Chatting with a "virgin" young guy who has been holding himself out for Mr. Right prompted me to write about personalities, the role they play in sex and stereotyping.
For one who have not had sex with another guy (so he claims) and who have not even explored his rectum with his fingers, he believes he is versatile more to bottom and he seeks a top guy to be his life partner.
Most of us are clear on the personalities stereotype associated with gay sex roles. If you are top, you are likely to be one who likes to dominate or exert power over your partner and the active one in sex. You are likely to be more manly and acts as the man of the house who makes most of the major decisions. While the bottom guy is one who is submissive and likes to be pampered or doted upon or cared for and taken care of. Bottoms are the passive one in sex.
In a local context, tops are mostly the manly acting ones and the bottom are softer and, dare I say, kinda sissy, the diva or queen. (I see brickbats raining my way!)
So what does one make of a guy who takes on both sex roles (the versatile guy)? He acts accordingly to what suits him or which role he prefers when he is in the mood???
Should not the role we prefer be based on which role gives us the most pleasure rather than the type of personality we are? I believe it is after exploring both roles and as a result of our experiences, we are better able to decide on the role most preferred.
wow i swear i was gonna write about the exact topic this week. u read my mind!
ReplyDeleteCoz lately i have been meeting some ppl online, and they claim to be vers, which to me is almost as confusing as being Bi.
My question is can 2 vers gay guys be in a relationship? I'm sure they have a preference even though they r willing to do both.
I have a traditional mindset, like what u said in the 3rd para. Wouldn't it be weird if a couple took turns to fuck each other during sex... I feel it somehow ruins the dynamic of the relationship
I believe the role can be quite fix based on the preference. I agree w/ J-Boy that being VB is as confused as Bi. To my own understanding, majority of bottoms may claim themselves VB even their preference role is B; due to the reasons below:
ReplyDelete1. They are not close to you yet, and unsure about your preference. If you are top, they will tell you their preference.
2. They don't want to be seen as softer, etc (like Drew described up there) and want to be seen by playing dominant role.
It's also possible for a couple to fuck each other, but that's for fun only; ultimately each will play their role.
Interesting topic...Drew is getting hot now!
I know some are physical top but socially bottom... and vice versa...
ReplyDeleteEven though a guy is 100% top, I believe he must try to be bottom for once, to unlock something...
ReplyDeleteTo my opinion, being plu, one must be versatile enough to be T or B even though he has his preference.
ReplyDelete@Beyond: hahaha...need to unlocked meh?
@J-boy: I visited your dreams last night!! (think Inception!) hahaha...
ReplyDelete@Sky: a friend once told me that if a guy says he is versatile when first introduced he is likely to be versatile bottom. the general idea is to go one notch lower than he claimed! ... interesting? as for me getting hot, can I climb into bed with you and Darren? LMAO... u know I am kidding, right?
@pikey: your comment is in line with my post, personality may not have a bearing on one's sexual role.
@Beyond: you wanna convince Sky? hahaha...
bottom is not necessary the passive one on bed...some top are dead log too
ReplyDeleteIn conclusion, there is no stereotype. Relationships evolve and people adapt to different situations.
ReplyDeleteMy view is that from a physical perspective, there is no apparent co-relation between one's character and mannerism and his sexual role in bed in a plu relationship. Sex is sex, both guys should enjoy what are pleasurable to them.
ReplyDeleteThe divsion of role between top and bottom is all in the mind. The sexual role is, to a large extent, influenced by our own perception and emotion. This in turn are largely influenced by how heterosexual partners behave, because it is probably the only benchmark we see. We therefore draw reference from it. The heterosexual bahaviour in sexual activities are determined by the inherent differences of a man and a woman. Since plu relationship is different, albeit physically, why must we adopt the stereotype? Why can't we have our own rules and practices?
I do not subscribe to the view that we need to clearly define our sexual role. We should enjoy journey of love and relationship. Those who choose to should realise how they are deluded by their own perception, emotion and stereotyping.
I also do not agree to the view that say how two versatile guys can be in relationship. That goes to infer that the love relationship are primarily determined by sexual role. The love for each other and the relationship should rise above the sexual role. Sexual activities complement the relationship and not the other way around. We can now see why relationship breaks down due to incompatible sexual role. We can also see why relationship never blossom, although it could have been, because a top guy meets another top.
On another note, and I think this might be contoversial, but it is based on my experience and observation of so many years, is that some guys want to be identified as bottom because of certain functional limitations. When the tool is either too small to perform to the pleasure of the receiving parties or too big for the receiving parties to accept, they tend to become bottom.
Drew, apologise for the long comments. Since I don't run a blog myself, I just "tumpang" your space here to air my views. ;-D
@Darren: yes, that's true!
ReplyDelete@William: its all in the mind!
@Ng: wow, you continue to impress me! wanna take over my blog? hehe...
yes, its all in our minds and we are shackled with our own preceptions.
size dictates role? some truth in that but only in extreme cases, i believe.
Haha...it's you blog lah, I make occasional guest appearance cukup lah
ReplyDeleteHmm how do you explain then guys who are obviously bottom but wanna be top or tell others that he's a top while being a bottom secretly? I've met a few of those. and one of them is also a blogger :p
ReplyDeleteThe fox wonders why are some people so stupid!
who's the versatile guy u r referring to ar? so innocent one? hahaha. adorable. :p
ReplyDeleteOk Ng's comment is helpful.
ReplyDelete"The love for each other and the relationship should rise above the sexual role."
But i think:
1. If 2 ppl can't get it on sexually, basically there is no intimacy in the relationship.
2. Even if 2 ppl can connect on an emotional level, if they both happen to prefer the same role, it would be like putting 2 hetereosexuals in bed. I don't see it working.
Oops by '2 hetereosexuals' i mean 2 heterosexuals of the same gender. :P
ReplyDelete@J-boy: Referring to your statement #2, I would like to offer my views...
ReplyDeleteSay, if you and another person whom you like can really connect emotionally and love each other to develop a relationship, but because the two of you have the "same role", therefore:
Are you suggesting that you would forgo developing further the relationship because you two have the same role?
Is role compatibility so important to make a twist in your decision?
Do you and your partner need to be so fixated in the sexual role preference?
Are you and your partner be in a relationship to match each other in sexual role preference or you guys are in a relationship to love and hold each other in the journey of life?
I do recognise that sex plays an important role in enhancing and promoting intimacy in the relationship. But, after assessing the overall scheme of things, does sexual role become the center or focal point in a relationship and therefore other components in a relationship work around that focal point? OR The love for each other should be the focal point, and other components (including sexual role) should work around it.
There is no right or wrong answers to all the above questions. It is just points of view that you may want to think through.
At the end of the day, you choose whatever that works for you.
@Little Fox: I guess we can't really call these people stupid lah ;-D
ReplyDeleteI think that their behaviour as such could be influenced by the inter-play of two factors, constant stereotyping by our community on how a bottom is and self-ego.
We constantly label a bottom to bahave "more like a female" and we call a guy bottom when we see he has "a more feminine character". This seems to have created a kind of negative connotation to being a bottom.
Therefore, it becomes a "natural reaction" for a guy to have wanted to disassociate himself from the negative connotation in the eyes of others, and hence all the "disassociation actions" that follows.
This "natural reaction", I believe, is caused by self-ego. We all have ego and want to "look good" in the eyes of others.
Imagine, if there is no constant stereotyping and there is also no ego, do you think that the situation you mentioned would have happened?
p/s: Drew...hope you won't mind me cannibalising a bit of your space here...;-D
Ng, i think you should a blog of your own and i will the first one to follow and link you. =)
ReplyDelete@Ng: you are robbing me of my readers!!!!!! sob sob sob... hahaha
ReplyDeleteseriously, love to read your thoughts, maybe you can be a team member of my blog and contribute your thoughts through my blog. think about it!
p.s. taking a break from my blog, busy with work!
@Drew: No lah, I am not robbing your readers away lah, I am just being busy body contributing some thoughts. Anyway, this entry of yours attracted the highest number of comments thus far...hehe...
ReplyDeleteHmmm...a bi and a gay writing in a blog...interesting combination huh...should you get a straight guy to join the party too? That makes a "Threesome"...haha
@Lucifer: Thank you for the interest you have on my thoughts, but I am not a writer and it is not easy to maintain an active blog due to work commitment. Maybe I should consider Drew's offer huh...:-D
@Zach/Ng: 3some?!?!?! the idea fascinates me!! let's party!! LMAO...
ReplyDelete@Ng/Zach: Point taken. I think I know what u mean now!
ReplyDeleteAnd yes u should write more!
@J-boy: Haha...I will write more when Drew starts the party lor...;-D
ReplyDeletehi drew, zach invited me over :) tengok tengok, dah start to promote future blog of his dah! :)
ReplyDeleteomg!! i thought the 23 comments were short ones and all but when i click it, DAYMN!!! this can be published as some thesis karangan short story novel ancient scroll thingy.. hahaha..
zach dude, join drew!! 2 is better than 1, that song damn sien edi btw.. gosh..
i feel like an intruder, my comment damn out of place, dah lah tulis some in BM lagi, one malaysia kononnya..
ciao!! nice blog tho :) teehee!!
@tuls: thanks for dropping by! you are most welcome to leave your comments here related or not to the topic!
ReplyDeleteHello Drew :) Gonna take a page out of that big old tuls's book and post something irrelevant here.
ReplyDeleteNice topic though! If i didn't just read your blog, i would've thought that that innocent lil' boy boy is me.. But i've changed now.. So yeah.. Still innocent la.. Being the young kiddo i am..
I dont think it's all internalities though. I generally like to bottom but sometimes when I see a cute, smaller sized guy with a nice bum i feel the urge to take a poke instead. >___>
ReplyDeleteand how unexpected this topic is from a blog url-ed 'love make you silly' LOL ;P
"In a local context, tops are mostly the manly acting ones and the bottom are softer and, dare I say, kinda sissy, the diva or queen."
ReplyDeleteI don't know if this stereotype is prevalent outside of the country I'm in, but this doesn't hold true to where I am at. I know of some drags who like to "top" sometimes and manly types who like to "bottom" for someone too.
So, yes I agree that personality might not generally be the factor of what roles we prefer in bed.
So, which role appeals to you, Drew? (you really don't have to answer this) :-)