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.

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.

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?

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.

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.