An Opinionated Daddy's View of Life

Friday, October 30, 2009

I Wish I Had Nothing Better to Do Than Waste My Time....

There are certain mysteries in life. Even at my advanced age, there are just some things I don't understand, nor do I ever expect to.

I chat online a lot. Too much, to be honest. But, as I've mentioned before, it is sort of the 'Seattle thing' to do so. We are a very polite, but extremely cold and shy lot up here in the Pacific Northwest. So, for many of us, being 'online' is a social venue which allows us to 'meet' folks and make friends, etc.

As I've mentioned before, I tend to visit sites which cater to younger/older interactions (DH and SD, for example). Since, by their nature, those sites tend to be more 'sexually' oriented than friendship oriented, I tend to use 'evocative' nicknames to make sure I attract the right 'types' of guys with whom I'd be interested in chatting. I am a top, so something along those lines is usually included. I am 'daddy' so something along those lines is also usually 'in the mix' when I am coming up with a snappy nickname to use. I am neither the smartest nor wittiest person online, so it can be hard sometimes to come up with something fun. Still, I think I've picked some good nicks along the way. I go for attention grabbing, without being crude.

Still, no matter what I do, the vast majority of guys who chat me up, tend to be older, fatter, hairier guys. Nothing wrong with that. I am happy to chat with almost anybody. But, often, and I just don't get why, the conversation almost immediately starts to 'veer' into the, 'I know I am older than you are, and I know you say you like younger, but....'. Or, "I am sorry that I am older, but....." What is up with that?

I know there are way more older guys that like younger guys than the opposite. I am intimately familiar with being an 'older' guy and the fact, therefore, that it means that I've essentially gone from being a 'hot guy' (yes, looking back at some old pictures as I was recently, I was pretty hot back in the day. I didn't think so, of course, but if I'd known then what I can see now......) to being a 'kink' or a 'fetish'. I've come to terms with it. It is, like it or not, sort of the way our society operates. Unlike others, we don't venerate age, we devalue it. As I often say, "I don't make the rules, I am just bound like the rest to play by them".

To me it seems rather self-destructive or masochistic to set yourself up for failure and disappointment by taking the time to chat up someone who is clearly, CLEARLY not going to be interested. If, that is, what you seek is some kind of connection other than just chatting. I don't know about you, dear readers, but I work two jobs, have a crazy dog, elderly parents, and own an nearly century old home. I've got better things to so than to waste time chatting up guys, when I am online, who I can tell from the outset won't be interested in chatting with me. Okay, my time would be better spent doing almost anything other than chatting online, but as I've said before, it is what we 'do' here. And it is my time to waste, not yours.

Don't be, 'sorry I am older', you can't help that fact, number one; and, number two, there isn't anything wrong with being older. Have a little self respect. There are lots and lots of younger guys who do like older guys. I am not one of them, so stop bothering me and wasting my time and go after the ones who do.

If I see a profile online which says a guy seeks, 'athletic'. Or if it says he seeks, 'under 30' or 'smooth' or 'taller' or 'cut', I am none of those things, so I don't bother sending him a message. And I certainly don't, if I am in a chatroom someplace, send him an IM and try to initiate a conversation. Why in the hell would I? All I am likely to do is piss him off and get ignored or brushed off. Isn't my time better spent chatting with the guys who say they seek, 'stocky, hairy, uncut", etc. (all things I am)? It sure seems like it to me.

Now I know I'll get comments and flames about how I must think I am special or something (I've commented on this before in previous posts, you can tell this is one of my soapbox issues, as I am repeating myself on this issue) . Don't waste your breath. I am not special. I don't think I am 'all that'. Heck, for the life of me I can't understand why anybody ever (or has ever) thought I was attractive. Lucky for me, there are guys out there who do, not many, granted but some. I don't know why, but boy am I glad. I know what I want and I am explicit about saying so. You do both of us a favor by paying attention to those facts.

Have a little respect for yourself. You, like anybody, deserve to be valued and appreciated. There is bound to be someone out there who thinks, for one reason or another, that you are hot. Not, and I repeat, NOT ME. Look for the guys might, not the ones who don't. Or, if you are going to go after guys who are plainly not going to be interested, grow a pair and expect to get pinged on and don't get pissed off or hurt when it happens.

Sigh, this stuff just makes me tired.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Since When is "Masculine" a Code Word for 'Fat'.

Have you ever noticed, not like this is a unique observation, that most online profiles are full of 'buzz words'? Words like, 'swimmer's build' or 'athletic'. The word I see most often on the profiles of bigger, older guys is, 'masculine'. Well, I hate to break it to you gentlemen, but fat does not equate to masculine. I don't subscribe to the idea that there is a 'standard' of masculinity. I do believe, that like youth, being 'masculine' is a quality that many people in this community admire, even if they don't always define it in common way. I understand, therefore, that people would 'lead' with a description like that. It is more than appropriate to put a 'positive' spin on how you describe yourself. I do it. I use 'stocky' or 'burly' or 'sturdy' to describe my 'robust' physique. But putting a positive spin on how you look or how you act is appropriate, lying or claiming a quality you don't possess isn't. For years I wanted to be 'tall and slender'. Well, tough noogie. I am short and stocky (5'8", 215 on my scale this morning). It finally dawned on me that lots of tall, slender, younger guys like 'opposite' guys. So I stopped regretting that I lacked those qualities. When meeting someone new (especially someone I've cultivated online), I'd much have them be 'pleasantly surprised' when they meet me than be hopelessly disappointed. If you are big, say so. Don't hide behind 'code' words. Do you really think that if you turn out to be some nelly guy like Christopher Lowell or you are what the bear community might call a, "polar bear", that because you said, 'masculine' in your profile someone meeting you for the first time will be convinced, despite not desiring someone with such characteristics? The beauty of our 'scene' is that there are always guys out there who desire someone like us. The group of those folks may be small. Heck, there are days when so few folks chat with me that I think being a chunky, older, hairy guy makes me some bizarre fetish (like breath control, or cross dressing). But, the fact is, there are quality boys, of the type I like, who do and will continue to find me appealing. I don't know why, I don't get the attraction to stocky, hairy, older guys at all. But, there are guys that do. And I think success is more likely when you are real and honest in your profiles.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

What the H*ll is Wrong With Guys on the Internet?

You know, I use the internet a lot for both connecting and 'connecting', if you know what I mean. While I tend to visit the same cities over and over again (where I've established connections), sometimes I do visit new places. At the moment, I am at one of those new places. Not, I might add, a place I hope makes the list of places to which I will return.

Anyway, since I use the internet to meet people, I tend to use the same venues on which I chat to meet new people who live in the places to which I travel. I am starting to wonder why I bother. The flake quotient is extremely (and I do mean EXTREMELY high).

For example, one guy with whom I chatted wanted me to call him late, late at night before I arrived. When I explained that I am an old man, who was taught that you don't call before 10:00am or after 10:00pm, he got pissed off. When I arrived in this dismal place on business, I started work right away and worked for several days. After a few days, when I had the chance to check in via email, he got pissed off because I'd not contacted him immediately and that I didn't rearrange my entire work schedule to accommodate chatting or meeting him. Next there was a guy I chatted with, who when he IM'd me after I arrived, gave me grief because I'd left him 'hanging'. He'd somehow gotten the idea that we had specific plans to meet and was all upset that I'd led him on. Really? You chat with someone once, perhaps exchange a couple of emails, and you are engaged? That seemed to be his impression.

I just don't understand it. I know people are lonely and I know some people find dating and hooking up frustrating...but how can you leave someone 'hanging' to whom you've never even actually spoken? How can you expect someone to rearrange their entire schedule, especially when they are traveling on business, to make meeting you their highest and most important priority? I just don't get it.

Okay, like many travelers, I get bored spending so much time alone when I travel to a new place. Also, it is nice to make friends and have social experiences when traveling. While my horndog days are mostly behind me, still, it would have been nice to have the option of getting some 'attention' if the opportunity had presented itself and I'd been in the mood. So, really. You think it is safe to go to some stranger's hotel room? Really, you think someone is going to feel safe inviting you to their hotel room, when you've never even spoken? I would think in this day and time, caution would be a valued trait, not an unvalued one. I've been very lucky so far. The boys I've met during my travels have been generally nice, sexy, good boys who I was very lucky to meet and spend time together. I have boys I see in Honolulu, Hilo, San Diego and DC, some with whom I've been friends for 6 or more years at this point. Still, at some point, luck might turn against me. So, caution seems like a good idea. Don't you think?

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Top = GOOD, Bottom = BAD, right?

Wrong. I've always been surprised by the lack of respect 'bottoms' get in our culture. I mean, if there weren't bottoms, what would tops do? To me, as a confirmed, total top, like a tennis player, my 'game' improves when I play against a more skilled 'opponent'.

So many guys seem to think that 'bottoming' is somehow 'less' than topping. I don't get it. You see many guys advertise as 'versatile', not because they are versatile, but because for so many in our culture identifying as a 'bottom' is looked down upon. I've never understood this attitude in our culture. Granted we all have our ideas about what a 'good' bottom is. I like submissive, eager to please bottoms ("yes, daddy, do me." "Do me like the b*tch I am." "What can I do to make you happy, daddy?) not bossy, 'power' bottoms who merely want me to be a meat dildo available for their pleasure ("Don't kiss me so hard". "Don't cum in my mouth". "Only f*ck me in X position").

To me, the whole 'top' and 'bottom' cycle is about sharing. Ideally it is about both top and bottom receiving enjoyment and pleasure for the sex act. It is kind of like a circle. The bottom chooses to let the top 'in charge'. It is therefore incumbent upon the top to value and appreciate that opportunity.

Back when I was younger and more ignorant, I used to always think that the top was 'in charge' or that it was incumbent upon him to do the 'chasing'. I was set straight in two separate conversation with two different bottoms at right about the same time. In essence they both made statements along the lines of, "The tops that I pursue......". When I questioned them (again, being young and ignorant, thinking that the top should do all the pursuing), both said (essentially), "look, it boils down to this. You guys like to think you are in charge, but if I don't feel like letting you inside, you aren't getting in there, now are you?"

In some ways, if you think about it, really the idea that the top is 'in charge' is kind of a myth. Sure, we like to think we are in charge. And sure, many bottoms derive much pleasure from being 'used' for someones pleasure, but really, think about it. In that moment, when the bottom is on his knees, sucking for all he is worth, and the top is 'in the zone' (his eyes glazing, his mind totally focused on shooting), who really has the power? When you are behind some hot bottom, his face down, his ass up, presenting that sweet, firm, round boipussy for you to use, and again, in those few seconds toward the 'conclusion' when you are rutting in top of him, like an animal, drooling, grunting, your mind almost blank from the powerful, prehistoric urge to 'breed'....who is really in charge? Who is really in control? It is his prostate that is getting massaged. It is him who has 'given' himself to you, opened himself up to you. You may want to think you are in control. He may want to think the same thing. But really?

I may want my boy to be the 'b*tch', at least in the bedroom (by 'b*tch, I mean, I want him to be a submissive, total bottom). I may want his focus to be on my pleasure, ideally deriving as much pleasure as I in the process. But, to be honest, I may call him 'boy' while f*cking him, but if I didn't really respect and value him, and appreciate the opportunity to mount him, I'd not really want to put my dick inside him.

What would all us confirmed, total tops do, without confirmed total bottoms? I don't know about you, but I'd be miserable. Perhaps you should think about that the next time you are tempted to (or you hear someone) bad mouth bottoms.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Remind Me, Just What is the Definition of Insanity?

The old saw says it is doing the same thing over and over again, and yet expecting a different result. This is something I see all the time online. I see the same faces, the same profiles, the same pictures over and over and over again on the various online venues I visit. Sure, like me, many of these guys use the Internet to be 'social'. They may be partnered or whatever. But many, MANY of these guys (both daddies and boys) are still looking for a 'someone special', however they might define it (boyfriend, partner, buddy, etc.).

I sometimes chat with these guys. And I always suggest that perhaps if what they are doing (the venues they visit, the pictures they use, the profiles they post, etc.) isn't getting them the results they seek, perhaps they should try something new. Nearly every time I suggest this, I get slammed, "how dare you suggest that I (insert my suggestion here: get a new pic, shave off the ugly facial hair that makes them look ten years older, change nicks to better reflect what they seek, and so on and so forth...) change". Well, for heaven's sake, if you aren't getting what you want, and you are doing the same things over and over again, perhaps it makes basic common sense to simply try something different.

We all get stuck in 'ruts'. But sometimes it is those ruts that are keeping us in place, rather than moving us forward. If you are a 'daddy', for example, who (online or in person) holds back, for fear of being thought of as a 'troll', then time to step up. If you are a young guy, whose had the same 'look' for the last ten years (either because you inside on wearing an ugly beard/goatee/moustache, or because you refuse to update your pictures), perhaps it is time to change. We are all so much more than our profile pictures. But, unfortunately, in our little social arena (the bar scene or the Internet) it is the 'look' that is most likely going to catch someones eye first.

We all make a lot of assumptions about the way others think and feel. And many of us have very fragile self-images, so once we've got ourselves 'set' on one, it is hard to change. But, sometimes just a small change is the momentum one needs to foment positive change. A lot of older guys, for example, fear being thought of as 'trollish' if they hit on younger guys. Yet, in the 'daddy/boy' culture, since the 'daddy' is supposed to be dominant, the 'boys' expect the daddy to make the first move. So, what does this cause? Well, nobody moves anywhere. I always tell lonely boys that the 'secret' to meeting daddies, is being willing to take a risk. What have you got to lose? There are way more older daddies looking for 'boys' than vice versa. A well-timed smile, or 'hey' while standing at a bar, might be just the opening needed to start a conversation which otherwise might not ever get a chance.

Monday, August 24, 2009

It is Completely Appropriate to Date a Circuit Boy Young Enough to be Your Son. Isn't it?

No. Not really. Upon reviewing my posts, the 'grumpiness' seemed mostly focused at the younger guys. So, I thought it appropriate to write a grumpy post about older guys, just to show a little fairness.

Okay, older guys, really? You really, honestly think you are going to find the 'perfect' boy? You truly think you can have a serious, long-term relationship, with a 20 year old circuit boy/skater boy/Marine/firefighter (whatever your fantasy might be), who possesses the body of death, thinks chunky, hairy, wrinkled old guys are hot, AND, who also happens to make enough money so that you can share a life together not requiring you to support him (or make a serious reduction in your quality of life)? Please. Talk about self-delusion.

Just like the younger guys seem to think if they haven't found 'the one' by age 25, they are doomed, too many older guys spend their entire lives in search of the 'perfect' boy. He, of course, must be very mature for his age, yet act like a total 'boy' (or girl, for some of you folks that like that sort of thing...not my taste, but I try not to be critical) when required. He MUST be in his 20's, because lord knows, a 'boy' over 30 is no boy. He must find older guys totally hot. He must be willing to do whatever 'daddy' wants (top/bottom, everything in between), and not have any 'demands'. He must not expect to get supported, but be okay with a little 'spoiling'. He must be perfectly comfortable with the idea that as soon as it turns out his firm, tight, hot little ass starts to sag (despite, of course, the fact that he is supposed to think your flabby, saggy, ugly ass is the hottest thing going), you'll start looking for fresher meat. He is essentially supposed to be both perfect and static (always look young and hot, etc.).

Do any of you older guys have any idea how crazy and unhealthy this thinking is? Look, I am the last one to tell you that you can or should 'force' yourself to be attracted to someone you aren't. That isn't my point at all. But, aren't you damning yourself to a life of disappointment? There are lots and lots of single, younger guys, who against all odds, think older guys are hot. They just all don't look like Ryan Phillipe. They are crawling all over the Internet. All you have to do is look on DH, SD, etc. and see profile after profile of younger guys looking for older. Sure, some are fake, some are flakes, some have more issues than almost anybody could deal with, but still. Why is it so many worthy older guys, pass by equally worthy younger guys....both ending up alone on a Saturday night. I know why: unrealistic expectations. How many of you 'older' guys, would NEVER have gone on a date with a guy over 30....when you were in your 20's? Almost all of you, I'll bet. It is the height of arrogance, therefore, for you to expect the younger guys you fancy to do it when you wouldn't have.

Sure, in a perfect world, hot young guys would throw themselves at us old farts. They'd be forever young and beautiful, and always ready to get down and get 'funky' with their favorite daddy. But, this isn't a perfect world. Maybe it is time to start considering a 'boy' over 30 (or heaven forbid, even over 40). Maybe it is time to at least try to see if 'chemistry' works with guys a little outside your normal 'comfort zone'. Maybe you should think about hitting the gym now and again. Or, maybe cutting your nails, or brushing your teeth.

Again, I am not in any way suggesting that anybody 'force' themselves to be attracted to someone they can't be. The sexiest boy I've ever met ( and I do mean the sexiest, full stop, bar none, the sex is the best I've ever had in 25 or 26 years of being out), has a gut, a hairy ass, and is a conspiracy theorist and tends to be just a tad paranoid. My type, not as I usually define it (well, he didn't always have the gut, that came later...but still), but the chemistry is undeniable. The sex was amazing (we were long-term 'buddies', he lives on the other side of the country, in a state to which I often travel on business. We didn't date, it wasn't that type of relationship, we both knew it), and, he happened to be a very, very nice young man with whom I greatly enjoyed spending time.

I am often flamed for having such narrow 'tastes'. Yet, by being a little 'flexible', I was blessed to have such a great experience, with such a quality younger man. Maybe some of you other old guys should try being a little more flexible too? What have you got to lose?

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Monogamy, What's That About?

Okay, so, I am one of those guys who thinks monogamy is a good thing. I think it is an important 'goal' for a serious relationship. That said, I think it is more likely to be an important (ideally long) 'stage' in a relationship, rather that a permanent 'state' of one. I've known too many guys to cheat. I've seen too many relationships fail because someone cheated. I've seen too many relationship die prematurely because the couples declared themselves monogamous after 3 weeks. Come on, are you really even a couple after 3 weeks? In my opinion, gay guys are 'bad' at relationships because we come so 'late' to them. While our straight peers are having their crushes and their flirtations and doing their 'dating' in their teens, many of us don't get to experience that. At least, not really. So, many of us tend to confuse passion and or sex for 'love'. I am the first one to say that passion must exist (or have existed at some point) for a relationship to be a romantic one rather than a friendship. That said, just because you lust after someone, doesn't mean you can or will be able to 'love' them. Does lust last? No. Do the embers of passion last? No. Relationships change over time. Having gone through this myself, I can tell you I'd much rather have you say, "Look, I love you, we have/had a great sex life, but there is just something I am not getting that I need to get. Is it okay that we come up for a plan to make that happen?", than to find out you've been cruising the internet, picking up guys and taking them home to f*ck in our bed (which is what my ex did, giving me crabs in the bargain) when I am out of town on business. I think the standard of monogamy is too tough for most guys to manage. Too many relationships place too much emphasis on monogamy and then if someone 'slips', the relationship comes apart. To me, as hard as such a discussion might be, it is better to talk about this stuff, then to 'cheat'. I think it should take a couple a while to 'date' before they make any decisions about monogamy and I think they should talk about it along the way.

Sex, Should it Be a 'guilty' Pleasure?

I don't understand guys who feel 'guilty' about the kind of sex they enjoy. I mean, as long as it doesn't involve children, animals, or other defenseless beings, sex exists to be enjoyed, right? Sure, for the breeders out there, procreation is also high on the list of reasons why sex exists, but I think even they are supposed to enjoy it when they do it, aren't they? I used to have this friend. His idea of 'great' sex, was to go to a park (one known for its cruising environment) and blow as many guys (ideally in groups) as he could, all they while they (the blowees) calling him, 'bitch', 'boy', 'whore', etc. Then, after being 'humiliated' in such fashion, he'd go home, drop into a deep depression, and I'd get a call from his boss saying, "Patrick hasn't been to work in 3 days, can you go and check to make sure he isn't hanging from the curtain rod for me please?" Okay, I get that wanting to be a bukkake bitch in a public part may not be the healthiest of sex acts, but clearly this kind of sex 'did' something for him. It was cathartic or therapeutic, or heck, at least while it was occuring, just plain fun (for him, anyway). Don't you think we all have enough stuff to be depressed about, without doing something we 'enjoy' and then feeling unhappy with ourselves for having done it? I mean, what is wrong with a consenting adult, having sex in a way they enjoy, with other consenting adults? Nothing, at least not as far as I can tell. It seems like a complete waste of time, energy and effort to express oneself as a sexual being, and then feel bad about it later. I just don't get it.

It is The 21st Century, Right?

I am always surprised (not that you, casual reader aren't surprised as well) with guys that refuse to have a picture when they post profiles online. I get that some guys need to be 'discrete'. I mean, I was in the military for 30 years, I understand the need for some guys to be circumspect. But, please. If you have a profile on SD or DH or MH, etc....a site that is only visited by guys who like other guys, how much risk is there really? Oddly, guys without pictures in their profiles seem to be the 'pickiest' about how other guys look. If you are online, you should either have a picture (or pictures, ideally current ones, or at least pix that represent what you really look like) available. Do guys without pix really expect to garner much 'attention'? I don't think so. Speaking of pictures, why do some guys post the most unflattering pictures possible? I mean, sure, we are our worst critics and some of us just don't have that many pictures taken, but, come on. Do guys that post pictures which make them look like gargoyles really expect anybody to chat them up? You see this a lot with 'interest' sites. I myself, for example, like a boy with nice feet. I dont' 'do' anything with them, to me feet are hot. And I prefer to date boys with nice feet. If you go to a 'feet' site, though, you see some of the nastiest, ugliest, most digusting feet possible. GROSS! Dicks, the same thing. How often do you see the ugliest dicks on the planet posted on someone's profile? I just don't get it.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

You WILL be Attracted to Whom I Think You Should be Attracted!

Why is it that when you specify or state a 'type' preference (for me it is taller, smoother, younger guys, ideally total bottoms) that some guys confuse that 'preference' with an expectation or sense of entitlement to receive the attention of guys of that type? Whenever I post online (DH,SD, MH, Craigs, etc.) I receive all sorts of flaming emails about how unrealistic it is for me to desire who (or is it whom?) I desire? It is as if they (those doing the flaming) get to decide to whom I should be attracted. I don't get that. I don't know about you, casual reader, but I am not capable, not at all, of dating/hooking up/romancing someone to whom I have no attraction. The fact that I have a 'type' in no way indicates that I think I 'deserve' for guys who look like that to desire me, it just means I know what I like. I am, for heaven's sake, a middle aged man, whose been 'dating' etc. for over a quarter of a century. I think by now I have a pretty good sense of what makes 'Mr. Happy' smile. If my 'tastes' are too narrow then I am the one that 'suffers' if I can't find guys who fall into my taste spectrum into whose taste spectrum I also fall. It is the height of pretentiousness for someone else to criticize me for having a preference, and 'demanding' that I change that preference. Sigh, I just don't get it.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Older Guys are stable and mature, aren't they?

One of the oddest dichotomies of intergenerational dating is the disconnect between the maturity levels of the two people involved. Often the younger guy prefers older guys, not because we are sexy and funny, but rather we are more 'mature' and more 'stable', with less 'drama'. Trust me, this isn't necessarily true. Old guys have their own issues and insecurities. These may not be as 'bad', but they are there, just different. We worry about our potency and performance. We worry about getting fat and bald. We worry about our prostates and our salaries. Do we have more life experience? Yes. Do we care about things other than Britney and Paris? Yes. Do we want you to respect and value us for these things? Yes. But do we want you to seek us out because we have less 'drama'? No. We want you to enjoy our company, think we are sexy (I know, I know, that is hard for many young guys to believe, that some younger guys actually find older guys appealing, but it is true), and think we are individuals of quality.

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

If You Don't Give Him Enough at Home, He Might Not Always Be at Home

Why do 'older' guys who actively seek younger guys, when they finally find a hot boy to call their own (a guy with a great body, who is 'in love' with them, who is eager to please and be pleased) do the older guys not have frequent sex with them? I hear this all the time from many of the 'boys' I chat with, "I have a great boyfriend, he is sexy, and sweet, and I really love him. But, he won't f**k me very often". Or "He won't f**k me hard, like the bit*h I know I am". Or, "he thinks rimming or giving head is 'nasty', so he won't do it to me or let me do it to him". I may be old (46) but I still have a sex drive. I can't be in bed with a hot boy and not want to be making love to him or f**king him like a bit*h. Don't these older guys realize that a horny, hot, younger guy has his pick of older guys? That if you don't give him enough at home, he might not always be at home?

Cute? Cute? Cute?

Why do guys use words like 'cute', or 'younger' or 'hot' in expressing what they seek in postings (example: 'Please be hot!' or 'Hot guys only') but then don't spell out what 'hot' or whatever means? Guys that find me 'hot' like chunky, hairy, older guys. I don't. So, if I see a profile which says, "must be 'hot', I assume I likely don't quality. If you don't define what 'hot' is, how will anybody know. Are we just supposed to guess?

Tops versus Bottoms

Why do some guys who claim to be bottoms (oral or anal), show pictures in their online profiles of their dicks? As a top, I'd much rather see their ass or their mouth. I mean, in the sexual context, a top usually couldn't care less what his partner is 'packing'. Same question in reverse. Why do some guys who claim to be tops, show off pictures of their asses and not their dicks? I mean, how much sense does that make? Alternatively, why do some guys say they are "total bottoms" and then after you start seeing them, suddenly express and interest in topping? Again, same question in reverse. Why do some guys who claim to be total tops, throw their legs up in the air at the slightest provocation? I just don't get it.

The Height of Narcissism

Why is it considered 'self loathing' to be attracted to someone who is an 'opposite' rather than a 'similar'? Why does not wanting to have sex with someone who looks like me (stocky, hairy, older) somehow indicative of me thinking that I am some how 'the sh*t' or that I think I 'deserve' someone better than I should expect. I don't think I deserve someone better, I just know to what kind of guys I am attracted. Isn't wanting to have sex with yourself (or someone that looks like you) the height of narcissism? It seems like it to me. And why do guys to whom I am not attracted take it so personally when I politely tell them so? It is as if somehow my tastes or opinions 'matter' or take precedence over others. They give me some sort of power that I can't possibly possess. The fact that I may not find someone attractive has no baring on their general 'attractiveness', rather, only their attractiveness to ME. I don't want to have sex or date someone to whom I am not attracted. If I could do that, I'd be able to date chicks I also don't want to have sex or date someone that doesn't find me attractive. Why would they (those who flame me)? That is what seems self-loathing to me, to demand someone find you attractive who doesn't and then attack them for what they like, when it doesn't include them.

To Flame or Not to Flame? Is that Even a Question?

Why do people flame others for having opinions? I never get that. The internet venues I use to meet people with similar interests are, at least in part, designed to promote interaction and discussion. This is the very essence of what this sort of venue is all about. Heck any personals venue (Craiglist,,, etc.) is designed for the specific purpose of 'advertising' for what you seek (or at least what you hope to find). So, I am always surprised when a user takes it upon himself to flame another for holding a differing 'opinion' or seeking a particular type of person. I have things of which I am certain (I hate onions, and detest facial hair on younger guys). Does that make them 'right', no. It just makes them right for me. So, while I may question what someone else says or believes, I'd never be so ill-mannered as to attack them personally for holding a thought or belief different from my own. Don't these 'flamers' have lives? Wouldn't their time be much better served chatting up folks with similar or complimentary interests, rather than bitching at people who don't?

Bears, and Twinks, and others? Oh My!

Why is it that when you say, "I am not into bears or chubs" guys take that to mean, "I am therefore ONLY interested in twinks". As if there are not other guys in between. My ex, who I met when he was 29 and I was 34, is still hot, very hot (at 42) and he clearly isn't a 'twink'. He just isn't a chunky, hairy guy, with a bad goatee, who looks 10 years older than he is.

Bottom 'Dads', No Such Thing

Bottom dads? No such thing. Being a 'daddy' is intrinsically dominant. So, it is oxymoronic (well, just plain moronic, anyway) to call oneself a 'bottom daddy'. While it is true that I am only attracted to 'boys' who are younger (though when I say younger, I mean just that...not necessarily young enough to be my child, anything 40 or younger will usually do), in fact 'daddy', as it means dominant can be a younger top, while the 'boy' is an older bottom. It is about the 'roles' they play. Being an older guy who likes to bottom for younger ones makes you an older 'boy', not a 'daddy'.

Why do 'boys'/'hunters' Do That?

Why do some younger guys, who prefer older guys, seem to do everything in their power to look older? Growing facial hair, for example. All that does is make a 'boy' look older. Well, since most daddies prefer 'younger' boys/hunters, it would seem antithetical for a boy/hunter looking for a 'daddy' to try and look 'older'. I just don't get it. I keep hearing, "But without my facial hair, I look 12". No, you don't look 12. You look like the younger guy you are, not like someone who is ten years older than you are. And that is why 'daddys' find you appealing. If they wanted to date someone who looked the same age as they are, they'd do that. You are going to have many, MANY years to look and be older. Enjoy being 'young' while you can.