I'm Asian, and I'm attracted to white guys a lot (yeah... typical GAM into GWM... lol), and they're certainly on top of my list as far as romance is concerned. When I was asked why, my reason is always that I'm fascinated by our cultural and physical differences. Because they have facial features that are different from mine (blue eyes, sharp nose maybe...), I tend to find them generally appealing and pleasant looking to me. Or maybe I'm just too obsessed with appearance sometimes. As he'll be the one I'm seeing everyday, therefore he has to be somewhat eye-pleasing to me. I'm always warned that great looking guys "equals" high potential of disloyalty, because with their charm they tend to be players. Go for inner beauty, they say. Greedily I'd of course love to have both in a guy, but I still like to judge a book by its cover most of the time. Is this "handsome guys = players" theory true? If I ever date a good looking guy, should I be mentally ready for that?
One last question, are gay guys mostly into anal sex? Cuz' I'm not. Seeing the terms "versatile, top, bottom..." makes me feel myself too weird to be gay... Sometimes I do wonder if I should stop thinking about relationship, because I'm worried sexually I'll never be able to please my partner, so sooner or later he'll end up cheating on me or leaving me... Sometimes I don't know when I should mention this to a potential bf. Before we date?
Don't mind my ignorance. I only came out to myself 2 years ago, so I'm still exploring.
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
•
Most gay guys are not into anal. When polled honestly we discover that oral sex is preferred more often than anal. That is a preconception driven by sterotypes (e.g. Fudgepacker). Its made worse because Pornography tends to cater to all tastes, thus we have a session of oral followed by a session of anal, and since most parents don't talk to their kids about sex in general, let alone what the gays do, our sole source of "real" education is pornography.
In general broad strokes (not applicable to all) when it comes to tops and bottoms there is a general proclivity for the Top to be more dominate in the relationship (in and out of bed) and the bottom tends to be more submissive in the relationship. The idea of top and bottom (identified to sex acts) connects with the idea of genders (based on sex organs).
We are victims of a two-gendered society where the majority look at the roles of man and woman in a 'traditional' sense where it is generally 'accepted' that the man is the dominate individual in the relationship, and he 'tops' the woman (is the inserter). While the woman is to dutifully submit to her husband's will and is the receptacle.
In every aspect of a 'healthy' relationship one partner takes the lead. In some relationships one partner is in charge of all things or nearly all things (The top/Alpha/Man) while the other follows his lead (bottom/Beta/Woman).
In the rest the role of who leads and whole follows depends on which aspect of the relationship we are talking about. One may be in charge of finances, the other in charge of the lawn care - each different aspect of the relationship one leads the other follows.
This is needed simply because two followers will stand around waiting for the other to take up the lead and two leaders will be arguing and fighting over how a thing is to be done.
Our society has painted specific images of a 'man's role' and a 'woman's role' in a relationship. Its not until the last century that societies have seriously challenged these roles and we as a species are still banging out the details. Used to be clear that the woman stayed at home, took care of the house and submitted to the will of her husband. Today the lines are blurred, and in many instances the roles are reversed.
By and large the majority of us fall into the general understanding of traditional gender roles in a relationship because its easier.
Nearly all LGBT are raised in a 'straight' household and we live in a predominately straight world which relies heavily on gender roles to identify roles in a relationship (and in bed). As such LGBT are caught with trying to balance out their need to identify as their own gender while trying to tie in a common frame of reference to something that helps identify where they are in their needs/wants for their role in a relationship.
Other terms are used to try to express this relationship:
Top/Bottom
Dominate/Submissive (Dom/Sub)
Alpha/Beta
Aggressive/Passive
But its not clear cut in most cases. Thus we get throw offs such as the Aggressive Bottom and the Passive Top where the Aggressive bottom does indeed 'accept/receive' but is more take charge in (and usually out of) bed.
Versatility/Versatile are even more complex. Fewer are actually 50/50 they can range say 80% bottom/20% top. It can even mean that they are 75% Aggressive Bottom (in bed) 25% Passive bottom (in bed) and they can be 80% aggressive out of bed 20% passive. (All those numbers I'm pulling out of my hat only used for demonstration of how it could be not how it is in all cases)
It really isn't easy for same gendered couples to know what they are getting in a mate since our whole society is tied so strongly to a two gendered model which carries with it some pretty strict rules of who does what in the relationship and of course it ties into who does what in bed since men have penises and women don't.
•
A few things to point out:
1. First of all, what you find attractive isn't necessarily the same as what others find attractive.
2. Even if a person is what most people would call handsome, he doesn't necessarily have to be a "player". Unfortunately, that kind of thing is not very uncommon as most good-looking guys get lots of admirers, develop great confidence and end up believing they can charm anyone with their looks alone.
3. Good-looking and loyal men DO exist! :o
4. As for you being attracted to whites because of cultural and physical differences; I'm the same only with asians.
5. I have no idea whether most gay guys like anal or not. As for myself, I've never tried.
•
In addition to what BowynAerrow said:
There are many same sex couples and singles, who dont get into the sex part at all. This is not typically talked about, because it doesnt fit the gay stereotypes that gay industries/media have labeled onto all of us.
There are many, many same sex partners out there who are happy being with who they connect with on a level that "sexaholics" will never be able to understand. Sex is not involved in thier relationships. Some of these relationships dont even entertain the thought of sex, and some do nothing more than masterbate each other, when hormones are aroused. In other words, these people are more intellectual than sexual.
They are extremely happy being with someone that stimulates thier brains and not thier sex organs.
Although I believe I am one of these types of people, I like sex every once in a while. But Im not obsessed about it. I find intelligence a huge turn on. Hot men are fine to look at, but for me, they are more of an art form than a sex object.
As for the physical differences between races.....you arent alone. There are many people out there who tend to like one race feature over another race feature. There is nothing wrong with that, thats just your personal perference of what excites you...mentally or physically.
Personally, I am drawn to the more "anglo saxon" type of man. I love alabaster skin, black hair, and hairy bodies. But thats my personal preference to what excites me. I base more of what really excites me from what personality the other guy has. Good, intellectual personalities turn me on more than the physical features I tend to like.
And as far as "players" go....they come in all different races, colors, and breeds.
•
hey guys, thank you so so much for the thoughtful responses. i appreciate it and i enjoyed reading them! inspiring and educational, i'd say. love it love it love it! it sort of gives me a relief now that i shouldn't be worried too much  now i feel more optimistic and hopeful
•
I think that all of the posts above are really insightful. I would like to add that anal sex can be somewhat conditional as well. What I mean by that, is that anal sex (at least for me) isn't something I would want to do with every guy I have dated.
My husband is a good example. When I am with him, I bottom because I am attracted to him in that way. My last significant relationship before him was with a guy who I exclusively topped, because that was the attraction I felt towards him. Years ago, I dated a airman with whom I was fully versatile--we literally took turns bottoming in bed.
Anal sex is one of those things that if its good it is very good, but if it isn't it REALLY isn't, and it not only isn't for everyone...it isn't for everyone WITH everyone. If that makes ANY sense lol.
•
haha, Beaux, thanks for sharing your personal experience. now i know that anal sex is really not a must
•
Beaux Wrote:I think that all of the posts above are really insightful. I would like to add that anal sex can be somewhat conditional as well. What I mean by that, is that anal sex (at least for me) isn't something I would want to do with every guy I have dated.
My husband is a good example. When I am with him, I bottom because I am attracted to him in that way. My last significant relationship before him was with a guy who I exclusively topped, because that was the attraction I felt towards him. Years ago, I dated a airman with whom I was fully versatile--we literally took turns bottoming in bed.
Anal sex is one of those things that if its good it is very good, but if it isn't it REALLY isn't, and it not only isn't for everyone...it isn't for everyone WITH everyone. If that makes ANY sense lol.
this happens to me too.
in a general sense, if the other person is bigger and stronger (or older sometimes) than i am i would happily accept the bottom role in bed; if he were smaller and skinnier (and younger) i would prefer to be the top. it really depends on the person. also, versatile people (if i find out) turn me off as a top partner, but not as a bottom one if he fulfills the other requirements.
•
thanks for sharing. that makes sense to me too
•
appearance:
one can not love all of gods creations but for the gay population preferences are some what limiting in a small playing field. ![[Image: 57.jpg]](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XjWfA8HXQUE/T1fgnX2bHwI/AAAAAAAAC0U/3S6coz8m3W8/s1600/57.jpg)
anal sex
the 80's experiences has changed things where the general population is not jonsing to do it.
•
|
My theories...
