So they say that no means no, especially when it comes to matters sex. But it's hardly a black and white question in my opinion. Years ago my date for Halloween stood me up, so I made eyes with this Asian gymnast who was dressed as a caveman. One thing lead to another and we ended up in my bed. I asked him what he liked to do, and he said anything but get fucked. Okay for me, no problem. But he did happily turn over and let me inspect the goods that cannot be fucked. I spread his bubble butt apart and couldn't resist chowing down. He liked this too. It went on for several minutes when he began saying excitedly "fuck me, fuck me!"  I reminded him of what he had said earlier, and he said "fuck me" again. So I did. He liked it, I liked it, but should I have stayed with his original intent?

Another example. My favorite Asian masseur of a few years ago, another hunky guy who gave a very sensual massage, without sex, but I could suck his dick and of course he always made sure I left happy. So one time he is over me with his butt near my face. He had never set a rule on that, so I pulled it a little closer and did my chow down thing. After about 5 minutes, I stopped for breath and he said "never do that again.!" Okay, I won't. Until the next time, when I was minding my manners and his butt kept getting closer to my face. But I resisted. Finally he just about sat on me and of course he wanted to get rimmed. Never do this again, or go with his obvious desire- unspoken though. I munched, and this time, he didn't complain.

No, he didn't.

This is very frequently what sex is all about.

Thank you.

Transgressing self-imposed boundaries.

2 hours ago, Lucky said:

So they say that no means no, especially when it comes to matters sex. But it's hardly a black and white question in my opinion. Years ago my date for Halloween stood me up, so I made eyes with this Asian gymnast who was dressed as a caveman. One thing lead to another and we ended up in my bed. I asked him what he liked to do, and he said anything but get fucked. Okay for me, no problem. But he did happily turn over and let me inspect the goods that cannot be fucked. I spread his bubble butt apart and couldn't resist chowing down. He liked this too. It went on for several minutes when he began saying excitedly "fuck me, fuck me!"  I reminded him of what he had said earlier, and he said "fuck me" again. So I did. He liked it, I liked it, but should I have stayed with his original intent?

Another example. My favorite Asian masseur of a few years ago, another hunky guy who gave a very sensual massage, without sex, but I could suck his dick and of course he always made sure I left happy. So one time he is over me with his butt near my face. He had never set a rule on that, so I pulled it a little closer and did my chow down thing. After about 5 minutes, I stopped for breath and he said "never do that again.!" Okay, I won't. Until the next time, when I was minding my manners and his butt kept getting closer to my face. But I resisted. Finally he just about sat on me and of course he wanted to get rimmed. Never do this again, or go with his obvious desire- unspoken though. I munched, and this time, he didn't complain.

No, he didn't.

How can you possibly,  after last week (weak) telling  everyone you’re leaving again, and then now, asking the same people to believe you’re upset with the human condition/behavior of others. I just don’t understand this.

 

Larstrup, please re-read what I said last week. And Merry Christmas!

52 minutes ago, Larstrup said:

How can you possibly,  after last week (weak) telling  everyone you’re leaving again, and then now, asking the same people to believe you’re upset with the human condition/behavior of others. I just don’t understand this.

 

In all fairness, he said he was taking a break for the Holidays.    Guess it was the "shortest" Holiday on record ?  

Consent is a very different thing in the gay community than in the straight community.

Straight girls take sex much more seriously.

On 12/25/2017 at 2:42 PM, BiBottomBoy said:

Consent is a very different thing in the gay community than in the straight community.

Straight girls take sex much more seriously.

Do you really believe that?

Yes. I do. As a bottom I love being pressured/coereced into sex.

But if I was a woman and people constantly were trying I'd probably hate it

12 hours ago, BiBottomBoy said:

Yes. I do. As a bottom I love being pressured/coereced into sex.

But if I was a woman and people constantly were trying I'd probably hate it

YES!!!

Great insight & wisdom in both those observations.

'We men are not pigs, we are just dogs.'

And then, on the other side, that women still have to put up with all the shit of male-controlled...etc., etc., etc...everything.

It's really a wonder that the female half (slightly over, actually) of the population does not rise up -- as has been imagined by more than one SF writer (female and male both) -- and just decide to slaughter all but a token number of the males.

Or socially castrate them into a small, safe zone.

Thye'd probably leave the gay ones alive.

On 12/24/2017 at 7:01 PM, Lucky said:

So they say that no means no, especially when it comes to matters sex. But it's hardly a black and white question in my opinion. Years ago my date for Halloween stood me up, so I made eyes with this Asian gymnast who was dressed as a caveman. One thing lead to another and we ended up in my bed. I asked him what he liked to do, and he said anything but get fucked. Okay for me, no problem. But he did happily turn over and let me inspect the goods that cannot be fucked. I spread his bubble butt apart and couldn't resist chowing down. He liked this too. It went on for several minutes when he began saying excitedly "fuck me, fuck me!"  I reminded him of what he had said earlier, and he said "fuck me" again. So I did. He liked it, I liked it, but should I have stayed with his original intent?

This is a non-example. This was not a no. This was someone changing his mind. Which is his prerogative, as much as it would be his prerogative to ask to be fucked, and then change his mind and ask you to stop. If you continued trying after being asked to stop, that would be an example of continuing past "No".

 

The problem is that there are SJWs who say that people can't change their mind in the heat of the moment - that once they've said no to something you have to assume they still mean no even if they really mean yes.

5 hours ago, BiBottomBoy said:

The problem is that there are SJWs who say that people can't change their mind in the heat of the moment - that once they've said no to something you have to assume they still mean no even if they really mean yes.

UGH. "SJWs"=Social Justice Warriors. Your use of this phrase lets me know exactly who you are and what kind of bullshit you believe.

13 minutes ago, torogen said:

UGH. "SJWs"=Social Justice Warriors. Your use of this phrase lets me know exactly who you are and what kind of bullshit you believe.

I am as rabid lefty as they come, but SJWs do exist. People for whom cold rigid principle in the abstract overrules the hot realities of lived life.

Since you raise the question, exactly how would you describe who you are? And which brand of bullshit you believe?

SJW is a SNARL WORD created by the right to discredit people who believe in social justice. Rational people should not adopt those intentionally inflammatory and derogatory words. It is possible to discuss the issues without bringing in propaganda. Even using those phrases means that you have allowed the opposition to frame the discussion.

Just now, torogen said:

SJW is a SNARL WORD created by the right to discredit people who believe in social justice. Rational people should not adopt those intentionally inflammatory and derogatory words. It is possible to discuss the issues without bringing in propaganda. Even using those phrases means that you have allowed the opposition to frame the discussion.

I disagree in whole with that view.

I know a lot of people who self-identify as SJWs.

1 minute ago, BiBottomBoy said:

I know a lot of people who self-identify as SJWs.

Yes, there are some people who have tried to "reclaim" the word, much as Queer Nation reclaimed the word queer back in the 90s. More power to them. I choose not to use propaganda created by right-wingers. It's like saying "pro-life" instead of "anti-choice". Framing is intentional and powerful. I would no more use SJW than I would libtard, feminazi, etc. The phrase comes from the same place and has the same intention as those words.

But this is off-topic. I have never heard anyone argue that a person can't change their mind and give consent.

Eh. If you look at Jezebel you'll find lots saying you can change your mind to "no" but can't change your mind to "yes."

34 minutes ago, BiBottomBoy said:

Eh. If you look at Jezebel you'll find lots saying you can change your mind to "no" but can't change your mind to "yes."

Really? Links?

 

I'll see what I can find.

 

Here you go.

 

https://splinternews.com/the-scary-sex-trap-that-is-nice-guy-stealthing-1820515761

Before one can change his mind to yes, there must have been a no first. In the first example, there was a clear no. Then he may have chained his mind, or else might argue that I gave him no choice, in which event, his no still stands.

The second example is a nonverbal change of mind. In either case, it is my word against his, but the point is that I am trying to honor his wishes. I would have preferred the masseur to have verbalized his change of mind.

 

"I know my mouth said NO, but what do my EYES say ?"

 

 

Verbal is good