guy to ask the bottom to fuck him- then the only safe bet is a strict top.

HAHAHA this is actually what my ex told me before, and one of the reasons our relationship could never go long term. He wanted an ONLY top guy. Which is really ironic considering since we broke up he is topping more than ever. In fact we just flip fucked today, lol.

IMO vers guys get a bad rap. Im literally 50/50 vers, even in practice, yet so many guys (including my ex) told me i was just a bottom. Dont get me wrong I love taking dick, but i love giving it too, and I cant just take it though and be satisfied like a true bottom.

Edited July 4, 2014 by rawTOP

[NWUSHorny]

I'm versatile and wouldn't limit myself to just versatile guys, I like fucking too much for that. If there is any kind of attraction we can fuck, flipping is merely a bonus.

I do think other versatile guys are better at both topping and bottoming. I've also found that guys with larger cocks are more likely to be versatile and flip with you. For some reason average and smaller versatile guys tend to turn total bottom when we hook up.

[ckt]

I think logically versatile is clearly the best.

But there's a fantasy dynamic of the 100% stud top and 100% whore bottom.

And that makes 'versatile' seem like a mundane reality compared to the fantasy dichotomy in porn.

So people try to structure their sex lives like that because it's a culturally received thing.

Back when I was a teen, and only had porn for company, I used to kinda dislike the idea of being versatile.

But now, a little older, I realize versatile guys can have more fun and be more skilled for it.

Just my $0.02.

[curiousone]

I don't mess with versatile guy in my personal life at all. They're too wish-washy and as a total bottom they make terrible partners in bed. They always try to grab and suck at my dick and once they top for me they either want me to fuck them or try to get someone else to fuck them. Just annoying.

I find 100% tops to be the most attractive thing in this world. Both my exes were total tops and it's amazing. There's something spectacular about a man who has never submitted to another man and wants nothing near or in his ass but just wants to fuck your holes all day long.

At the moment I'm single so I still do hookups. Not only are tops attractive but they have less risk for STDs whereas versatile guys...well they'll sleep with anyone.

[bearbandit]

I find it amazing that you can do such a thorough demolition job on versatile guys and finish with such a euphemism as "they'll sleep with anyone". I'll have you know I'm pretty picky about who I fuck with (did that offend you sensibilities?). And in what way are tops less risky for STIs?

I'm sorry, I've only been around the gay scene for forty years: never yet met a total top...

[otebbtop]

Again, exactly how did so many of our "total tops" end up with HIV? I don't think that all of them were IV drug users or getting dirty loads down their throat.

99% of the time i'm top. But whether top, versatile, or bottom - I'm with BearBandit...i'm picky.

Edited July 4, 2014 by otebbtop

[curiousone]

I'll admit I was a little harsh on versatile guys sleeping with anyone. But in terms of progression, total tops definitely have less of a risk than a versatile guy. Either way, tops have the least amount of risk no matter what way you roll the dice.

[Toxxic]

Never met a 'total top' either, frankly I always think 100 hundred percent bottoms are just lazy, or boring.

Of course got nothing against preferences, but why limit yourself to one rigid role?

I figure as men we've got both sets, so use 'em :-)