How do gay men get motivated and thrive like straight men if competition for gay sex is minimal?

Men have invented the modern world because they have had to compete to become the Best Male in order to get laid...by the hypergamous and selective woman. Let the games begin. And if you get burned, play harder.

While gay men are arguably as disposable as straight men (more disposable if you're thinking discrimination, less disposable if you're thinking gay-worship in the media), getting laid for a gay guy is not the hardest thing nowadays. And we here who know the wisdom of disposing oneitis and not "improving myself for him so he gets interested again" (due to the neuroticism it causes and the lack of practicality of postulating our old flames will rekindle)...we have a leg up on romance, but that might be our falling. We don't compete for sex and we know better than to give our hearts to the first bidder (or any bidder if we can help it), so what's our biological kick to ass-kick?

I figure that the big motivator for gays is often shame. Even if they're not being shamed now that high school's over (it got better!), the feeling is still there, or the personality pattern of achievement and taking the other bitches out of the competition remains. Dad isn't thrilled about your ball-throwing abilities, but he thinks that science fair prize (or standing ovation in a theater) is pretty dank!

After TRP taught me what my oneitis was and why I should cast it aside, I've still had motivation to plunder on in my career and self-analysis, turning new rocks, making new friends, self-discoveries and ideological leaps, but I have recently been struck by the notion that I don't have the "sexual" or "romantic" motivations that so famously drive men to change the world. And coming from our consumerist world-culture, we can look at this and find the audacity to say "hey, I want that."

I suspect masculine-top gays may psych themselves into running more game, out of necessity or because they initiate more, and thus they are constantly in 'competition mode' or 'all in or nothing whether I get rejected or not', thus driving them to become more worthy men, whereas more feminine bottoms may have gone off of their looks and used clumsier game, coming off at best as endearing during flirtations but regardless not finding sex to be a rare commodity.

I've also noticed that high-status men have hit on me and even become romantically interested when I play it right, but I suspect it doesn't have to do with my super-masc-alpha-dude status, nor does their interest affect my status in the male hierarchy. It is like being the female of the group; the status is by no means automatically lower, but the standards are so different that lining up a who's-who hierarchy of males and females is a headache. In courting, the masculine counterpart's status matters but not necessarily the feminine's.

This could entirely be the problem of bottoms. Much like feminism has taught women to go for career and status, when this in fact makes them unsatisfied romantically and sexually, maybe bottoms aren't meant to change the world like their more masculine gay lovers. They play the woman's game sexually/romantically, and therefore their habits and motivations transfer into their life force and motivation.

Now that I've said "life force" humor me with this new age thought: sexually I find the masculine counterpart's horny energy comes from his hips/balls area and projects onto the masculine subject's ass, while the feminine feels a longing in the chest for the masculine counterpart's desire, and the feminine projects 'her' desire onto his sexy upper torso. I very strongly feel that the life force is what's activated when someone is interested in a masculine way, and the feminine desire for the masculine's desire is desire for his outstanding life force, the procreator of life. Interestingly, they say that when a man's balls are literally cut off, he has little motivation in life. Correlation?

How have gays been able to accomplish so much if gay sex competition is minimal?

What is the fire under your ass, or the thing that holds the carrot in front of your face?

What would you say is the chief motivator for most gay men, sex or otherwise? A taste for life, an eye on luxury/harmony/pleasure/kitschiness?

If lack of motivation is more of a bottom's situation, should a bottom aim to become a top in bed in order to achieve, instead of find himself in a life of tying down a beta-bux?

It's OK to say "no" to someone because they have HIV/AIDS, despite what the current PC campaign says

AIDS was a big deal and a death sentence, and nowadays with the right meds, it seems to be a pain in the ass financially but if you're responsible you should basically be fine, or so they say. I'm pretty uninformed but my understanding is that most people who have AIDS will still die from some form of "AIDS related illness" aka AIDS pressing the off button on your immune system, so AIDS still completely sucks to get.

My Facebook feed has been lecturing gays about HIV/AIDS "stigma" and how it is now arrogant to not sleep with someone just because they have HIV/AIDS. Especially if they mention they are "undetectable," which means they are taking their meds enough that they shouldn't be transmitting. Because you should always take a relative stranger's word on their disease-status when your life depends on it, right?

It must suck to have this disease, have to share the news with partners should you decide to, and be inevitably turned down or heartbroken as a result of a dumb past decision, or perhaps be relegated to condom use or only informed gays who take PrEP (which seems to be 86-99% effective). But no means no amirite? And if I had AIDS who am I to lecture responsible men on how they should have sex with me for politeness' sake?

I was doing a voluntary anonymous gay-male-sex study for money when I said something like "protection" referring to condoms and the monitor quipped something about how that word has "stigma" as if AIDS were something someone would want to protect themselves from, so he personally prefers to use another word. I'm not sure if someone is trying really hard to get gay people to keep on fucking AIDS into each other as if it would actually cull our population, or people are really trying this hard to create a world where No One's Feelings Are Hurt Ever. And if hundreds of gays get AIDS in the process and the pharmacists keep making that money, hey we made people feel better!

I am largely beginning to think that there is a large but strong undercurrent of counter-thought to most of these PC campaigns, especially since nowadays you don't hear much from the boogeyman-side that they are shouting against. "Black lives matter, especially when it's a white person killing them (despite 93% of black murder victims being killed by other blacks)!" "Ok." "Her body her choice!" "Ok." "Feminism!" "Mhmm."

RP says, it's your life, not their politeness playground. Your body your choice betch!

Alpha-widowed? Maybe it's time to become an alpha.

Alpha-widowed is a term we see often on TRP that refers to a woman who met her male alpha match and can't have him back and won't take anything lower (and for alpha widows that becomes, "won't take anyone else"). Maybe he was a one night stand, maybe an ex. These women are considered damaged goods by the community.

Gay men infatuated with a masculine superior who no longer gives him any notice have a vantage point that women don't however. They can make the man of their dreams out of themselves. Not just in a feel-good way ("Well Dan isn't answering my texts anymore, but check my new mile-running time!") but actually feel his love for that masculinity go towards himself as he becomes it, and the bygone alpha-Dan becomes objectively substandard to his new self. He doesn't have to miss moaning under the Masculine; he can be the Masculine in even better form, channeling it better than Dan.

Straight RP men actually have the same solution. Making yourself an alpha male draws all your pheromones to think you are really, really awesome, that the guy in the mirror is really, really awesome, and bitches become a fun occasional side gig, girlfriend included, an inferior priority to the god that is YOU. We preach this on TRP all the time.

Gay men though, have the whole masc/fem, bottom/top thing going on so masculinity can be a little more complicated. Anal semantics aside (literally and figuratively), my whole schpeal regarding gay sex/dating is and has been that masculine/feminine polarization is just as an important dynamic sexually between straight partners and gay partners. One is the player providing masculine value, the other is the screening playful more-feminine one looking for Mr Guy. An initiator and a receptor. Otherwise it's two dudes planning a mutual wank playing who can get their tongue down further the other's throat, or two drag queens planning a Lady Gaga shasay into the ground.

Being a feminine receptor to a straight-guy-type is fun because you are going mostly off of your looks (you don't necessarily have to lift), the other guy initiates if you're lucky ("he wants me, oh my!" is a familiar and fun feminine endorphin) and the guy, if you're lucky, is muscular, taller, and actually likes that you are easier to handle/carry and boss around. It's also fun because you will probably deal with less catty gays and instead guys who just act more like guys. Less drama, more interesting conversation, and, if you're into missionary, chizeled abs going thump-thump right above your pelvis. I accept.

But I've found that moments where I catch myself at my most masculine offset a joy I didn't know I had. So when a twinkier, cute, light-haired guy shows interest in me and I'm basically down despite him not being Captain America, I follow the push and pull, and practice being the oak tree that the bottom-monkey climbs on and feeds off of.

It only sucks because in the position of the masculine, you're more likely going to be with more ostentatiously feminine guys (or go through the trouble of screening them out if you're on a mission for a masculine submissive), you deal with shit tests, which are hard -- basically, they're not expecting to buy you a drink (but they do, if you let them). Being the guy is so much eeeasier than being the girl, right?!

I had a plate who was cute and an insider into our industry, which I found very interesting, so the conversation was mostly that. He did text a lot though so I kept him at a distance and ignored his empty openers ("you're cute"; "hi"). When we were among others and he wasn't worried about concentrating on conversation that fancied me, I couldn't help noticing the similarities between being a girl and being a feminine gay bottom type. I mostly am a gay/skinny(toned)/feminine guy to be honest, but I like to think I'm more grounded and curious than this generic type I'm about to elaborate on:

I noticed that when he was talking to others, he would always go on about himself without exception. His tone was always gossip-y and whenever he talked about others' actions, it was always with a "wow! can't believe they went there!" because someone else would certainly judge that, the status quo had been clear to him but not to the dissenter in question, or something else had set the rules and garlfriend wasn't following! Scandal! Judgment decries them! Moments alone for this girl-fellow were an instantaneous flight to Instagram where, with an almost somber expression, he would Like almost everything on it; he was therefore one with the group and 'with it.' More sad are the femme gays who I have actually seen get off to some kind of 'empowerment' by double-tapping Insta posts by celebrities who have never heard of them and who will never notice their 1 second Like-contribution. What all of these have in common is that the Instagram, the gossip, even the hair-tossing (for whom?), all swirl and dance around a phallic symbol, like a big wide open vagina worshipping a Penis so deep inside of it that it can't see it: the Penis, a based protagonist, a rule-setting, phallic beast that is the rule, the status quo, the man. And when Penis says "WHAT is this!" or anything goes against Order/Rules/Society (i.e. Penis) and Penis's silence echoes the dissonance between the offense and It, social media and chicks go "ohh..my...gawsh. Oh no they didn't. Literally can't. Hashtag not doing what everyone else is doing even though Big Phallic Center Of Gravity says to and we all follow it. Also that dress? What will people (Penis) think? Also, the other day Louise ignored Michelle in front of everyone when she said hi [expecting huge reaction from person she is telling]. (Penis says to try to be nice, as we all know, and this is a violation of Penis.)" "That's nothing: Matt said something racist." (She couldn't give less of a shit about hurt feelings or discrimination; Penis says it's bad though and that makes all the girls go "oh! ohh Penis!") These peter pan girly gay boys are putting on a show for an invisible judgmental distant man all the time. They are the true Charlie's Angels.

The craziest part was when this other guy was talking about another guy like "oh he's showing interest in me!" soullessly like a little whaddya know status show instead of any kind of connection, and his girlfriends would be like "ahmaga good job." My only inner response was, wait, seriously? That's something to be proud of? It was obvious that for this particular guy the only thing going through Mr Chad's mind was "sure I'll stick my dick in that." (This was the Instagram one btw.) I never thought TRP would make me laugh at a chick/bottom's self-congratulation of being with a worthy guy, but that's the thing -- the guy is the worthy one. Not this leech.

For the truly and pathetically femme gay men, power is always by proxy. Tagging Beyonce in tweets, showing off that they saw Cher on the street -- it's one thing to do something like this occasionally and in good taste or humor, but for many gays this is life as they know it, and settling for anything else is a [RuPaul pun regarding the word "no"]. Including with the manly men they seek -- a manly man is power and status for them, these gays have made luxury items¹ of themselves. Feminine people need validation, need to put someone down, and this all depends on someone else's judgment/decisions/values, the status quo of their society, the firm regulations that are like a holy book that fall hard on a surface and make the feminine person go "oh!" (in both acquiescence and pleasure).

Be the status quo. Be the rule. Make your own values. It applies to relationships too: gay men don't have to revel in the cat lady status that women so often do once Chad sees their expiration date is up. They can be men.

And now for something uncanny:

The Pervert's Guide to Cinema talks about, among MANY things, this phenomenon of a figure not being able to leave your life; it comes out either in your imagination, or an impression you do. This phenomenon has come up a lot in movies as a creepy Other that sometimes becomes you. In almost all cases it is the person, or an untapped energy inside the person that the person refuses to dig into. A very interesting and humorously made documentary for its own sake. Are you ignoring your masculinity and projecting it onto other inferior boys?

Man up :]

¹ Linked because of this quote: "There is one great advantage which women have over men: they have a choice – a choice between the life of a man and the life of a dimwitted, parasitic luxury item. There are too few women who would not select the latter." Funny that gay men have this choice too, and too often select the latter.

Edit #343234575: I noticed that I only dealt with oneitis towards more masculine/dominant guys. I guess becoming more alpha is still the answer, as it is with TRP, even if your oneitis was more submissive/feminine. Bitches ain't shit, and oneitis is feminine anyway; it depends on the other person etc. Become the rule.

Responsible Offendedness

There is a considerable amount of well-meaning tone-policing, word-policing, and, well, thought-policing on Facebook lately, mostly meant to raise awareness and politeness, but sometimes with haughty moral superiority that is not so empathetic and actually meant to start a witch hunt against those who think non-hatefully, but simply have different ideas on how everyone can achieve even more happiness using broadly different and scientific tactics (totally not me or anything!). In everyone's rush to get everyone to think like them and to get those pesky individuals who think differently to at least act like they do by following arbitrary "rules," I propose a few "rules" about REPONSIBLE OFFENDEDNESS, and, according to the current doctrines, I Totally Can Do This because I am gay and hispanic. No privilege tho.

1. If someone offends you, it doesn't mean they hate you or XYZ group.
2. If someone offends you, it doesn't mean they're wrong. It means you had an experience, and the truth is independent of that.
3. If someone offends you, it doesn't mean you're right. You could be right, but your level of offendedness doesn't correlate with the truth.
4. Don't immediately try to unemploy someone who holds a view that is different than yours, or who feels differently towards a subject than you or what everyone is supposed to feel/think.
5. If you find yourself trying to unemploy someone after an interaction with them, you are probably doing something shitty and don't care about free speech.

If these rules seem severe, check out the other rules on your feed. You obviously don't have to follow these rules, but see what happens when you don't follow the others!

"Kids in school don't know how to think anymore. They feel something and they think they're thinking." ~ Thomas Sowell, very summarized quote

(I almost posted the above on my Facebook. What was I thinking!)

Never Do This After A (First) Date/Hangout/Hookup

"Hey nice to meet you, sorry if I was a little off today :] hope you have a safe ride home!"

"Sorry about tonight haha"

"Hope I wasn't too boring tonight :P later..."


Never send an apologetic text after a (first) date. Strange that it has to be said, as if that would go against something on this blog, but it's just a beta knee-jerk response that has to be killed.

Unless it was unclear, these texts usually follow an orderly or at least no-bumps-on-the-road date where nothing in particular happened. Not that you should be making every date an adrenaline-pumped experience; it just comes from a feeling of not having 'done' enough, as if you had to do anything except just be and have a good time with him. That feeling comes from thoughts and feelings of low self-worth.

Will it ruin your chances with a guy to send him this text? It'll put him off at least a little. No one wants to be with an obedient little sheep. But more likely than not, he may have not been that into you to begin with, causing you to think you were doing something wrong and/or giving you more tingles, in turn causing you to send that unnecessary text.

Just don't. Keep your self respect.

Heroism and Hero Worship in Sexuality

Along the theme of the top/masc partner gifting his 'fire' to his feminine/bottom partner, I just found this really interesting article. It talks about the value that men and women have, what exactly "masculinity" and "femininity" with no politically correct agenda, while being very exacting and careful in how the male/female relationship pans out, value exchange, etc.

Some choice quotes:

"Hero worship is based on the metaphysical natures of men and women, i.e., what a woman is and what a man is. The less efficacious gay guy woman looks up to and admires the stronger man. A top's male’s sexuality is wrapped up in heroism, and a bottom's woman’s sexuality is wrapped up in admiring him because this is, after all, what has allowed civilization to exist and to prosper. Sex is the celebration of life. Life is the standard of erotica."

"Hero worship is not meant to be a damning curse, highlighting the “inferiority” of bottoms/subs women. It should be nothing more than a simple, benevolent female-to-male appreciation."

"If hero worship is not the response to male strength, the only other response possible is jealousy. Feminists make this response inevitable." <-- Interesting to consider in terms of male/male sex. A guy who wants to identify solely as a top would have this response, while a guy comfortable being submissive would find longing in seeing a bigger guy.

Here it is.

Working out your purpose but also being a "good person"

If my interest in the energy between sexual partners is any indication, I'm fascinated by the potential emotional forces inside us that bring out the best and most sexual and awesome in ourselves and others.

I'm also interested in Purpose and Unity in Purpose.

But I grew interest in Universal Compassion, an idea seen by many to be imaginary (and myself too mostly), but this interest largely conflicted, I thought, with my power/fame/money/muscles/success/player purpose.

I have an alchemical practice that's enabled me to really get in touch with my fire; the technique is a topic for another blog and I'll let you know if that happens. After a successful night of permanently burning off a chunk of anxiety and depression, a feeling of love towards everything is in all circumstances underneath it; it grows, outstretches, and then my personality (personality = unprocessed experiences that are distortions of that one true love) takes a positive shift and a portion of my real, true self comes back, permanently.

With those experiences under my belt, it's become clear to me that even when removing the veil of religion -- a genre of institutions that ultimately seek to control -- the message from the ancients and my unbridled soul at its most pure is the same: we are love, our purpose is love. But fuck, I want money and bitches. (Don't worry, there's a happy ending for us.)

What is love? Baby, don't hurt me... The word is so overused and broad that it can mean to take a great interest in something, to fall in love with someone romantically and sexually (dependency/infatuation), to feel affection towards a friend (fraternity), and the ultimate material the universe is made of (hippie dippie shit I believe, but you don't have to in order to get the thrust of this article). Let's concern ourselves with the most frustrating version:

Universal Altruism.

(Shudder.)

I do occasionally find myself feeling compassion for people involved in some atrocity, and my conversation style is steeped in sympathy when it needs to be, but the sensation is as fleeting as any other feeling, even if it is more profound.

What's been most frustrating about this is that while I WANT UNITY OF PURPOSE, in my day to day life I'm more interested in growing and becoming BETTER and more VALUABLE (as we should be!). So if we are all distortions of love and love is the true thing, but most of our drives are deliciously self-interested, but being a monk with nothing sucks, and giving out handouts is also unfulfilling, which is the right direction??

Then it came to me.

We weren't made to become professional leech-assistants. That's what I was afraid of, in my thought process of how to think and react towards the needy parts of the world. I was afraid that being big-hearted meant that I would have to stop what I wanted to do, and help others get their footing until everyone was all caught up.

The intelligence behind the universe is staggering: the atmosphere and alignment of the planets is just perfect enough for humans to survive, and even Richard Dawkins in "The Selfish Gene" pointed out that even if we had all the years that we understand the universe to have existed, it still makes no sense that something as complex as Man could be happening right now, or perhaps ever. So I'll use the unforgivable idea that a mind is responsible for the universe JUST so I can make this point: What kind of intelligence would make a group of beings so it could just help other beings that couldn't help themselves? And in a universe in which everyone attained happiness, what on earth are they GOOD FOR if they were built just to help the less fortunate? Once they were ALL HAPPY, where does their 'altruistic true programming' go from there??

It goes to show that BUILDING YOURSELF IS YOUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. YOUR HAPPINESS IS YOUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. OTHERS' HAPPINESS IS NOT YOUR JOB.

Compassion is an amazing feeling. When it happens and it's genuine, you should act on it because you WANT to act on it. Doing compassionate things out of a "sense of duty" feels like slapping yourself in the face. You are probably giving a man a fish instead of teaching a man to fish when you feel that way. Follow your fire; it purifies everything. And when it wants to teach out of charity, it wants to teach efficiently so you produce ANOTHER being that is ALSO SELF-RELIANT.

There are evil "purposes," of course, such as a goal to inflict prolonged pain on a group of people because it would get you off. That's what happens when the "input" you got, that is, incredibly shitty childhood with parents with similar goals, don't get processed out of your system by absorbing and letting go of shitty experiences. As a messed up person, your convoluted intention behind your 'fire' is to go ahead and do that crazy shit, so that'd be an example of a shitty purpose.

But let's assume your purpose isn't evil and a cry for help -- you want stuff, and to feel good about yourself, and a status that make those lower in vibration feel envy.

Follow your Purpose. Do your thing. You'll help others along the way. That is, if they deserve it.

I'm not talking about the poor and "whether they deserve it"; there are poor people who were as comfortable as you or I and got the carpet pulled from under them and have nowhere to go. I'm okay with taxes going towards unemployment for that reason. But let's put that aside for now and talk about serious leeches, of society and of you personally.

My public/non-anonymous persona has had a jump in the fame chart: earned a verified check on my Facebook page and getting a lot of "fans." Every single day I have someone message me, "Hey, can you do something for me?" The irony is staggering. It's not that I'm getting arrogant and starting to think, "Who are you to ask big mister me?", but instead, my internal monologue goes, "Who are you or ANYONE to ask if you can take something from someone else and not offer something in return?" To assume you don't have value is the end of your value.

Some of us want a hand when we're down, but when we get up, not all of us want to become Mother Theresas. The homeless person you clothe and feed today won't necessarily do that for others. Does that mean you shouldn't be compassionate when the impulse is healthy and aligned with your values? No, you can be. But it does mean that you should realize that ULTIMATELY, EVERYONE WANTS TO BECOME THE BEST VERSION OF THEMSELVES, AND THAT IS OUR FINAL MISSION -- EVERYONE'S WORLD IS ABOUT THEMSELVES AND THEIR GOALS/GOD.

So in short, no, fulfilling your dream to be a Wall Street wolf or an It guy or a DJ whose DNA is inside all the jumping bottoms is not "selfish." Serve by becoming an example to others. Sounds like a great way to serve without getting leeches. Grow. When you have the chance to really be compassionate, you'll be glad to have been selected for the mission (by your own self) because it'll feel great. You'll teach a man to fish, not give him fish. You'll let YOUR Power and Influence do something that brings harmony and vibrancy to the lucky person or people of your choices. Bitches love harmony. (Ha, no they don't. On that note...)

Breaking hearts? If you're doing it literally on purpose, there's something very shitty eating your soul that is making heartbreaking interesting to you, so your 'bad karma' 'has already been served' ahead of time in the form of your tarnished insides. On the other hand, if you're simply interested in a guy and lose interest and your departure causes him to wonder what the meaning of life is, that's him dealing with feelings that he's already had inside that are surfacing. Help him out if you want to, not that there's anything you can really do. Is sticking around as if you were his boyfriend really going to help him in the long run?

All right. You're already "good." Now go get what you want.

How to Fuck a Guy Like a Man (or, Every Moment is Sex When You're Masculine, or you're at least trying to be)

This revelation (the one between parentheses in the title) blew my mind. Allow me to extrapolate before I seem too ridiculous.

A little over a year ago I was finishing with packing my bags to fly to see family, but a hot guy I'd been talking to on Grindr was in the hood and had a free minute. He came over, smooth tan muscular taller, took his shirt off. As he naturally established dominance and I became submissive to his chiseled body and naturally more aggressive foreplay, I slowly let myself sink into the joy of becoming his plaything.

He stuck his arm around my hips while we were jacking off or kissing and it felt amazing. It made the feeling of warmth and security come out from my chest, which is a lot of fun if you're not too easily attached. Nothing makes a bottom feel more loved than another guy's testosterone-filled, not-necessarily-loving intentions.

But the arm-hip thing is what I thought I loved about that.

At one point I pushed my hand into his bicep for balance and panted, "Do that thing where you stick your arm around my waist again." He was happy to oblige, but as manly and natural as the gesture was, the oxytocin (love chemical) didn't happen again.

Huh? Was it an in-the-moment thing? I'd given myself plenty of time for my flight, so it wasn't stress.

I wasn't a drama king about it; we continued having sex and he deliciously came all over me, and my come followed his right after; the come looked like a father eel taking a dive and his baby eel following suit (lol). Semen famously has mixed reviews, but when you're into the dominant guy, you want it like Gogurt, and a dominant guy who's into you wants to splooge his all over in/you; none of this polite nonsense of coming out of sight into condoms. After our breath settled, his bigger, darker hand gently grabbed mine and he guided it around my ripply torso, and it was the first time I massaged another guy's seed into mine. If you want to fill a bottom with that love chemical (oxytocin) and get him ready for round two, that's how.

During that shag or another, I realized it wasn't just in themselves his hand clasping my hip or him massaging our come that brought my body chemistry to life, but his masculine desire to do those things that was so hot about the experience.

His desire to hold me and have me belong a little more to him during a sloppy kiss.

The desire in his eyes as he scanned my body and rubbed himself out on me.

His desire to fertilize me with his seed, so I would symbolically bring his young to bear.

What this specific kind of desire consists of:
1) it's masculine/assertive/dominant
2) it's exactly how he likes it

I always like it when he, the masculine, does what he wants with me, the feminine. His act of satisfying himself with me is my own victory.


THIS REQUIRES SOMEONE DESIRING TO BE THE EPITOME OF MASCULINITY TO ALWAYS BE FAMILIAR AND INCREDIBLY AWARE OF HIS DESIRE.

It's a flame inside you; it's not you.

I was able to replicate this with a French boy who had the pleasure of riding me one evening; I was 'top' and he was 'bottom', no penetration.

The experience of being great at being masculine during sex is that you do exactly what you want. That doesn't mean you brainstorm and choose at random instead of someone else choosing for you; it means you have to be in touch with that fire that has a mind of its own.

During sex with Pierre (his real name, not being fresh), I remember never knowing what I was going to do next until I was doing it, as if I were watching myself act. My eyes were glazed over because my consciousness was in my belly and balls; he was looking at me expectantly and wanting to please, a little afraid from my gaze that I would say at any moment, "let's not." I remember how delicious, veiny, smooth, and innocent his throat looked. I spent a good three minutes chewing it all raw, and made it familiar with my dick, while he helplessly tried to land his mouth on my penis, while I made sure that didn't happen until I wanted it to. Later I had fun pressing my dick on parts of him that were hot (to me) and like they could take a shot of seed. ("Oh mai got...oh mai got...")

The sensation of banging a masculine guy who's following his fire, and being the lucky feminine guy who is the means to which the 'top' can execute and explore his fire, is a holy experience for the 'bottom.'

The feminine (the bottom) wants to feel desired in the most authentic way that someone's masculine fire (the top) expresses that desire. That's it.

During one of my first experiences as a top, I thought I was fucking this guy until I realized I wasn't inside of him. He said "I didn't tell you because I don't like getting penetrated, but I like feeling dominated." (He likes feeling a guy's firey desire for him, and to have that masculine energy desire go straight towards him.)

When you play Big Man, your submissive boy, while able to share this experience with you humanly and perhaps lovingly, is still a means to the end of your ejaculation and bearing your sure-to-be-strong children, which is his primal prerogative in the heat of passion. You see him like a pretty piece of meat, you talk to him like a semen-absorbent, gorgeous piece of meat (while keeping peace of mind and making sure he doesn't think he's landed a serial killer), and he'll enjoy that because he feels your desire oozing over him like a semen ocean that keeps him safe from the horrors out in the world. He's gonna have kids from a competent gene pool, and his daddy's a badass -- oops, he means, his future kids' daddy.

With light-eyed, blond, smooth, submissive-to-me boys, when I'm jacking off on them and my face is close to their ear, particularly at night and under sheets, I'll whisper how I want to get them pregnant, how fertile they are, telling them I wanna be the daddy to their kids, biting at their neck, mouth, nose. As creepy and weird as this sounds out of context, these theater and PR boys will smile at me sweetly and in all instances whisper, "Do you have a condom?" (Translation: Will you please fuck your seed into me now?)

The more you are in touch with your fire, the more your boy toy is excited to help the fire out. Everyone has fire; only some are the most in touch with it, and those are the worthy ones (alphas) ready to bring the light of the next generation. Your casual bottom partner might not be thinking of what your kids will look like during sex, but your masculine presence pressing against him elicits a heart-filled fantasy that tempts him to sleep under your cocksure strength for a thousand and one nights.

You are a warrior-like channel for your carnal desire when you are at your best masculine fucking.

If your boy is screaming that he wants you to pull his hair, but you fancy giving him a hicky and pounding your dick under his package, guess what he's gonna be more excited for you to do now. A bottom isn't too excited about a top taking orders against his will. If you pleasing him about that particular thing he pleads for is hot to you, go ahead -- it's okay because you're Obeying Your Fire. To him it'll ideally feel like he asked for one thing and you did something else, even though you did what he asked. Your tiger is out of the bag, there's nothing he can do about it, and you can feel him shaking slightly; he's terrified and loving every second.

When you're the feminine guy, you'll learn (or already know) how fun it is when a guy wants you. That's all you want during that transaction. To be wanted. (By a hot guy.) Don't tell him to find his fire. You can cheat into more polarized positioning where he's more masculine and you're more feminine. Then let it flow.

Okay, and WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH EVERY MOMENT IN LIFE BEING SEX?!

Your fire doesn't only exist when you're gasping between sheets.

I have a lot of fun as a submissive guy to bigger guys, I think all gay guys should experience that, but, I still think that by default, a gay guy will be happiest living a masculine lifestyle at the bare minimum sense of: taking his own direction, making sure he's working towards what he wants, living with what he wants, and setting proper boundaries against what he doesn't want.

That also requires being in touch with your fire. It's the same fire.

If you want swag, be in touch with your fire.
If you want to lose your social anxiety, get in touch with your fire.
If you want to be an oak tree and less of a spaz, get in touch with your fire.
If you want to be the alpha male, get in touch with your fire.
If you want to be funny, get in touch with your fire.

When you approach a guy and you are officially the dominant personality, YOU HAVE ALREADY BEGUN HAVING SEX WITH HIM. Do what you feel like, but not to be an asshole on purpose. Unless your charm is set to 10, let your eyes glaze a bit and let's talk about what you feel like, and the stuff about him that you feel like. He's learning all he needs to about your girth in that moment. One time my approach at a club, I swooped in and told him he looked like an adorable wind-up toy. I dunno where that came from. Did I give a fuck? No. Did he ask that I "please stay" when I said I was walking? Yes.

A great life is like having sex as the more dominant guy. Touch what you want. Don't be nervous that he won't like it. He'll let you know if he's sensitive. His sensitivity is endearing. Does it make you wanna kiss him? Do it. He'll like it because you want to do it. Your desire is fucking hot, as the top. FIND IT. Oops we were talking about real life.

The difference between walking into a party submissively and making yourself seem less than others so everyone else is comfortable, and walking in to see who you really care about seeing and what you actually feel like doing and letting your energy shine towards that and allowing your fire and energy to magnetize what you want towards you, is that the latter is like walking into bed with a little 18 year old boy angel who wants you to fuck the shit out of him, and to make sure he can do everything he can in order for you to do that.
The second one is better.
Peace.

Number One Thing You'd Better Not Fuck Up

Brothers and babes:

Whether you're approaching or were approached on the dance floor, are in a relationship or about to be in one, there's one thing you must do. It's not the only thing, but it's nonetheless important:

1. Figure out who the 'guy' is.
2. Don't fuck it up.

I was texting a plate the other day who's in the military. He's pretty stoic in his texts and I usually become a shameless bouncy ball of energy when I talk with him; he's the oak tree in the relationship.

He's the guy.

I'm often the guy in other relationships. The other night I accrued a plate at a club who danced with/around me the whole night and went out to eat with me and my friends right afterward. I was the stoic fucker who approached him dead on and he was the one singing songs by Mariah Something and letting his hypergamy send him into orbits around me and my crew.

But with me and Military Man, he was always the guy in the relationship.

One time MM texted me that he was sick. I found myself going into "poor baby" mode, not in a condescending way; I was being my man's little helper in text message form. I wanted my man to know his li'l boy angel was thinking of him. Then he said something that made my skin crawl.

"Well I have nothing to worry about, I have a big man who can protect me." (Referring to me.)

Talk about a sexual polarity killer.

Plenty of guys tell me stuff like that, but they're my twinks, not my sexy daddies whose strength I subconsciously 'rely' on and whose displays of weakness give my reptilian brain the shivers.

Not to say it ended things. But that's probably because I can observe my romantic/sexual experiences, know where they're coming from, and once they happen, I can decide if the relationship's worth continuing.

Examples:

a) "He hasn't texted me back. BUT I WANT HIM SO MUCH. Well, that's not how it works. Abundance mentality, unsubscribe from posts, don't Like his stuff even if he starts pelting me with Likes as a result of my disappearance, but be nice in person. NEXT."

b) "What a turn-off, that thing he did!* Well, I have fun sleeping with him; you don't see pecs like that every day. I can overcome my momentary instincts in return for some sex that'll make my endorphins fly."

* Applies to beta moments your big boy has. Not him being an inexcusable dick. In that case, you cut contact.

You get the point.

But you might not be dating a cad as self-observant, game-aware, or who considers all options. Most humans are feeling-based, and even think that they're thinking when they're actually just feeling. Therefore, when dealing with the law of sexual polarity, tread with care.

Figure out (in your head, not in a conversation with him) who's the daddy and who's the son; figure out who's taking care of who; figure out who's the oak tree and who's the monkey. (Of course, an alpha in the pair can be high-energy; that sentence is mostly related to emotional volatility.) It's not always so black and white, but if you see a pattern, realize that the exchange of the relationship is very likely dependent on that dynamic continuing.

If you're the alpha male and he's your boy, realize that opening up too much about your feelings may put a damper on his attraction for you, even if he 'wouldn't do that.' (Remember it's not him doing it; it's generations of evolution that's done that to his brain.)

If you're the pretty boy princess and he's your bodybuilding stoic prince charming, there is less that you can do wrong in this sense, but if your occasional wound-licking for your man makes you out to be the caretaker or paternal/maternal figure, he might naturally exhibit some submissive/passive behavior that'll dry you up faster than dry ice sublimates. (And dry ice is a solid that turns into a gas, y'all!!!!11!11 Skippin' being the element water and shit.)

At the same time, don't overdo your role; you were a person before getting to know this good-looking dude, remember? Just because you're the alpha doesn't mean you should be completely distant or a tyrannical asshole. Just because you're not the manly one in charge doesn't mean he wants to be dating a drag queen, or that he doesn't need consolation once in a while.

Ok, good learning today. Time to make a cold approach.

ACCEPT STEREOTYPES (I'm a minority, and I do this! Read on!)

I'm a gay who plays flaming gays all the time, and I'm a latino who plays ghetto latinos a lot. At first, I wondered if this was 'problematic,' since I was taught from a young age that stereotypes are bad. But then I realized that if I wanted to go 'against' a stereotype, I could go ahead and write something else MYSELF. And if people wanted to pay to see it, great! If not, oh well. I was taught at college that having only a niche audience is okay too.

I don't know the formal definition of "stereotype," but from the way people use it, it seems to mean a reoccurring personality trait or habit within a group of people that everyone recognizes happening within that group because they see it all the time, but because it's unflattering, people call it a "stereotype" so you're a complete asshole if you point it out. Stereotypes are also not-demeaning, but those are discouraged from being show too often too ("look! it's a latino family with a lot of money!" "wow you're racist for reminding me how latinos often aren't wealthy." "oops my bad"). It's useful to identify stereotypes so you don't ASSUME it every single time about every single person of that group, since you would many times be wrong by assuming every gay is flaming for example, but, the problem with using "stereotype" as a weapon against writing/art we don't like is that it encourages us to stop others' freedom to portray people however they like and however they see them, and to talk about people as they very often are.

One stereotype that comes to mind is the easy girl. Couple thoughts: nothing wrong with being easy. Also, maybe it's not a stereotype in that it's not as common as we see in entertainment, but maybe the writer knows 10,000 chaste women and 1 easy woman, and he wanted to write about that easy woman because it was uncommon to him but still interesting. Maybe someone who grew up in the suburbs went to NYU, got an apartment in Washington Heights, saw me having a ghetto interaction in Spanish with someone, and he saw it interesting/funny/amusing so he thought he'd write about it. Maybe a writer saw me make out with two guys at the same time in a car and she wanted to write about slutty gays who are at risk of STDs. They are and should be totally free to write about their observations/experiences.

If a stereotype is harmful for someone, then the answer isn't to police that creator/artwork. That sounds more silencing to me than to make sure I'm portrayed as not-promiscuous (LOL) and that I'm just like all white people (nope). Everyone is welcome to guilt writers and artists as much as possible though, but the artists don't have to listen. I hope to the heavens that we won't resort to stopping "stereotypes" by legal means to "protect" groups. I would be in a lot of trouble if straight people didn't know gays are generally slutty and all of a sudden they saw my enormous bags of condoms -- in fact, that could put me in a dangerous situation. If very feminine women weren't allowed to be portrayed on TV, how would women know it's okay to be sexual, and how would guys be socially/romantically/sexually prepared for the lady that wants to get down to business asap and not after date #4? They might be aghast and the "stereotype," well-hidden, would just be rebirthed. Keep in mind there are a lot of paradoxical stereotypes living alongside each other too -- the well-to-do latino family that rose above, the married gay couple that have been together for 30 years and are both 45 years old. (I am literally only using examples of my own minority groups because otherwise they would doubtlessly considered sexist/racist/homophobic -- what a world we live in!)

Stereotypes don't apply to everyone -- it's not homophobic/sexist/racist to think so, just illogical -- but they reoccur all the time. If you want to stop a stereotype for whatever reason, the blood-curdling truth is, you can always start with yourself. As for me, I will keep being a flamer in jest, and change my personality when I talk Spanish sometimes. Sorry I can't be more helpful to my minority groups. If you want to portray someone against a stereotype and there is no public interest (no one's paying tickets), well, to the voting poles to force artists to portray different minority groups in entertainment in flattering ways! Or, keep looking for that audience. They exist!

To Hell With "Check Your Privilege"

I have a problem with this sign, even though it's technically 'in my favor' as a gay and hispanic. We are really over-playing our hand here, fellow minorities, in a very un-nice way, and "check your privilege" can have serious consequences.

It's one thing to raise awareness about disadvantages that individuals have, so they get recognition for their condition by others who are more advantaged, and the advantaged can thus learn/sympathize/assist/understand of their own free will. It is quite another thing to spread propaganda shaming others because of their sex/race/orientation/religion. Ahem.

Straight whites are the PC-approved punching bag of our recent time, if I may say that as a gay latino (if I weren't those things, I think it would be racist and straight-apologist for me to express this opinion...phew!). Recently, straight whites actually helped us out though, like, a lot. Certainly not all of them, but plenty. Especially Jews! They're letting gay marriage spread like it's going out of style, and the privately owned mainstream media is letting us know of any misbehavior by anyone wildly against the program. If a fellow hispanic acts like a total asshole (Zimmerman), I can rest assured the media will paint him as "white-hispanic" to decrease my chances of being oppressed during the trial, since minorities can't be racist against each other in the mainstream narrative. Phew! And, on top of being my go-to scapegoat, whites even have a phenomenon called White Guilt, where they KNOW they can be discriminatory, and are genuinely ashamed of their ancestors' actions, and those "hicks" in trailers, who are...not bad, just poor. They are even ashamed that they are SUBCONSCIOUSLY discriminative, just by being humans with brains, and they publish cartoons and articles at length lamenting their original sin.

Meanwhile, we the minorities are rubbing our hands together, ready to play the role of oppressor now! We love when they feel guilty! Instead of enjoying the settling harmony of acceptance, we put up signs shaming them for things TOTALLY outside of their control and that only reflect conditions in their lives that have nothing to do with their ACTIONS or content of their CHARACTER, like: their gender, sexual orientation, race, socioeconomic footing...sound familiar? We list all the goodies they got that we didn't, by chance, so we ask they hold it as a heavy raincloud-reminder over their heads, for our sake. Really you guys? The sign says "straights can hold hands and gays can't" -- true, but I rarely think of this at any point in my day! No matter which country I'm in! Why should they? Were we listening during Pre-K "we are all equal" circle time, or were we assuming that was just for the white folks in the polos who looked kinda, like, mean, and heteronormative? Let's not prop ourselves up by putting them down -- let's all support who we are; all of us are goddamn meaningful.

I COMPLETELY understand that the fight isn't over for minorities. There is still a *LOT* of discrimination against non-whites and non-straights, and I'm really only thinking within a coastal, U.S. scope here! There's so much work to be done. But privilege-pointing isn't how we should deal with it. If anything, this tactic builds resentment and divides us from the people who should be WITH us, not against us. If you think WE'RE oppressed, roll the die and take a few weeks in a third world country, or Russia. Jesus HQ Christ. (I was Christian for ten years or so, so...I can say that...)

Everyone deserves to have a shot at the best life possible. I encourage you to not impede progress by biting the hand that, well, fed/feeds us. We live in a democracy, not the fascism this sign would like, and our happiness is still, to a large extent, white people's business too, and our affirmative action (which helped me get into college, and didn't help white people) is not an amendment. No homo! (I'm gay, so I "can" say that. No free speech privilege here!)

If anything I said offended you, by all means, don't hate me, feel free to educate me! I put this out here because I think this needs to be addressed and I'm interested in hearing any kind of input.

LOVE -- // *****GRATITUDE***** \\ -- LOVE