Meenzer

Excellent call. *digs out the mp3*

I know you said the lass you ended up with last night was a bit rough, but... martin that doesn't make sense. it's he who has the bad taste in facial hair...not I. Oh, taste in facial hair, I see. So it's liking dodgy beards that makes you a girl. That makes so much more sense now.

I know you said the lass you ended up with last night was a bit rough, but...

I know the feeling, have spent many hours looking at Newcastle and they don't get any better either. Probably want to dump her if they are THAT bad though! She has a lovely pair on her. Source? All over his pants

Judging by all the porn I've watched there is nothing guaranteed to make a woman orgasm more than rear end action. Thats real isn't it? I certainly think it's a point worth making to every lass you want to try it with.

Alreet fella, hope you have a cracking day

Bears are big, masculine-acting, usually slightly older fellas with plenty of body and facial hair. Basically! Yeah, for all a man can reach orgasm through prostate stimulation alone, I presume it's not as straightforward as the equivalent is for women. I'm guessing though, obviously! And never mind lunch, I haven't even had breakfast yet. Not sure I have the appetite now :D

Radgi in lesbo shockah!

corretamundo...and thay look FANTASTIC !!!! So the truly reliable gaydar is seeing whether you're trying to get into their pants then?

Call me presumptuous, but I imagine one of the reasons you laydeez are good at the gaydar thing - and lord knows you bloody well can be - is because, by and large, the gay lads will be the ones who aren't falling over themselves to get into your pants? I beg to differ Meenz my sweet ...it may be because they are "better dressed" tho Good point....Too much attention to detail. That'll be why I seem to fall under the ol' gaydar radar a lot of the time then. I doubt I'll have a shave or check myself in the mirror before the Man City pissup even if Jonny promises to whip out his hanky.

Call me presumptuous, but I imagine one of the reasons you laydeez are good at the gaydar thing - and lord knows you bloody well can be - is because, by and large, the gay lads will be the ones who aren't falling over themselves to get into your pants?

Heartbreaker! Mind if I stare intently at your back pockets anyway?

Bloody good question really! Varies from person to person I reckon. My gaydar isn't outrageously sharp, though fuck knows it's improved a lot since living in Hamburg and London. It's inevitable that you hide a lot more of yourself somewhere like Newcastle or any smaller city I guess. Anyway, gaydar's probably a bit of a myth really - it stands to reason that you'll recognise your own traits in other people, after all, and I bet a lot of it's a self-confidence thing, both on the part of the person doing the observing and the person being observed. And the whole point of gaydar - picking up on subtle clues about the other person - is really only a variation on the kind of things everyone does when weighing up people in everyday life anyway. Of course, the rise of metrosexuality has made life a bit more difficult, though generally even the most comfortable-with-himself heterosexual male wearer of a pink T-shirt will still project an aura of "I'm only doing this because I hear the lasses like it, so don't even think about it, RuPaul."

liar Aye, OK. I troll like fuck. But I do genuinely appreciate Meenzer's candour. Found it very...educational! Aw shucks. You lot better stop it though, I'm starting to feel like I've just been scripting a Very Special Blossom or something...

Nee worries. There'll be a multiple-choice test next week. Incidentally, the "scene" apparently does have a convoluted set of signals you can give as to what role you prefer, traditionally involving colour-coded hankies () and the like. Never seen it myself, but I believe it's basically only used (if at all any more) in places where one might go to find a casual hook-up - you know, just to cut out the risk of actually having to talk or anything like that. Since that's so spectacularly not me, I remain entirely innocent of such matters.

I'd hope that most regular takers were capable of keeping themselves clean to some extent, and barebacking is so early 80s anyway.

Do you really want my take on it? Obviously it's not like there's a 50% split between pitchers and catchers - plenty of guys would call themselves versatile, and a decent number of them aren't even lying just to widen the net of potential shaggees or anything. I'm not averse to the idea of being on the bottom myself at some point, as long as it's with someone I trust to do it right and be careful and all that, but I'm top generally and I have to say it'd be far more about giving my partner pleasure than filling any kind of deep-seated urge to do it on my part. As such, I can't really say from experience exactly what the appeal is for regular "takers", but I'd assume that the question isn't dissimilar to asking what a woman gets out of plain-vanilla hetero sex, since she's the one on the receiving end, if you'll pardon the simplification. All I know is we fellas have this prostate thingummy that we can probably safely compare with the G-spot for the purposes of this exercise, and therefore it's not the worst thing in the world to have stimulated by whatever means. And as mentioned above, with stimulation comes the possibility of a reacharound (or not around, depending on the position) or doing a Jimbo on yourself while your partner's jackhammering away or whatever. In terms of attraction and knowing who's who/what... for whatever reason, it'll often follow that the more "masculine" men are tops and the more "feminine" men are bottoms, and also that they won't be attracted to their own type. But obviously it doesn't always work like that - just look at the bear scene, for a start, though I'd rather not - and when it's not screamingly obvious, you do get into situations where you'll end up with someone who generally prefers to be the same role as you. In some cases one person will be "versatile" enough to not mind being on the other end of the equation to usual, other times it just doesn't happen. It's worth noting that a common belief about us deviants appears to be that we're all about the back-door action. It's quite the opposite in my experience - oral (regular, 69 or whatever) is so much more straightforward, less role-bound, less messy, less awkward/potentially painful/damaging and - albeit not particularly accurately - less associated with nasty diseases than anal, so it tends to enjoy widespread currency in gay circles. Often you'll get couples who've been together for years and years and hardly ever had anal sex at all. Now are you sure you still want my take on it?

Touché

Table tennis. It was the only sport they'd let us do at school where you didn't really have to move.

That reminds me, been meaning to buy some slippers

They are sending the Sugababes over to rescue them ?? Either them or the Chemical Brothers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_h_rLKTLvs

They're gonna poosh tha button! Poosh tha button! Poosh tha bu- Poosh tha bu- Poosh tha button!

Well you are about as old as the relics they dig up ...OK, that may pushing the Comedy Quote Edit envelope a little too far.

SMO? This is where I rein in my capacity for bitchiness by not saying "no, I said a schoolfriend", right? With apologies for the quintuple negative.

SMO? This is where I rein in my capacity for bitchiness by not saying "no, I said a schoolfriend", right?