This is so beautiful. I'm currently at a BYU dance competition, and you can cut the sexual repression with a knife, but it's all in good fun. I'm enjoying the people-watching immensely: the ultra-serious, ultra gay-acting blond boy, the lanky brunett who looks oddly familiar and cheek-pinchingly cute but a touch sullen, the really hot guy in red who sadly for my fantasies is married and has a baby girl, the girls who seem to have no clue that their partners are inclined towards boys, etc etc. I love it. Oh, and the dancing is fun to watch, too.
But seriously...I always forget how many quite good-looking guys there are on this campus. I should probably not be checking out guys in the Wilk. Ah well, sue me.
You know, if you brought in the dance teams, the Young Ambassadors, and the BYU Men's Chorus, this room might spontaneously combust from the sexual energy of having like 90% of BYU's heterosexually challenged dudes together.
08 October 2009
07 October 2009
Post-Matis-Fireside Stalking
The lighter side of the firesides (which are not, contrary to rumors and to the tone of this post, complete meat markets):
So, one often meets new acquaintances at the Matises' firesides, and one may even exchange a phone number or two, on a friendly level of course, not for booty calls (not even cuddle-booty calls, as one acquaintance discovered *wink*). One may forget his phone and give his phone number to someone who asked for it, and that person may not call one's phone, so now that person has his phone number, but he doesn't have theirs. Totally not kosher. I mean, one needs to be able to screen one's calls or gladly answer, depending on the caller. I mean, not necessarily me, but someone.
And one may notice someone looking at him from across the room and whispering to his friend, and one may wonder what they're talking about or whether one should be flattered or mildly disconcerted or suspicious, or all of the above. Then said person may come up and talk when opportunity arises, and may or may not be stifling their grin, which is still somewhat hard to read: are they hiding amusement? attraction? obsession? mockery? Shoot, well, they seemed nice enough. I mean, hypothetically speaking.
Then of course there are the crushables. The ones one talks to and is torn about getting to know because there's some crush potential and one doesn't want that in one's life right now, either crusher or crushee. But the crushable seems like such a nice guy you can't help but want to get to know him better. Then you find out he's way younger than he looks, and you're thrown for a loop and feel mildly pedophilic for even thinking he was crushable, and the crushability goes right out the nearest open window. I mean, I can imagine this happening and how awkward it could potentially be.
Then there's the conversation with another acquaintance in front of others about how you've seen each other naked and how there's really nothing left to hide between you after that and you look at their faces and know they're really unsure of what to make of all of it, but you offer no further explanation and leave it at that. ...and you're not sure what to talk about after that, so you say, "Mmm...these are good cookies. Excuse me, I need some water." I mean, that could happen.
And as you're talking about the nakedness, Sister Matis walks by and pats your shoulder as she passes. I mean, I've heard of that happening to someone.
Of course there's the post-fireside Facebook search where one looks up the people one met at the fireside to see if their profile is semi-public or they have pictures available to give one a better idea of their personality, and one pays attention to who the mutual friends are to know what kind of "crowd" they're running in and one shakes one's head when they have all the "wrong" friends in common and one thinks, "you're a BYU student? Really? Better watch your back..." And then one waits patiently by one's computer wondering when the new acquaintances will add him and refusing to add them because one generally doesn't add people until they've hung out a couple of times and have some kind of real connection, but one still feels mildly disappointed when no adds show up and the self-flattery is over, and one realizes how silly one has been and shrugs it off and decides one didn't really want new "we just met and barely talked" Facebook friends anyway but still enjoys the "personal research" aspect of looking such people up on Facebook and wondering if they'll ever meet again...
I mean, what if, right?
So, one often meets new acquaintances at the Matises' firesides, and one may even exchange a phone number or two, on a friendly level of course, not for booty calls (not even cuddle-booty calls, as one acquaintance discovered *wink*). One may forget his phone and give his phone number to someone who asked for it, and that person may not call one's phone, so now that person has his phone number, but he doesn't have theirs. Totally not kosher. I mean, one needs to be able to screen one's calls or gladly answer, depending on the caller. I mean, not necessarily me, but someone.
And one may notice someone looking at him from across the room and whispering to his friend, and one may wonder what they're talking about or whether one should be flattered or mildly disconcerted or suspicious, or all of the above. Then said person may come up and talk when opportunity arises, and may or may not be stifling their grin, which is still somewhat hard to read: are they hiding amusement? attraction? obsession? mockery? Shoot, well, they seemed nice enough. I mean, hypothetically speaking.
Then of course there are the crushables. The ones one talks to and is torn about getting to know because there's some crush potential and one doesn't want that in one's life right now, either crusher or crushee. But the crushable seems like such a nice guy you can't help but want to get to know him better. Then you find out he's way younger than he looks, and you're thrown for a loop and feel mildly pedophilic for even thinking he was crushable, and the crushability goes right out the nearest open window. I mean, I can imagine this happening and how awkward it could potentially be.
Then there's the conversation with another acquaintance in front of others about how you've seen each other naked and how there's really nothing left to hide between you after that and you look at their faces and know they're really unsure of what to make of all of it, but you offer no further explanation and leave it at that. ...and you're not sure what to talk about after that, so you say, "Mmm...these are good cookies. Excuse me, I need some water." I mean, that could happen.
And as you're talking about the nakedness, Sister Matis walks by and pats your shoulder as she passes. I mean, I've heard of that happening to someone.
Of course there's the post-fireside Facebook search where one looks up the people one met at the fireside to see if their profile is semi-public or they have pictures available to give one a better idea of their personality, and one pays attention to who the mutual friends are to know what kind of "crowd" they're running in and one shakes one's head when they have all the "wrong" friends in common and one thinks, "you're a BYU student? Really? Better watch your back..." And then one waits patiently by one's computer wondering when the new acquaintances will add him and refusing to add them because one generally doesn't add people until they've hung out a couple of times and have some kind of real connection, but one still feels mildly disappointed when no adds show up and the self-flattery is over, and one realizes how silly one has been and shrugs it off and decides one didn't really want new "we just met and barely talked" Facebook friends anyway but still enjoys the "personal research" aspect of looking such people up on Facebook and wondering if they'll ever meet again...
I mean, what if, right?
05 October 2009
Losing It Late
Aw, crap. See, not only am I no Itzhak Perlman by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm in a demographic likely to experience sexual dysfunction later in life? Well, that's it. I give up. Lifelong virgin, that's it.
Warning: though this particular video is pretty tame, some of his other videos (which will likely be linked to at the end of this one), while refreshingly frank, use over-the-top language (in my opinion) and a notable...how to say this...lack of expressed support of sexual restraint or "the law of chastity".
Warning: though this particular video is pretty tame, some of his other videos (which will likely be linked to at the end of this one), while refreshingly frank, use over-the-top language (in my opinion) and a notable...how to say this...lack of expressed support of sexual restraint or "the law of chastity".
02 October 2009
Why Wait? (or Homosex...less)
HESITATIONS IN DISCUSSING THE S-WORD
I've hesitated to talk about sexual reservation or experience in a personal sense for various reasons:
Ultimately, the details are nobody's business but mine and those with whom I have shared physical affection in whatever form, but for the purposes of this post, I'll give just a brief description of "what base I've been to".
SECOND BASE? MAYBE?
The extent of my romantic physical expression includes the following:
Let's just say nobody has needed to see the bishop. Among my gay friends, they're often surprised how little sexual experience I have and with how few people, especially for a guy at my age.
PRUDISH...
With that background, I'll say that for various reasons, I have personal hesitations around sex. I don't believe this is, contrary to some perceptions, a self-conflicted shame around sexuality or an inability to break from pointlessly puritanical upbringing. Puritanical I may be in some ways, but I see sexual intimacy as beautiful, affectionate, fun, pleasurable, passionate, bonding, etc. I see it as something too intimate and bonding (chemically, emotionally, physically, spiritually) to share within casual or recent attachments which have not reached a genuinely high level of true intimacy, connection, and dedication.
...BUT NOT THAT PRUDISH
It's not that I avoid sexuality at all costs. In fact, I've been a terrible tease in the past, testing my ability to elicit certain responses from people and then being the one to put on the brakes to maintain my boundaries but really enjoying the sexual tension of it all. I've backed off from that, I think, but I won't deny I've done it, and I'm probably lucky I kept my boundaries as well as I did.
PROVING SOMETHING BY WAITING...
No, this is less about repression and more about intimacy, as far as I can tell. Sometimes, I question not only my own motives for being friends or spending a lot of time together but the other person's. I question whether someone is genuinely interested in my personality, my thoughts, my goodness...in short, if they're interested in me and in bringing out the best in each other, being true friends and companions (along with the probably/hopefully very fun sexual benefits), or if they're primarily after something they find intoxicating or physically attractive about me. Mind you, I'm not claiming to have any sort of animal magnetism or irresistible charm. *scoff* Nor am I claiming true romance excludes that intoxicating love and passion. But I do wonder, when people seem interested in me, what it is they're interested in. I wonder if they would be so engaged in my ideas if they weren't curious about what's under the hood. I wonder if we'd feel close to each other if we didn't think there was that unspoken, enticing possibility of making fireworks one day soon. I wonder whether they will give up or put off the pleasure they may want now for a relationship with someone they love. Is it worth it to them? Is it worth it to me?
It's not merely a test. As I see it, it's not about making them "prove it" to me to satisfy some insecurity. It's about both of us showing what is most important and proving the relationship. I figure most people who are willing to hold out are actually interested in the relationship, not mainly in getting their jollies with someone they find attractive.
I suppose some people's way of doing this is to go ahead and have fun, and then if they're still interested once they've had all the fun, they know it's "real"? Perhaps I'm actually making it worse by holding out and maintaining that intense sexual tension and vague anticipation, which makes us feel more interested in each other than we are. But I also think a relationship can only take so much of that before one or both parties say it's not worth the wait and move on. And at least in that case, I'd be able to walk away knowing I didn't give myself over to someone who didn't fully value what I was offering, nor did I take advantage of someone else because they were what was available.
DIFFERENT STROKES...
I've had a couple of friends tell me, "You just ascribe more to this stuff than I do. I can be sexual with someone without it meaning anything. It's just fun." Now, they also later made admissions they either don't think it ever truly means nothing for both people involved (unless they're both to the point where sex is like a handshake) or that physical intimacy just wasn't the same when it wasn't with someone they loved. But others have continued to insist sex is recreational as long as it's not hurting anyone (AKA neither party is cheating on or deceiving their partner). Maybe that's true, but I don't see it that way, and I refuse to numb my sensitivities in that respect for my own or anyone else's comfort, despite it seeming like a truly rational attitude in certain ways.
CONSCIENCE-SAVER?
I have to question how much of that attitude is a conscious-saving disconnect. Sexuality is a heck of a lot of fun. And going without sexual expression is not easy. It's not. No, don't argue with me. I know this because I've done it. I'm doing it. Of course, now that it's been a long time since I actually made out with anyone, it's easier than right after I had. But I've also refrained when it would've been SO easy to move my hand somewhere, or remove an article or two of clothing. And it feels SO good to feel like you're "connecting" with someone, whether or not you think it's a "real" connection, or to experience the racing heartbeat and whatever chemicals are produced in anticipation of sex.
Since it's not easy to go without, a lot of people...well...don't. They "slip up" or they "have some fun" or they "fool around." And rather than let their conscience tell them they're doing something they shouldn't, or thinking about the emotional consequences of their actions on others, they just shrug and say it's all in good fun. But maybe not all. Since I can't get inside anyone's head, I'll just shrug and say I'm not that way, whatever way it is.
VIRGINAL STUBBORNNESS
It's no secret among those closest to me that I am a bit of a prude this way. My frank way of talking sometimes throws people off because they make deductions about me based on my bluntness. I've laughed at more than one shocked expression when someone found out I've only really kissed a couple of people and have never done anything that led to anybody climaxing. I'm not sure if they're shocked because of my age, or the way I talk, or what, but it's funny to see people so flabbergasted.
Yet a prude I remain. I intend to refrain from sexuality until I'm in a relationship in which it is a genuine expression of sincere affection, emotional investment, and vulnerability. And sexuality of the kind I have not yet experienced is definitely for a committed, long-term relationship (marriage perhaps?). And if that means no kinky stuff until at least a year of committed, monogamous relationship, or until marriage, I kinda like that idea. Prove your dedication, baby, and then we'll have some major fun...if my body is still capable of it when such a time ever comes around...if it ever comes around. Wow...I could die an old man virgin. How very tragic.
...OK, so I don't see that as tragic. Despite occasionally lamenting my lost youthful years spent in sexless ignorance, I think I've experienced enough of passion to have an idea of what I'm missing out on, and while it's good stuff, I just think anyone who believes that living without sex is something tragic and awful doesn't live a very rich life, or doesn't know real intimacy independent of sexual relationships. But perhaps that's another post for another time.
I've hesitated to talk about sexual reservation or experience in a personal sense for various reasons:
- I've not wanted to say I've never done this or that only to turn around the next week (year? decade?) and lose that claim. But let's be honest, I'm a slow mover; that's not a high risk.
- I've not wanted to attract the efforts of those who might try to defile me, and I've not wanted to deter the efforts of those I might want to try to defile me.
- I've not wanted to destroy any ultra-pure perceptions some may have of me by admitting I'm not completely inexperienced in expressing affection or passion in certain ways, but I've not wanted to speak of my experience as if I'm wise in the ways of the flesh, either.
- I've not wanted to make myself sound more or less experienced or repressed than I am because people have such different ideas about what it means to have "crossed boundaries" since everyone's boundaries are slightly different, and goodness knows there are some amusingly creative ways to push bounds without "crossing the line" (remember how Julia Roberts' character in Pretty Woman, a prostitute, never kissed on the lips?).
Ultimately, the details are nobody's business but mine and those with whom I have shared physical affection in whatever form, but for the purposes of this post, I'll give just a brief description of "what base I've been to".
SECOND BASE? MAYBE?
The extent of my romantic physical expression includes the following:
- cuddling (often with intertwined limbs 'cause it's just nicer that way),
- spooning (the watching-a-movie or sleeping kind, not the sex kind),
- what I call "active cuddling" (the somewhat handsy stuff that's not really making out but is certainly getting there, just without kissing or grinding), and
- very occasional (read "maybe two people") "making out" (by which I mean the kind of kissing and touching that is passionate but keeping the man-goods off-limits).
Let's just say nobody has needed to see the bishop. Among my gay friends, they're often surprised how little sexual experience I have and with how few people, especially for a guy at my age.
PRUDISH...
With that background, I'll say that for various reasons, I have personal hesitations around sex. I don't believe this is, contrary to some perceptions, a self-conflicted shame around sexuality or an inability to break from pointlessly puritanical upbringing. Puritanical I may be in some ways, but I see sexual intimacy as beautiful, affectionate, fun, pleasurable, passionate, bonding, etc. I see it as something too intimate and bonding (chemically, emotionally, physically, spiritually) to share within casual or recent attachments which have not reached a genuinely high level of true intimacy, connection, and dedication.
...BUT NOT THAT PRUDISH
It's not that I avoid sexuality at all costs. In fact, I've been a terrible tease in the past, testing my ability to elicit certain responses from people and then being the one to put on the brakes to maintain my boundaries but really enjoying the sexual tension of it all. I've backed off from that, I think, but I won't deny I've done it, and I'm probably lucky I kept my boundaries as well as I did.
PROVING SOMETHING BY WAITING...
No, this is less about repression and more about intimacy, as far as I can tell. Sometimes, I question not only my own motives for being friends or spending a lot of time together but the other person's. I question whether someone is genuinely interested in my personality, my thoughts, my goodness...in short, if they're interested in me and in bringing out the best in each other, being true friends and companions (along with the probably/hopefully very fun sexual benefits), or if they're primarily after something they find intoxicating or physically attractive about me. Mind you, I'm not claiming to have any sort of animal magnetism or irresistible charm. *scoff* Nor am I claiming true romance excludes that intoxicating love and passion. But I do wonder, when people seem interested in me, what it is they're interested in. I wonder if they would be so engaged in my ideas if they weren't curious about what's under the hood. I wonder if we'd feel close to each other if we didn't think there was that unspoken, enticing possibility of making fireworks one day soon. I wonder whether they will give up or put off the pleasure they may want now for a relationship with someone they love. Is it worth it to them? Is it worth it to me?
It's not merely a test. As I see it, it's not about making them "prove it" to me to satisfy some insecurity. It's about both of us showing what is most important and proving the relationship. I figure most people who are willing to hold out are actually interested in the relationship, not mainly in getting their jollies with someone they find attractive.
I suppose some people's way of doing this is to go ahead and have fun, and then if they're still interested once they've had all the fun, they know it's "real"? Perhaps I'm actually making it worse by holding out and maintaining that intense sexual tension and vague anticipation, which makes us feel more interested in each other than we are. But I also think a relationship can only take so much of that before one or both parties say it's not worth the wait and move on. And at least in that case, I'd be able to walk away knowing I didn't give myself over to someone who didn't fully value what I was offering, nor did I take advantage of someone else because they were what was available.
DIFFERENT STROKES...
I've had a couple of friends tell me, "You just ascribe more to this stuff than I do. I can be sexual with someone without it meaning anything. It's just fun." Now, they also later made admissions they either don't think it ever truly means nothing for both people involved (unless they're both to the point where sex is like a handshake) or that physical intimacy just wasn't the same when it wasn't with someone they loved. But others have continued to insist sex is recreational as long as it's not hurting anyone (AKA neither party is cheating on or deceiving their partner). Maybe that's true, but I don't see it that way, and I refuse to numb my sensitivities in that respect for my own or anyone else's comfort, despite it seeming like a truly rational attitude in certain ways.
CONSCIENCE-SAVER?
I have to question how much of that attitude is a conscious-saving disconnect. Sexuality is a heck of a lot of fun. And going without sexual expression is not easy. It's not. No, don't argue with me. I know this because I've done it. I'm doing it. Of course, now that it's been a long time since I actually made out with anyone, it's easier than right after I had. But I've also refrained when it would've been SO easy to move my hand somewhere, or remove an article or two of clothing. And it feels SO good to feel like you're "connecting" with someone, whether or not you think it's a "real" connection, or to experience the racing heartbeat and whatever chemicals are produced in anticipation of sex.
Since it's not easy to go without, a lot of people...well...don't. They "slip up" or they "have some fun" or they "fool around." And rather than let their conscience tell them they're doing something they shouldn't, or thinking about the emotional consequences of their actions on others, they just shrug and say it's all in good fun. But maybe not all. Since I can't get inside anyone's head, I'll just shrug and say I'm not that way, whatever way it is.
VIRGINAL STUBBORNNESS
It's no secret among those closest to me that I am a bit of a prude this way. My frank way of talking sometimes throws people off because they make deductions about me based on my bluntness. I've laughed at more than one shocked expression when someone found out I've only really kissed a couple of people and have never done anything that led to anybody climaxing. I'm not sure if they're shocked because of my age, or the way I talk, or what, but it's funny to see people so flabbergasted.
Yet a prude I remain. I intend to refrain from sexuality until I'm in a relationship in which it is a genuine expression of sincere affection, emotional investment, and vulnerability. And sexuality of the kind I have not yet experienced is definitely for a committed, long-term relationship (marriage perhaps?). And if that means no kinky stuff until at least a year of committed, monogamous relationship, or until marriage, I kinda like that idea. Prove your dedication, baby, and then we'll have some major fun...if my body is still capable of it when such a time ever comes around...if it ever comes around. Wow...I could die an old man virgin. How very tragic.
...OK, so I don't see that as tragic. Despite occasionally lamenting my lost youthful years spent in sexless ignorance, I think I've experienced enough of passion to have an idea of what I'm missing out on, and while it's good stuff, I just think anyone who believes that living without sex is something tragic and awful doesn't live a very rich life, or doesn't know real intimacy independent of sexual relationships. But perhaps that's another post for another time.
01 October 2009
Straight Men Getting It On With Men
When people say homosexuality is all about sex, I think they're actually talking about this (don't worry, it's nothing scandalous), which I don't think of as homosexuality but rather as simple, good old fashioned horniness. He asserts many points I think some scientists and psychologists will say are disputed and not quite as cut-and-dry as he (a gay psychologist) seems to believe, but the discussion is an interesting one, and he makes some good points, I think. But I guess, in the most literal sense of the word, this behavior is, in fact, homosexual but probably distinct from "being gay". Oh, the semantic journey of social and biblical questioning this could take me on... Nope, I'm going to the gym instead. Toodles!
Sidenote: I don't like that he brings "bromance" into that discussion because as I understand it, bromance is not at all sexual but is a type of friendship some people call "romantic" friendship, but not in the sense of wanting to be with in a conjugal or "romantic" relationship but more like a form of infatuation or a "friend crush"...OK, shutting up. Gym.
Sidenote: I don't like that he brings "bromance" into that discussion because as I understand it, bromance is not at all sexual but is a type of friendship some people call "romantic" friendship, but not in the sense of wanting to be with in a conjugal or "romantic" relationship but more like a form of infatuation or a "friend crush"...OK, shutting up. Gym.
29 September 2009
Fooling Yourselves 2
Whose is the defensive voice in the previous post? Take your pick. "Chris" is a gender-ambiguous name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)