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.

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, Match.com, Partners.com, 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.