?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Vertical Prose


November 16th, 2010

sketching out understandings of human actions in dysfunctional relationships @ 06:08 pm

if women are indeed interested in LTR monogamy
which I would apply to Bottom queers as well
the receivers
the dedicated receivers
with huge fear bases in raising/caring for the offspring or suffering through the diseases

they present to the men who want to fuck them
they need commitment before they give up their snatch
of course they want it
so they're willing to be convinced
even by bad actors

acting and lying are similar feats
in both you have to convince yourself of your character to be believed by your audience
the trouble with lying is it is socially shamed
which means it's usually hidden
often even from the liar
where an actor is lauded for putting on his mask
a much clearer distinction
it is easier to take it off
for a man wanting to impress his mate
he perceives her motivation and internalizes it to made his declaration believable
often losing the understanding that led to his actions in the necessary obfuscation
leads him to a life of agony
Desiring The One
while driven by his nature to pleasure and disseminate himself with the many



.iP
 
Share  |  |

Comments

 
From:(Anonymous)
Date:November 16th, 2010 11:22 pm (UTC)

nice

(Link)
i take it that you are reading sex at dawn... LOVE THE BOOK!
but um...
who said that bottoms were looking for monogamy?
-i
[User Picture Icon]
From:dominicvine
Date:November 17th, 2010 07:12 am (UTC)

Re: nice

(Link)
omniagamy!

ok.
my argument comes from the fact that many big older bottom guys that i know aren't looking for rampant sex in the way the tops i know are
a lot of guys that are geared as tops want to fuck a lot of different guys
want to get their cocks sucked by anyone who's around
where as bottom guys tend to be more desirous of one guy they can call their own
it's not so much about sexual monogamy as it is about commitment
another comment i got talked about the psychick receptivity of the bottom as well
and that's very true
especially if you're taking cum up your ass
you're not just afraid of disease from many men
it's just too much to take: a whole bunch of people's emotions
it's overwhelming
that's why i don't like bottoming all the time
i mean
i'll such cock all the time
but that's not having random people pump their root chakra directly into my root chakra
pumping it into my throat chakra allows me a lot more control over how i filter it and disperse it
. . .

Monogamy is about sexual energy and very much about seed
let's say there is two kinds of monogamy
and the taking of someone's seed is much more intense than playing with someone

that's the difference between the gay term of "playing" and "breeding" right?
you're not a cum pig, are you?
and you've already told me about your emotional drive
you love sex
but often you would just rather do it with your husband
you like the idea of it all over the place
but you prefer the action of it in his realm

and my initial writing was a bit flat and monodirectional
i'm glad for the comments i've got coz it's given me a better perspective

thank you for recommending the book
yes, i'm loving it
and even though i forgot about it for a while (lost in the world of my iPhone)
i was very grateful to find it today

love ya!

oh
and this is the big problem with me living out here
i love being in NYC coz at this hour of the night (11pm) i can call Leo or someone else in CA and chat away late into the night
but at this hours in CA it's 2am in NYC and you're asleep
THIS is the hour i'm free and would love to chat
but everyone is sleeping

so i'm typing...

i'm going to sleep outside again tonight
hope it's not too cold
the sky is so beautiful
last night i saw three shooting stars
but had jacked off a few times before getting out there
so was really tired by the time i lay down and fell asleep pretty quick
not tonight... NO!

i'm off now

HUGS

MWA

.d
[User Picture Icon]
From:bigbeard61
Date:November 17th, 2010 03:27 am (UTC)
(Link)
I guess I tend to think that the tendency of women toward LTR monogamy is less connected with the the nature of sexual acts than with the impulses stemming from reproductive function. I would definitely accept that receptivity is connected with a greater psychic openness nurturing in immediate connections, but larger scale life organization doesn't seem to follow this pattern, and this difference is more connected to gender itself. Of course there are a million exceptions, but over all, I tend to think that it really is about the difference between men and women.
[User Picture Icon]
From:dominicvine
Date:November 17th, 2010 06:56 am (UTC)
(Link)
yes... it is true
the receiving of psychic spelled with the orgasm is very intense
that has a big factor
perhaps bigger than the fear
I don't agree with the reproductive impulse idea, though
I'm reading a book right now that inspired this called " Sex at Dawn"
which I think you would love
coz y'r so brainy and sexy
check it out
[User Picture Icon]
From:dominicvine
Date:November 17th, 2010 06:53 am (UTC)

what I wrote to my aunt when she asked what "LTR monogamy" meant

(Link)
LTR= Long Term Relationship
vs: "hookup"
it's an Internet term that indicates people are looking for partners 
not just sex

I'm reading a book right now called "Sex At Dawn" examining the history of human sexuality

one of the premises it's examining is the common misconception that women are passive and have low libidos

I think what I wrote could just as easily be turned at how women are Expected to be "pure" and not lusty
and though many of them don't feel that 
they feel they should
so learn to act like it
which causes huge problems for them
living against their own nature


I think society is retarded, myself
but... you know me

I was going to say that it might not fuck up women as much because society expects them to suppress so much of themselves they are better at it

but that stupid
of course it hurts them

and men are expected to surppress themselves
in an "opposite" way: not supposed to show emotion...

Society.
Retarded.
Seriously, yo.

love ya!
[User Picture Icon]
From:broduke2000
Date:November 17th, 2010 08:16 am (UTC)
(Link)
Top? Bottom? I'd just be happy if more Gays understood playing in the shower with me.
[User Picture Icon]
From:ednixon
Date:November 17th, 2010 09:13 am (UTC)

and, now, from D.H. Lawerence

(Link)
the closing scene from "Women In Love"
****************************************

"`Did you need Gerald?' she asked one evening.

`Yes,' he said.

`Aren't I enough for you?' she asked.

`No,' he said. `You are enough for me, as far as a woman is concerned. You are all women to me. But I wanted a man friend, as eternal as you and I are eternal.'

`Why aren't I enough?' she said. `You are enough for me. I don't want anybody else but you. Why isn't it the same with you?'

`Having you, I can live all my life without anybody else, any other sheer intimacy. But to make it complete, really happy, I wanted eternal union with a man too: another kind of love,' he said.

`I don't believe it,' she said. `It's an obstinacy, a theory, a perversity.'

`Well --' he said.

`You can't have two kinds of love. Why should you!'

It seems as if I can't,' he said. `Yet I wanted it.'

`You can't have it, because it's false, impossible,' she said.

`I don't believe that,' he answered."
[User Picture Icon]
From:dominicvine
Date:November 25th, 2010 09:01 am (UTC)

Re: and, now, from D.H. Lawerence

(Link)
hey Frank, thanks for this
i've never actually read the book
(though i read others by him)
this was great to read when i first saw your comment
thank you.

THANKS
[User Picture Icon]
From:ednixon
Date:November 25th, 2010 10:32 am (UTC)

Re: and, now, from D.H. Lawerence

(Link)
I was actually looking for the scene with Birkin in the flea market. Couldn't find it. The closing scene is better, probably.

Vertical Prose