Let’s talk about Top Privilege

So let’s talk about Top Privilege. Do you guys believe that in the gay community tops are more desired than verse or bottom guys? Do you think this lets total tops get away with more than bottoms might? Another good question is, what exactly makes a total top? Does he have to be hung? Fit? Tall? Or is it simply his refusal to "take" that lets him get away with so much more?

As a total top myself I’ve notice some of the fringe benefits of being one. The first and most noticeable is that I really don’t care what I’ve eaten prior to having sex. Chipotle smothered in curry with a side of gravy or Taco Bell and a PBR to wash it down? Sounds great, now lets fuck! But if any of my former partners or my current boyfriend was to have just one of those items, you can pretty much guarantee it’d be a “bad night to bottom”. So either no anal or they risk having a potential embarrassment due to the nature of them getting penetrated.

The second thing I’ve noticed is the reaction on my Grindr when they see a fit 6’2 Total Top show up in their area. I’ve literally shown multiple friends that with those stats and a crap photo I can still get a hit every 5 minutes for the next 3-5 hours. However when I remove Total Top from the description it drops to 1-2 hits every hour. I’ve also noticed that the assumption is that I’m masculine (despite my somewhat twinkish appearance) is always gathered when I put that I’m a TT, but if I take it away I always get a question along the lines of “You’re masc right?”.

It seems to me that no matter what, total tops seem to get a trophy boy status in a world where it should be more about two guys having a good time together. I’ve noticed that my straight friends all find this very weird. While some seem to think in the lines of the “male” and “female” of the relationship, others who seem to have gotten past that are still hung up on the idea that a bottom isn’t getting pleasure. And while I know there are certain cases of tops just getting themselves off, I’ve noticed one redeeming quality from my other friends who are total tops. We’re eager to please our bottoms. Maybe it’s this simple fact or maybe it is the illusion of masculinity and power that makes a total top seem like such a prize possession. I guess I really want to know from everyone what their thoughts are.

Catch you later,
Mike Tango

Soapbox Preaching: Why I Hate the Phrase "Sex with the person you love is the best sex"

There are a lot of versions of this phrase that float around on twitter, and every time I see them retweeted on my feed, I kind of lose my shit. My twitter feed was recently treated to a shortened burst of this rant, but I thought I should elaborate just in case my 140 character posts came across as terse or mystifying (I am frequently mystifying, so I understand.)
But really, I thought they deserved more elaboration than I was able to give them in mini-rant form. So, here we go: Why the phrase "Sex with the person you love is the best sex" (or any iteration thereof) pisses me off.

Sex is an extremely personal thing- whether it's casual, monogamous, polyamorous, or committed in any other way. That's the key here- "personal"- and every person is different. If you, personally, only have sex with people you love, cool, that's your prerogative. But you don't get to decide your sex is BETTER than sex other people are having simply because you're in love with someone.

Another thing- this phrase sets a super dangerous precedent where uninformed or young people mix up their oxytocin rush after sex for "True Love". Oxytocin is a hormone that is released after sex which causes feelings of bonding, affection, and trust which can feel a whole lot like LO-V-E. 
The reason that this is dangerous is, post-orgasm, someone who treats you like absolute shit can start looking like the love of your life. This could be someone using another for sex or money. This could be a mentally or physically abusive person who this person needs to get away from. This could even be a good person who is only invested in the physical part of the relationship who will become freaked out and defensive if the person they're sleeping with suddenly starts proclaiming love. A man. A woman. Anybody. 
People who have never had sex before, be they young or old, could potentially base their entire post-sex mentality on this phrase. This is not a harmless retweet, this inaccurate phrase could actually be harming people's relationship psyche and setting them back on their healthy-relationship learning timeline. People are going to get hurt.

Finally, people are never going to grow sexually in relationships if their entire basis is this phrase. They'll assume that because they are in love, the sex has to be the best they're ever going to have. It will get stagnant, it will get boring, and you're going to look for ways to "spice things up". Basically, stagnant sex=bad sex and this phrase encourages stagnant sex.

So, what really makes sex good/better/best? It happens through communication, honesty, chemistry and knowledge of BOTH sex and your partner. The point I'm arguing is that not a single one of these things is exclusive to love. Does love make these things easier for some people? Tooooootally! that's what's supposed to happen when you're in love! But it doesn't mean that people who aren't in love can't have sex that's every bad metaphor for good sex all rolled up into one. Get out there and learn all you can about sex. Learn how to give yourself an orgasm, ask your partner what they need to orgasm. Don't fake it. Have good sex.

The "sexy son" hypothesis, or, my biological excuse for putting up with an asshole for too long

Fairly recently, I came to the conclusion that I needed to go through with finally purging a toxic relationship from my life. This guy (#bigdrummerboy, if you are a Twitter follower) was someone that I met back in 2010 after a particularly traumatic breakup. At the time, my friends decided the best way to cheer me up was hot guys, and being the band nerds we are, they immediately carted me to the nearest place where a Drum Corps was holding a camp. (In case you doubt that DCI is full of some of the sexiest men I have ever met, here are some photographs of one of the Corps) So, as we're sitting in the stands of the local football stadium, my friends and I played the game of "pick your favorite" and quickly came to the conclusion that every single one of us thought a particular guy on the drumline was it. All seven of us agreed.

To shorten this story somewhat, he ended up approaching me later in the week and, suddenly, I was caught up in this maelstrom of sexuality that he exuded like other human beings "exude" carbon dioxide. I'm not even sure now, after I've eliminated him from my life, if I can explain my reaction to him in a way that doesn't make me sound mentally touched. The sexual tension was so think I couldn't think. I became a bundle of energy, a grouping of nerves, A VAGINA ATTACHED TO A BRAIN STEM.
Anecdote 1) I met up with him after one of their performances and as we were walking somewhere he jokingly lifted his shirt to show me "how much weight he's lost" and I literally lost the majority of my motor function. I was unable to walk, talk, or do anything but stare at his stomach until he put his shirt down.
Anecdote 2) At one point during a semi-public heavy petting session, I pulled his shirt up over his stomach and just...bit him. And growled. It was at this moment he pulled me close to him and said "Yeah. I know."

In short, we had a sexual/chemical/physical compatibility that you probably could have bottled and sold to porn stars as an enhancement drug.

Unfortunately, as I was to learn partially that summer, and learned again in the summer of 2012, this guy...seriously, folks, ladies in particular, learn from my mistakes and walk away from toxic assholes like this before you get as hurt as I did. Some of his crowning moments:
1) Despite the fact that I went down on him more times than I can count, I know exactly how many times he touched my vagina. He touched it twice. How did I think that was okay.
2) He (being on tour at the time) needed to use my computer to send some stuff for his study abroad program. Afterwards, I opened my computer to find that he had been, not emailing the forms, but looking at titty pictures that he had been emailed by four other girls who resided on various towns he would be visiting on his tour.
3) Finally, after spending over a month calling me "his girl", holding my hands, snuggling with me on his water breaks, kissing me randomly etc, he decided that I was "acting too girlfriend-y" and that I needed to stop. When I informed him that, to the best of my knowledge, we were just friends with benefits and I didn't want to date him, he smiled and put my hand on his cock before asking me if I felt generous.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming he's the devil. I'm not even saying he's a bad person- but the way that he treated me was unacceptable and because of the sexual chemistry I was blinded to it. Even to this day, I catch myself thinking that maybe the sex is worth it. But it's not.

I needed an explanation- for my own piece of mind. I like to think of myself as an independent, aware woman who wants a companion that respects and treats her well- so why did I put up with him? Why was I still so attracted to him? And last fall, during an Animal Behavior class I was taking, an answer of sorts emerged from our studies of mating strategies.
There is this hypothesis that was proposed in 1979 by these guys called Weatherhead and Robinson. They mostly studied birds, who have the highest occurrence of monogamous couplings in nature. However, this hypothesis can be applied to almost any animal, including us big-brained bipeds.
I highly doubt you'll look up scientific literature (as people who are expecting the first published post here to be about fuckin', I don't blame you) but the general gist of the hypothesis is this:
Females are attracted to promiscuous males, even if they won't help with child rearing or resource providing, because those womanizing genes of his will raise the chances of her own male offspring spreading their (and, indirectly, her) DNA far and wide.

So I'll blame that.
Yeah.