Political Turn Off

[BootmanLA]

3 hours ago, ErosWired said:

If the offender is a Top, it indicates that he has started thinking with the Big Head, and you should shift his thinking to the Little Head.

That's fine for you, who makes it clear you never refuse any man's cock. I have tried to reformulate this next sentence so as not to be offensive, because I honestly am not judging you and your life and how you live it in any way - more power to you! - but: Those of us who have standards may well not want to do anything to shift thinking to his Little Head. I'd be more inclined to punch him in the nuts, on the assumption that anyone into the self-abuse that being a gay right-winger entails would surely appreciate the contribution to his pleasure.

[ErosWired]

19 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

That's fine for you, who makes it clear you never refuse any man's cock. I have tried to reformulate this next sentence so as not to be offensive, because I honestly am not judging you and your life and how you live it in any way - more power to you! - but: Those of us who have standards may well not want to do anything to shift thinking to his Little Head. I'd be more inclined to punch him in the nuts, on the assumption that anyone into the self-abuse that being a gay right-winger entails would surely appreciate the contribution to his pleasure.

My suggestion was predicated on the notion that it’s better to disregard the content of the political comment altogether and redirect matters to the business at hand. It is not true, however, that I will take any man’s cock under any circumstances. I am on record on this forum stating that I will not knowingly service a racist, a white supremacist, or any promoter of hate or bigotry. Having been fucked by more than a thousand men, I have no doubt that I have been rutted and seeded by such individuals who did not make their philosophies known to me, but I will decline to serve them if they make themselves known as such.

It does raise a question for those with “standards”, however. You select a guy to fuck and are pleased with the fuck; you anticipate a second round. Then he says something you find politically unacceptable and decide this disqualifies him from further fucking. Now rewind a few moments. You select a guy to fuck and are pleased with the fuck; you anticipate a second round. He starts to make a political comment but gets distracted and doesn’t end up saying the thought in his head. You didn’t hear it, he isn’t disqualified, and round two commences with lusty abandon.

Yet in both scenarios, you’re fucking the same guy. His philosophy is exactly the same, you just don’t know what it is. So if you actually have a certain “standard” that guides who you fuck, and you claim it’s important enough to discriminate by, shouldn’t you be screening for it before you select the sex partner in the first place? If being a ‘right-winger’ is a deal-breaker, shouldn’t you be asking about that before a hookup is agreed to? Because if not, that’s essentially “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, and that’s hardly standing on principle.

In my case, I have a governing principle that I accept any man because every man has a right to sexual expression and some men are denied the opportunity to express it. That principle is my baseline duty. Even men with questionable political views have the right to have this basic human need met, and thus my duty applies. I have a personal principle of not giving support to those who promote hate and bigotry. Where those two principles come into conflict I must make a decision which principle is most vital to uphold. I determine that denying the use of my body will likely not result in the complete loss of opportunity for the individual, therefore I am at greater liberty to express my opposition to his philosophy thereby. If I am unaware of his views however, and allow him to take his pleasure in my flesh and inseminate me, am still operating under a guiding principle; it is not an arbitrary decision.

[hntnhole]

9 hours ago, ErosWired said:

So if you actually have a certain “standard” that guides who you fuck, and you claim it’s important enough to discriminate by, shouldn’t you be screening for it before you select the sex partner in the first place?

When, in the places men cruise/fuck, some guy displays political clothing, regalia, of some persuasion or another, then it is that guy who has included his mental capacities into the "mating dance".  Most of us don't do that, since we're interested in matters of the flesh, not matters of the mind.  Given the numbers, years, I am certain that I have fucked many men whom I would disagree with on other matters.  The point is, we're not fucking each other's political perceptions, we're fucking their Holes.  It's only when others purposefully display their political persuasions, un-invited to do so - and thus intentionally force that view into the "Breeding-Equation", that we ourselves are also faced with decisions irrelevant to fucking the guy. 

Most of us - including you, given your obvious intelligence - have "standards" in all manner of aspects in our lives.  Those non-related-to-sex standards are to be left at home, not carried with us to the fuckjoints.  They are irrelevant to sexual interaction.  When political views (or any other, for that matter) are forced upon us (as in the original post), any man with a brain will react one way or another.  It is wholly inappropriate to introduce extraneous issues into sating our Lusts, since any man of any political view can be burning hot or repellently cold.  That quotient exists in the mind, alongside other perceptions such as political ones, and should stay there when the owner of that mind is cruising for sex.

Thank you.  

[BootmanLA]

16 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Yet in both scenarios, you’re fucking the same guy. His philosophy is exactly the same, you just don’t know what it is. So if you actually have a certain “standard” that guides who you fuck, and you claim it’s important enough to discriminate by, shouldn’t you be screening for it before you select the sex partner in the first place? If being a ‘right-winger’ is a deal-breaker, shouldn’t you be asking about that before a hookup is agreed to? Because if not, that’s essentially “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, and that’s hardly standing on principle.

Yes, and that's why I seldom (thought I can't say never) just get right to fucking when someone wants to. I'm not saying anyone else needs to proceed with that caution, but I prefer to. Again, this isn't meant to suggest any disapproval of your life and/or the choices you make, but I'm not going to ordinarily find myself in the situation where some guy is about to fuck me and I don't know at least a reasonable basic amount about him. That's just how I operate, not that I think everyone should, or that those who don't are somehow suspect.

I don't, however, have a checklist of questions that someone must answer before sex. There's a broad sense that I want him to be (at minimum) a decent person, and so I like to get at least a feeling for his ethics before sex. And in some of those general discussions it's usually possible to determine whether his views place him outside the realm of decency, as I define it - without coming at him with a numbered list that starts "Are you now, or have you ever been, a....".

It's not perfect, and of course some guys are deceptive and others will simply slip through the cracks. But like sex itself, it's about acceptable levels of risk.

[ErosWired]

11 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

determine whether his views place him outside the realm of decency

Heh. ‘Decency’ being a distinctly subjective measure. By some measures, by hosting Tops at hotel rooms and bathhouses, I automatically ensure that I don’t get fucked by ‘decent’ men because ‘decent’ men don’t fuck random cumdumps in cheap hotels and bathhouses. By some measures.

 

Samwise: It must be getting near tea-time, leastways in decent places where there is still tea-time.

Gollum: We’re not in decent places.

[BannedWord]

9 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

Heh. ‘Decency’ being a distinctly subjective measure. By some measures, by hosting Tops at hotel rooms and bathhouses, I automatically ensure that I don’t get fucked by ‘decent’ men because ‘decent’ men don’t fuck random cumdumps in cheap hotels and bathhouses. By some measures.

Your mileage may vary. 😃 

I reckon from the OP's original comments that there was a significant difference in the relationship. If you're in a hotel room or bathhouse and meeting anonymously, I'd find it difficult to believe anyone is doing a conversational screening based on politics or religion:

"So Anonymous Cocksman, do you think Gavin Newsome is a true-talent or a complete twat?" Yeah, somehow doubt that ever happens. "And what are your thoughts on the economy?" Yeah, I'll give you what everyone's been getting from the economy, no reach-arounds just like in real life. 😂

[Davidc]

Often I don’t even know the guys name ( or sometimes crusing ,seen his face.

let alone see if our political views chime !

[Guest]

I always try to keep politics and religion out of any conversation even if it's a potential one off meet.  If it comes up I might disagree with a view point, but I would not let that colour my view of the person as they are entitled to their view, and I would hope they would reciprocate if my views were opposite to theirs. 

[BBArchangel]

I don’t wanna to bring politics into a hook up at all ever. But if I woke up to a home and there’s a 4’ x 5’ “Trump in 2024” sign in the yard or a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag waving over the door, there just isn’t going to be any conversation. Without me bringing any politics up he’s already told me his.

[mjkuhl]

On 11/25/2011 at 6:47 AM, Hotload84 said:

"I'm in the 'why are you even discussing this' camp. I can be as political as anyone, but these discussions do not belong in the context of sex."

Well put, MascMountainMan. This would be my take. I don't think I've ever been targeted with political analysis in post (or pre-) coital engagement, but were I, I think I'd abruptly remove myself from the scene.

Hear, Hear!!!!

[hntnhole]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

There's a broad sense that I want him to be (at minimum) a decent person, and so I like to get at least a feeling for his ethics before sex. And in some of those general discussions it's usually possible to determine whether his views place him outside the realm of decency, as I define it -

I agree completely, if the fuck is to take place in my home.  That said, I almost never invite "fresh" Hole into my home; much prefer to hit the backrooms/fuckjoints and get the sweat off my brow.  I need to have a really good idea of who the guy actually is before I let him come over, and even that can be tenuous.  

[NEDenver]

If it's a hookup, I probably won't know.  But I'm not going to engage in any form of relationship, even as casual as fuckbuddy with someone who is awful.

[ErosWired]

4 hours ago, TheSRQDude said:

I reckon from the OP's original comments that there was a significant difference in the relationship. If you're in a hotel room or bathhouse and meeting anonymously, I'd find it difficult to believe anyone is doing a conversational screening based on politics or religion

In my room at the bathhouse I actually end up having a surprising number of non-fuck-related conversations, but for some reason I also tend to get a bizarrely high number of guys who wander in looking for directions, or because it’s their first time and they don’t know what to do, etc. It may have something to do with the fact that I always put a sign on my door that says Welcome - Cum On In! or because I just look like I have the friendly sort of ass you can talk to. Who knows? I’ll talk to anybody.

[BannedWord]

6 hours ago, ErosWired said:

In my room at the bathhouse I actually end up having a surprising number of non-fuck-related conversations, but for some reason I also tend to get a bizarrely high number of guys who wander in looking for directions, or because it’s their first time and they don’t know what to do, etc. It may have something to do with the fact that I always put a sign on my door that says Welcome - Cum On In! or because I just look like I have the friendly sort of ass you can talk to. Who knows? I’ll talk to anybody.

Directions?!? I would have thought that any Top could provide those to a willing bottom. LOL
(obviously kidding, but I'm sure they appreciate the public service, and I hope you're getting a discount from the proprietor).

[ErosWired]

56 minutes ago, TheSRQDude said:

I hope you're getting a discount from the proprietor

Unless you count getting fucked by the guy behind the counter when he got off shift the first time I visited, no, no discount.

I don’t mind guys stopping in with random questions. I like to think they’re also window-shopping…