Discussion
  • Read More
    PelllRich Juzwiak
    3/03/15 9:23am

    Belief in the implicit supremacy of man-on-man sex is the closest thing I have to faith.

    GIF

    Wow. I don't doubt your sincerity, but this is alarmingly sexist against women.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      snowPelll
      3/03/15 9:36am

      Yeah. Got to love the implication that the sex I and anyone I choose to have it with can ever have is by definition inferior. Thanks Rich! Nice misogyny you have there. But you know, women, eh. The best thing about being gay is the fact that you don't have to deal with them, now isn't it.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      CleisthenesPelll
      3/03/15 9:37am

      nah

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    RegretsalotRich Juzwiak
    3/03/15 9:07am

    You know, there can be a heckuva lot of versatility in hetero sex as well, although most guys (at least anecdotally and in my particular circle) fear it.

    From fingers to vibrators to strap-ons, there's plenty of prostate-pleasin' possibilities.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Denzel WashyourtongueRegretsalot
      3/03/15 9:17am

      I guess it depends on how adventurous your girlfriend is right? Prostate play and the like are stimulants but unlike women, they aren't needed for men to reach the "peak." The current ms. Washyourtongue, doesn't want any type of advanced sex, which makes it get kind of boring since I'm all about her and try not to focus so much on me, however, she is very much the type to put on some rubber gloves and give me a "prostate exam" but, only if I ask her, and I rarely if ever do.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      DancingforJoyBeharRegretsalot
      3/03/15 9:43am

      Right - the genital/non-genital distinction in this article is its fulcrum... which is a shame because there is a good message here, but seriously get the fuck over you being the best, author. The gay-focus here could be replaced with a more welcoming tone, but, alas, then it wouldn't be zeitgeisty or fair or non-targeted or proof that this author might not be super-special etc.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    C.A. PinkhamRich Juzwiak
    3/03/15 11:41am

    ...you know that you can be both a top and a bottom in heterosexual sex too, right? Like...there are devices that make that possible. That's...that's a thing we have.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Hello_Madam_PresidentC.A. Pinkham
      3/03/15 11:53am

      I was real MEH about this line:

      the objective fact is that men who sleep with me are the only kind of lovers who can both genitally penetrate and be penetrated without outside assistance like non-erogenous body parts (fingers, toes), sex toys, or a third partner. Variable mutual pleasure is our gift. That is our X-Men power.

      Oh, ok, tell me some more about how a penis is the only *real* sex toy.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      C.A. PinkhamHello_Madam_President
      3/03/15 12:46pm

      "It doesn't count if it's not a penis" is...um...what?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Rowen (Paid Politcal Shill)Rich Juzwiak
    3/03/15 9:12am

    "In 2012, when I found myself single for the first time in almost a decade,"

    *sigh* #foreveralone

    Though, this might be TMI, but I'm over 6 feet tall, so everyone wants me to be the big burly manly top, and in some cases, that's totally fine, because ... I'm extremely tight back there. The few (extremely) patient dudes who have . . .gotten me to loosen up have shown me that it can be REALLY fun, but, I have a hard time getting to that point. So, without being overly descriptive (unless you want to be), how did you get past that?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      KirupuRowen (Paid Politcal Shill)
      3/03/15 9:31am

      Whereas I'm the small-framed short guy everybody wants to bottom, but nope, that doesn't work. 100% top, out of physical limitations. C'est la vie. FYI, tall or muscular bottoms are the best. :p

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Rowen (Paid Politcal Shill)Kirupu
      3/03/15 9:35am

      I feel like this is when I'm supposed to get all online internet flirty because I do actually like shorter guys (I mean, everyone is shorter than I am, but ... you get my drift).

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    StenchofaburnerRich Juzwiak
    3/03/15 9:08am

    Great post, Rich. One more thing I would add is how bottoming is tainted by pervasive misogyny as well. Or how it is perceived as something "feminine gays" are into and, as such, it is "inferior" to tops. Popular culture is full of jokes and stereotypes about this and, I wonder how it affects men's sexual exploration (gay men, of course but also hetero men who could be interested in pegging and other assorted forms of sexual pleasure).

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Rowen (Paid Politcal Shill)Stenchofaburner
      3/03/15 9:18am

      Sometimes I like to write things, and I wrote this thing that is about what you're talking about. ^_^ http://www.manhattandigest.com/2014/01/07/mea…

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      StenchofaburnerRowen (Paid Politcal Shill)
      3/03/15 9:21am

      Thank you for sharing, that was a good read :)

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    HiMyNameIsJayAgainRich Juzwiak
    3/03/15 9:09am

    In 2013, I went to a urologist because my cum was a weird consistency and I tested negative for all STDs. While he was examining my prostate, he asked me, "Has anyone ever told you that you're a real tight ass?" "Isn't that a good thing?" I joked back.

    I've seen this porn.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      sizor_sisterHiMyNameIsJayAgain
      3/03/15 9:37am

      Are we sure the urologist wasn't just trying to hit on Rich? Try to get 'em with a compliment.

      And between the Disneyland bathroom hookups and NYC sex parties, I've always assumed much of Rich's could be mistaken for a (hot) porn.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    RobiTheRobotRich Juzwiak
    3/03/15 9:34am

    This makes me laugh so very hard. Next time I'm pegging my husband with a strap on, I'm going to think of you and my feminine lack of versitility.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      swannysezRich Juzwiak
      3/03/15 9:17am

      I think that some of the reticence comes from more than just a superior attitude. There is also the fact that there are plenty of gay men find the mere mention of a vagina abhorrent and react to any mention of it not unlike a class of five year-olds being instructed to eat poop. There is also the reality that many, many, MANY, gay mean simply refuse to accept that any man might actually be fully straight and thus any discussion devolves to a "but would you" contest.

      That said, I find the idea of adhering to rigid sexual roles utterly silly for gay men. If'n ya got it, boys, use it.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        chickaboomRich Juzwiak
        3/03/15 12:44pm

        I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt here in assuming that you are speaking about sex in the context of your own experience from the perspective of your own sexuality, which is fine. Because let me tell you as a woman who has sex with men, I can make the exact same claims that versatility exists within the context of my sexual relationship, and that I can choose to be the dominant "top" partner or the submissive "receptive" partner during any given sexual session. Sex is just sex. It's an action that can be done in multiple ways by multiple people there's nothing really revolutionary about it.

        Reply
        <
        • Read More
          shite-hawkRich Juzwiak
          3/03/15 9:43am

          Belief in the implicit supremacy of man-on-man sex is the closest thing I have to faith.

          I find that unspeakably sad. Not that your faith be the superiority of one type of sex over the other, but that your faith in life be centered so much around some physical function. What is the point of the mind then? What is the worth of a man if it is only that he amuse himself?

          It is sad, Rich. Really very sad.

          I'm sorry.

          Reply
          <