Reset Password
If you've forgotten your password, you can enter your email address below. An email will then be sent with a link to set up a new password.
Cancel
Reset Link Sent
If the email is registered with our site, you will receive an email with instructions to reset your password. Password reset link sent to:
Check your email and enter the confirmation code:
Don't see the email?
  • Resend Confirmation Link
  • Start Over
Close
If you have any questions, please contact Customer Service
Experiences and Thoughts
 
A blog about whatever sexual experiences I might be having, as well as my thoughts about them when I'm currently not having any, and even the occasional post about whatever might be on my mind thats not sexual.
Keywords | Title View | Refer to a Friend |
Hmmmm.....
Posted:Nov 21, 2009 4:54 pm
Last Updated:Nov 22, 2009 4:35 am
6100 Views

Riddle me this, Batman:

I guess this sort of relates to the last post I made here, back i May: Why is it that a woman into much younger guys used to be known as a "cradle robber", and is now known as a "cougar", but a guy who is into much younger women was and still is called a "dirty old man"?

Any thoughts on that one, folks?
0 Comments
Age: Is it just a number, or something more?
Posted:May 9, 2009 2:18 pm
Last Updated:Feb 19, 2012 2:39 pm
6173 Views

(DISCLAIMER: I shouldn't have to say this, but just so it doesn't go unsaid, let me say for the record that when I'm talking about the notion of sex with somebody significantly younger, I'm OBVIOUSLY talking about somebody who is already ABOVE THE AGE OF CONSENT!! So get yer minds outta the gutter, ya pervs! lol)

I've been on this site for quite some time now, and if there's one thing I've noticed, it's that the age(s) of a potential partner seems to be becoming a bigger and bigger deal to more and more people (or at least women-can't say I exactly check out other guys profiles, so I don't know if the same holds true for us males).

It didn't always used to be, though. When I was first on here, I rarely saw people put down "Ages __ to ___ ONLY!" or "Nobody over (under) __ years of age need write". Now I not only see it all the time, but it seems like as time goes on, the "leeway" a lot of people are willing to give when it comes to a potential partner's age is getting slimmer and slimmer. Far be it from me to critise anyone's personal tastes/preferences, but I guess my innate sense of curiosity makes me wonder "why this is"? Maybe I'm in the minority, but I have to honestly say, age-either when it comes to having people as friends and/or as sex partners has never been a big issue for me. A cool person is a cool person, regardless of age. And an attractive woman is an attractive woman, regardless of age (have any of y'all seen Raquel Welch in those Foster Grant commercials she's doing these days? She's close to 70 now, and can you say "HOTTIE"? I thought you could! lol).

All my life, even as a , I've always had friends who were older than me, and also younger than me. Part of that may be that I've always had a very strong innate curiosity about people (my dad was a Sociology prof., so I guess the acorn don't fall too far from the tree....), and have always enjoyed getting to know very diverse kinds of people, of very different races, religions, ethnicities, interests, hobbies, politics, and yes....ages. And usually, even if the age difference is quite marked, I still manage to find some sort of "common ground" (and yes, other than sexual desire! lol) with most people. Plus, the differences that are there often make for some very stimulating conversations-conversations that I usually find myself growing as person because of.

And of course, as I've alluded to, this has also reached over into my love/sex lives. The first girl I was ever "with", when I was a sophomore in H.S., was a year and a half younger. My first serious relationship was with a woman who was 30 when we first started going together. And me? At the time, I had just had my 19th birthday. We were together for 6 1/2 years. Then there's my spouse, who's a month and a half shy of 15 years my senior (and no, I don't have a thing for "older women"-just worked out that way! lol). And in the last 10 years, I've had a LTR with a woman almost 14 years older, and FWB situations with women as much as 10 years older, and 13 1/2 years younger. All of them were attractive, mature, fun individuals. (Can you guess that I've never much cared for the term "cradle robber"? I've always considered it asinine, narrow-minded, and stupid.)

However, I don't want to discount "age" entirely! There are some people who don't "age well". There are some people who get the dumb impression that being a certain age (esp. among those younger than me) means acting a certain (usually rather stupid) way. There are people older than me who seem to think that age is a barrier to learning new things (sexually or otherwise). But really, even then only the first one has anything to do with chronological age. The others are more about attitude than anything else.

I guess the way I see it, while I obviously can't critisise someone for their standards or taste when it comes to what people they want to associate/have sex with, I also can't help but think if maybe sometimes people on here (I haven't noticed age being as much of a "big deal" on other adult sex sites, but that's just my observation) don't get a little too picky about the age thing. I know that each of my friendships I've had with someone significantly younger or older than me have enriched me, not just sexually, but as a total person as well. I wouldn't trade any of them for anything. (And yes, I've had-and of course played with-people my own age too, and they have been great too! But I am trying largely to focus on the notion of divergent ages on this occasion....)

I guess the only thing that I'd like to do different in the future is have some more friends/partners that are significantly younger than me. I suppose the reason for that is that the vast majority of partners I've had in the past have either been about my own age, or seriously older (10-15 years). Obviously, I've had a few majorly younger partners, but not nearly as many as same age or older. It'd actually be kind of nice to have some younger ones for a change; the younger ones I've had in the past I've found have brought a freshness and vigor to both the sex and the overall friendship that was unlike anything else I'd ever experienced. It'd be great to have some more of that. How much younger would I be open to "getting together" with? Well, all other things being equal with the things I've mentioned above, I'd have no problem with 15-20 years difference....or even 25. Why the hell not? If we're both adults, both attracted to each other personally and sexually.... More than 25? Welllll....as I mentioned above, if the person is "of age", and we're both attracted to each other, and feel a desiring for each other sexually (and yeah, I know the chances of that are slim to more likely none, though stranger things have happened....), I wouldn't automatically put it beyond the realm of possibility!

So anyway, though you probably can guess what it'll be, my answer to my own question is....Sometimes yes, it is more than just a number. But most of the time, for me at least, it ain't! Vive la difference!
2 Comments
The Greatest Movies You've Never Seen (or maybe have but just didn't know it at the time) #1
Posted:Apr 4, 2009 10:26 am
Last Updated:Apr 7, 2009 2:54 pm
6049 Views

Usually, like most people on here, I tend to write about my sexual exploits, stuff that I'm doing in my life, or stuff going on in the world that makes me happy or pisses me off (usually the latter-lol). But this time, I'm going to do something different: I'm going to start what I hope will be a semi-regular feature of my blog, namely a series of posts letting you, dear readers, know about movies out there that you may never have seen, or saw but likely did not realise you were seeing, that deserve a second look, IMO. I've been a movie buff, especially of "classic" (i.e. old) movies since I was a , and still am (Thank heavens for TCM!). Most of it is so much better, again IMO, than the stuff hitting the multiplexes these days. But among the "classics", there are always a group of films that, for some reason, don't get the recognition they deserve. For one reason or another, they have become for the most part forgotten. They don't get remembered the way Gone With The Wind or Casablanca do. So I'm hoping to change that here, even if only by a little bit. And the first film I'm going to start off with is the 1964 classic "A Shot in the Dark".

What, you've never heard of "A Shot in the Dark"? Well, you've probably seen it on TV sometime in the past, but didn't know that was the film you were watching. Why? Because you probably thought it had the words "Pink" and "Panther" somewhere in the title. It's understandable, since it features the character synonamous with those two words, the bumbling gallic policeman Jacques Clouseau (played by the great Peter Sellers, one of my all-time favorite comedic actors). And IMO, it's the funniest entry of all in the series of five films where Sellers played the character. (I remember seeing it for the first time when I was about 10, and it was the first movie that made me laugh so hard I honestly thought at times I was going to piss my pants!)

Now of course, the actual movie that first featured Clouseau, The Pink Panther, did come out before this, but only by a few months. In that movie, Clouseau was a relatively minor character-the character played by David Niven in the movie was supposed to be the lead. But Sellers' antics as Clouseau basically "stole the show", and were the buzz of both industry previews and test audiences. Enough so that producer Blake Edwards immediately sought out another project to feature Sellers in. And thus came about A Shot in the Dark.

The plot goes like this: At the home of French millionaire Benjamin Ballon, it seems like everybody is doing everybody else. However, "doing" soon moves from its sexual connotations to one of a different sort: Murder. The head chauffeur, Miguel, has been shot, and the prime suspect is his lover, the maid Maria Gambrelli (Elke Sommer). The Surete (French version of the FB is called, and they send out a man to investigate. It is only after they discover that the millionaire Ballon's home is where the murder took place do they realise, much to the consternation of the organisation's head, Commissioner Charles Dreyfus (Herbert Lom), they've already made one horrible mistake: they sent out to investigate the crime none other than the most incompetent man in history to ever carry a badge, Inspector Jacques Clouseau!

Clouseau arrives on the scene, and manages to promptly stumble into the pool of the fountain outside the Ballon mansion. Soaking wet but still maintaining his dignity, he goes inside and begins to question Ballon and the members of his household staff, including Maria Gambrelli. While questioning her, he manages to walk around for several minutes unaware that he has some of her face cream on the end of his nose, then later manages to put his still lit Zippo in the pocket of his trench coat, setting it on fire, which causes him to throw it out the window. At this point, Dreyfus arrives and takes charge of the case.

But Clouseau, smitten with Gambrelli, is convinced that what appears to be the obvious, that she murdered her paramour, is not what actually happened, and when he is suddenly put back by the case at the request of certain "influential parties", sets out to save the lovely young lass from a possible date with the Guillotine. Returning to the Ballon estate, he encounters her in the greenhouse, where it appears that she has murdered another member of the Ballon staff, one who coincidentally was blackmailing Ballon about his affairs. But the ever-clueless Clouseau, despite evidently catching her all but in the act, still believes her to be innocent. He manages to get her released, but each one of the disguises he employs to keep surveillance on her while she is free without her knowing about it manages to get him arrested! Ultimately, he follows her out to a nudist camp, where he finds her again in the presence of another dead (and quite naked to boot) body. Dreyfus and a group of his men raid the camp looking for Gambrelli and Clouseau, so they have to make their escape minus the clothes they arrived in, which leads to a hilarious scene that takes place in one of Paris' legendary traffic jams, and to Clouseau being arrested once again!

Dreyfus takes Clouseau off the case again, at this point so driven to distraction by his foul-ups that he no longer cares just how high up the "personages" who want him on the case are, and plans to ship him off to the Records Bureau of the Surete branch in Martinique. It is only when his assistant points out that Dreyfus would be ruined if Clouseau, small chance though there might be of it, turned out to be right about Maria Gambrelli, that he relents and puts him back on the case (he has now been driven so to distraction by Clouseau that he has managed to cut off his thumb with a cigar chopper, stab himself with a letter opener, and has also developed the peculiar "blink" that the character would be famous for in the rest of the Pink Panther film series). Clouseau announces that he has a plan for capturing the real culprit. He wines and dines (and tries to bed) Gambrelli, but strangely enough, a shadowy figure follows the two of them, and more murders ensue, as this figure tries to eliminate Clouseau. At the end, Clouseau confronts the Ballons and their servants in a classic, "murder mystery" ending, and the real murder is revealed to be.....

Unh-unh-unh! You thought I was going to give away the ending, right? Well, you'll just have to go and rent or buy the movie to see who the real murderer(s) is/are!

To sum up, this movie is absolutely side-splittingly hilarious! It is Peter Sellers at his very best and very funniest, and Clouseau ranks right up there with Edward Strangelove and Chance the Gardner as one of his greatest characters. As good as the later, "Pink Panther revival" films of the mid-to-late 70's are, this is head and shoulders above them (and even the original) in every respect. Yet because it has "Pink Panther" nowhere in the title, it is often not considered by most people to be a part of that series (when it very much is), and thus gets ignored. A shame, as this is in the opinion of most people who've seen it, the best of the bunch. Do yourself a favor and see it soon. In this crazy, messed-up world we live in today, we could all use a good laugh!
0 Comments
My favorite fetish!
Posted:Feb 7, 2009 11:37 am
Last Updated:Mar 28, 2024 11:45 am
5987 Views

OK, actually this is a repost of a very early blog entry I did, like 3 1/2 years ago. But I think that considering that this is my favorite fetish, it probably deserves to be reposted from time to time, just so that anyone who might be interested in getting together with me (or is just interested period) will know about it, and be able to decide if it's something they'd might like to try or not. Anyway, here goes....

Another thing I've been missing lately is engaging in my favorite fetish. What is that, you ask? Well, it's a fetish that I've had for over 25 years, but only recently (within the last 5 or so) found out I was far from alone in, namely I love to cum all over a woman's bra while she's wearing it.

Now in this particular fetish I am somewhat picky. Just as I prefer large sized women over slender ones, and prefer large, natural breasts over little A or B cup ones, so too the bras that turn me on to see a woman in *aren't* the skinny-strapped, one or two hook jobbers; no what gets me hot is a good old fashioned 3, 4, 5, or ever 6 hook, white or beige (though colors are cool for a change of pace) heavy-duty, "industrial strength" everyday bra, filled with it's owner's bounteous breasts. I don't know why I find this such a turn on, I just do.

As far as the cumming part goes, there are many ways I've experienced this, and I can think of many ways I've yet to, but would like to one day. The simplest and most obvious one is to just straddle my partner just below her breasts/bra, or kneel/stand to one side and masturbate to the sexy vision of her and her hooter holder (even better if she's jacking herself too at the time).

Another way that turns me on to do this that I've experienced is to stand while she's sitting in a chair or again straddle her midsection and place my hard dick between her breasts and outside her bra and let the sensation of the sweet nylon fabric, skin, and body heat rubbing against my cock arouse me until I climax. Another variation on this is to put my hard-on under the bottom band and jerk myself with her tits.

A further way I've climaxed doing this is to let her take the reins and jerk me, rubbing the glans of my penis against the cups of her bra in a fashion similar to someone spreading paint with a paintbrush. The only bad thing about this is that I tend not to last very long before cumming. I've also done this jerking myself.

There's a lot of other ways I can think of that I haven't tried yet but would like to. I'd love to have my partner sit in front of my, naked but for her bra, have her pull the shoulder straps down and lower the cups, and let me jack off and cum into them, then have her pull the bra back up and revel in the feeling of my seed both warm against her skin, and also satuating the bra. Also I would love to have her take off the bra, wrap it around my dick, then jerk me off onto her tits. Mmmmm.... There's several other variations I can think of, but I'll save them for another time.

I guess the thing that has surprised me the most about my fetish is just how many women I've done it with, and the fact that though most had never had any guy do it with them before, they were willing to try it, and most of the ones that tried it found it to be a powerful turn on-enough so that in the case of a couple different FWBs in the past, me jacking off and cumming on their bra became almost a mandatory part of our sexual activities when we'd get together!
0 Comments
When being a "stand-up" guy or gal isn't cool
Posted:Jul 4, 2008 12:49 pm
Last Updated:Feb 19, 2012 2:40 pm
6066 Views

Well, last Saturday it happened. It hadn't happened for a quite a while (usually because things don't get that far most of the time! lol). It wasn't the first time it'd ever happened (though to be honest, it hasn't happened all that often), and I suppose it won't be the last. In short, ladies and gentlemen, I got "skunked", or in other words, stood up!

I don't know about you all, but to me, there is nothing ruder someone can do to a person than stand them up when they're supposed to be getting together with them; the only thing that can make it ruder being that on top of getting stood up, the other person drove a substantial (for substantial let's say 50 mi. or more) distance to meet, only to find themselves stood up.

Now by "stand up", I don't mean the occasional SNAFU in communications that can happen that can cause one person or the other to not show up when they were supposed to. You know, the missed voice mail message or offline IM, the unclear communication or directions, the unexpected emergency, stuff like that. Things like that can happen. They've happened to me, they've happened to most people (plus, when they have happened to me, which has been rare, I've always made sure I got in touch with the other person ASAP to straighten it out). That's NOT what I'm talking about here.

No, I mean when it's clear and deliberate. I mean when the person never had any intention on showing, but couldn't get enough intestinal fortitude up to just tell you "sorry, I'll chat with you online, but I'm not interested in meeting you/playing with you". Or worse yet, they think the idea of you driving 45 min, an hour, even 2 hours to meet them, then sitting there and waiting for however long until you finally "figure it out" is just hilarious. Real shitz and giggles time. Makes you wonder why some people even bother joining a site like this.

Now in the case of last Sat., this person (yes, they're on here, but they haven't been active for a long time, in any case, I did not encounter them on here, but on another "adult" site) appeared very interested in meeting (we'd been chatting on and off for a few months), seemed to understand where we were to get together, as well as the time, and also understood that I had a small errand to run first, and might possibly be a few min. late. They had my cell #, too. (One thing that raised a small red flag: They claimed they didn't have a cell, but borrowed a relative's when they traveled anywhere. I mean, who the fuck doesn't have a cell these days? Esp. when there are plans out there that anyone but maybe a street person can afford?)

As it turned out, I was a few min. late....15 min, to be exact. And had I had this person's cell #, I would've called them and let them know I was running a little behind. But even still, given that the place we agreed to meet was equidistant between where she lived and where I lived (roughly 50 mi. from each of us), you'd think she would've waited at least 10-20 min. in case I had been delayed, right? And certainly she'd had even a "relative's" cell phone on them, they could have called to make sure I was still on my way, or hadn't gotten in an accident, or whatever, right? But there was nuttin'.

Now if the person had gotten cold feet at the last minute (which seems to happen with a lot of folks on here, I get the impression), she still could've called me (if she really had that cell phone on her). Though I certainly would've been disappointed (and would've thought twice before ever giving her a second chance), it does happen, and I think I'm a pretty understanding guy (maybe too much so for my own good sometimes). But again, there was nothing. And no offline message or e-mail when I got home, or in the days since. Again, nuttin'. (BTW, I do not feel any compunction to be the one to contact her. I gave her my cell number, and did let her know there was a possibility I might be a little late, so as far as I'm concerned, I'm not the one at fault here.)

Soooo....I've decided one thing: If I set up to get together with someone, I give them my cell #, we agree on a time and place, I wait 30 min. minimum (which is my standard rule of thumb as far as a minimum waiting time goes anyway if I don't get a call from them). If after that amount of time, there's no call, no car, no nuttin', I'm gone. I'll give that person a chance to contact me afterwards and explain themselves. But if I hear nothing from them, THEY ARE GONE. NO "SECOND CHANCES". Though I haven't had to put up with stuff like this very often, I have an even lower tolerance for it than ever before. Life's too short to play dumb ass games like that.
2 Comments
Do you think this makes me look older?
Posted:Jul 4, 2008 11:38 am
Last Updated:Jul 4, 2008 12:50 pm
6006 Views

Back this past February, while playing in a weekend long radio trivia contest (one of my many little hobbies), I started growing a beard again for the first time in about 12 years. It wasn't deliberate at first-I got busy playing in that contest with some friends of mine, and totally spaced out shaving (I didn't go anywhere the whole weekend). Then, in the days after after the contest, I got very busy with life in general (and yeah, a little lazy, too). By the time I started to think "Hmmmm....maybe I should shave here, y'know?", it was already pretty thick, and I started to think "Well, I haven't had a beard in over a dozen years, and I HAVE wondered at times how I would look with one again...." So I just let it grow until such time as it was long enough to trim (I usually trim it once a week).

To be honest, I did like the way I looked with one again, but on the other hand, I wasn't too crazy about the fact that in the last 12 years, it had gone a lot more "salt" than "pepper". But in any case, I decided to stick with the "new look", partially because I'd become a bit bored with the old one, and partially because I refuse to ever go 100% clean-shaven (I hate the way I look clean shaven, and also I always wear some sort of facial hair as sort of a silent protest against the idea that a man being "clean-cut" is some sort of mark of him being "civilised" as well).

Recently (as in the past couple of months), I started posting on my profile some pics I took of myself with the "new" beard. But I'm looking at them, and I definitely can see how some people would look at them and think I look a bit older in them than I do in the older pics where I just have a mustache or mustache and "soul patch". And given that I'm 47 to begin with, possibly looking even a "bit older" than I really am isn't necessarily an asset, especially not on THIS site! lol So this is where you, dear reader of my blog, come in. Take a look at the new pics, please. (Yeah, I know the lighting isn't very good in them, either-I replaced the incandescent lights in my desk lamp with those damn fluorescents! I may save money, but the light quality sucks.) Tell me honestly: Do they make me look older? If I get enough responses that say no, I'll likely keep it (or at least for a while). If the majority of them say "yes", I'll likely go back to wearing just a mustache, or at most a mustache and goatee or something like that.
0 Comments
I'm in the mood....
Posted:Jun 22, 2008 12:07 pm
Last Updated:Feb 19, 2012 2:42 pm
6071 Views

Well, in their neverending quest to add new features to this site, the powers-that-be have evidently come up with something new: A changeable "mood" feature, similar to the one they use for these blog postings. Now when I saw this, the first thing I thought was that least this seemed to be a somewhat useful thing (compared to some of the stuff they've come up with, like the "kudos" feature, which to me smacks of popularity contest), showing those who might view your profile, either people interested in you or friends you've already made on the site, how you're feeling that day or whatever.

But one thing that I noticed when I went through the list of moods was that the list was much shorter than the options available for blog postings, and most of them seemed to be sex or relationship related, e.g. things like "horny", "flirtatious", "seductive", "lustful", etc. And the few more general ones tend to be all on the positive side, e.g. "happy", "cheerful", "ecstatic", etc., while the ones for the blog postings are much more variable, e.g. "infuriated", "irritated", "powerful", "smart".

Now I don't know about you, but my moods tend to be pretty varied. And sometimes, they ain't always "sexy" or "positive". Which leads me to wonder: Why not use the same list for the profiles (including the option to set your own mood) that they use for the blogs. I think that having the options from the blog list-or at least some of them-also be the ones for the profiles could make for some good conversation starters, among other things, to say nothing of allowing people to be a bit more "candid" in expressing themselves to those who read their profile. Just a thought....
2 Comments
Is it just me....
Posted:Apr 6, 2008 12:47 pm
Last Updated:Feb 19, 2012 2:43 pm
6117 Views

....or does this happen to anyone else on here as well? I'm talking about the phenomena where you sign on to this site to check and see if anyone new has been looking at your profile, or sent you a wink, or both, and sure enough, there are new "winks" (guess they call them "flirts" now). But then you look at the list of people who sent you various kinds of flirts and, sure enough, they're from, oh, lets see now....Ghana, Kenya, the UK, Australia....um, just about anywhere on the planet except for within driving distance of where you are.

Now don't get me wrong-it's definitely flattering to get those "flirts" (even though I get the impression from the profiles that at least some of the people sending them are scammers, or girls looking for a nice rich American they can get a green card out of) no matter where they come from, but it's damn frustrating when it seems like the vast majority of them come from people who, even if they are "on the up and up", and even if they are someone you could see yourself "kicking it" with, live half the planet away! I'm not poor, but it's not like I'm going to any of those places, even on holiday, any time in the near future, y'know. I mean, why can't more of them be "local"? Hell, even Kenosha or Chicago would be fine compared to Capetown or Moscow! Sheesh....
0 Comments
Spring is here! Who's horny? :)
Posted:Mar 19, 2008 8:02 am
Last Updated:Mar 28, 2008 10:29 am
6126 Views

OK, now that I have your attention! LOL

Well, it looks like despite one nice little-and hopefully final for this season-kick in the butt from "Ol' Man Winter" that's due here Friday, winter is just about over for this season. Needless to say, if you've read any of my other blog entries, you probably have no problem guess just how I feel about that.

One thing I've noticed, in all the years I've been on this site, is that usually membership activity picks up during the winter, and falls off in the summer. Now by "membership activity", I mean both new people joining, and people already on here actively looking for "partners".

To an extent, this makes sense-after all, decent weather (or at least decent if your someone who prefers warmer weather to cold, wet, windy, and nasty weather) is at something of a premium in "these parts". And people around here do like to be "out and about" doing things in the summer, myself included. But despite that, it's gotten me to wondering: Am I the only person who's libido is both more active as well as stronger over all when it's 85 and sunny as opposed to when it's snowing 6 inches out, or when it's a sunny as the 4th of July, but the temperature is a rather incongruous 15 below zero out?

Now don't get me wrong-it's not like I don't feel horny or enjoy sex at all when those cold winds start a blowin' (Freudian slip not intended!) and the snow starts falling, because I still do, believe me! But to be honest, those feelings are definitely less frequent and the enjoyment less intense than they are when it's sunny, I'm not having to dress like Ralphie's little brother from that stupid "Christmas Story" movie in order to stay even half way warm, and I'm not having to worry about if a sudden change in the weather patterns is going to force me to have to call or IM that friend (of the with benefits persuasion, of course ) I was going to get together with that Saturday or Sunday. And that's another thing, BTW-up until a few years ago, I would drive though just about anything winter could throw at us and it wouldn't phase me, not in the least. All that's changing now as I get older. Now I prefer not to go out at all if the roads are even slightly crappy....just don't have the nerves or the patience for it anymore!)

In addition to that, there's just certain things about sex in the warm weather months thats a lot more enjoyable, not to mention a lot more fun. Like being able to have the window open as you and your partner are "playing" (yeah, you'll probably have to watch the noise level a bit more than you otherwise would, but so what?), and feel those incredibly sensual warm spring, summer, or early fall breezes caress your bodies as you enjoy each other. Or on a really hot day getting all sweaty together, feeling the heat rise off your bodies, and your juices (well, other than the usual ones!) mingling together, making for a wonderfully erotic sensation of all-natural slipperiness....and then top it off with a nice, long shower together (and then starting the whole thing over again! ). And of course, there's always the fun of finding that secluded outdoor spot where hopefully you won't be noticed, and letting nature take it's course (even if it's only a "quickie") in the middle of....what else?....nature itself!

So yeah, summer, or at least the warm weather months, are definitely the time when I feel the sexiest, think about sex the most, and feel the like having sex the most. So tell me, folks, am I alone in this? Or are there other folks (especially women, of course! ) who feel the same way-who feel their desires and passion start to rise when the thermometer does?

Here's hoping both you and I have a "busy" summer this year!
0 Comments

Posted:Jan 2, 2008 10:49 am
Last Updated:Mar 28, 2024 11:45 am
6167 Views

To borrow from Andy Rooney, "D'ya ever notice" how many times a woman's profile on here will say "No Dick Pictures!", then you look at their main profile pic, and what should be staring at you but....what? Anyone care to answer that? (Buheler? Buheler?) Yep, you guessed it-a nice extreme close-up of her "hoo hoo", in all it's glory! And I don't mean just a "spread shot", maybe showing a little bit of "pink", but a full-blown close up like something out of "The Monthy Journal of The American Gyocological Society"! I mean one where you can see every wrinkle and crevice in the labia, and the clitoris in question looks like it's trying to look like the female answer to John Holmes' member! You know what I mean-if you've been on this site for any length of time, I know for a fact you've likely seen this-how could you not? Now, is it just me, or is there "something wrong with this picture"? (And I mean besides the contradiction inherent in such a situation.)

Now don't get me wrong; I love that part of woman as much as any other man out there. And I'm just as "visual" as any other man living on the Third Rock From the Sun. (Though I think that has become modified by something called "personal maturation" over the years.) BUT, for some reason, I never have gotten turned on by what is commonly known as "gynecological" shots. In fact, I have always-even as a horny -found them just plain nasty.

Now, Full Frontal Nudity is just fine with me. And a photo of a set of nice, full, breasts (in or out of bra) looks just as sexy (if not as fun) in a picture as it does in person. Even a shot of a woman with her legs spread wide, and just a bit of "what lies beneath" showing can be sexy. But that's not what I'm talking about here. You know it, and I obviously know it. And I've known it since the first time I ever saw a piece of "serious" porn, back in my years (that was back in the day when if someone tried to publish such things in mainstream "mens" magazines it would get the publisher a good, stiff-no pun intended-obscenity charge). There's just something about that part of a woman, a part that is beautiful beyond description up close and personal, that just defies any and all attempts to do it justice on film, either photographic or cinematic. Now I've seen artistic drawings of it, and even they, while not being as arousing as the real thing, can depict accurately the inherent beauty of that part of a woman's body. But photos? They always look crass and tawdry (if not actually downright obscene, in the most literal sense of the word), and usually look even in the best circumstances like they belong more in a gynecological text than anything else.

Why I feel this way is anyone's guess. It's not something I've spent a lot of time analysing, nor have I felt the need to. I have a few guesses, but for the sake of brevity, I'm not going to go into them here. But what I'd like to ask is this: Am I the only guy out there that feels this way? Or am I just weird about this for some reason (not like it's the only thing I've ever been "weird" about in my life! lol). I know we men are supposed to be purely "visual" critters, but is there perhaps something about that part of a woman's body, depicted in such a way, that crosses some sort of "line" in my psyche between primality and progress? I'd truly like to hear from those of you who read the blog-both men and women-about what you think/feel on this subject (and if you're a woman, and you have such shots on your profile, why you have them there?). And to you ladies: This is just one man's opinion, but at least in some things, it's sooo much sexier when you leave some things for discovery when things get to the point of being "up close and personal"!
0 Comments
Class will tell!
Posted:Jul 1, 2007 12:44 pm
Last Updated:Feb 19, 2012 2:43 pm
6504 Views

One thing I've wanted to write about here for a long, long time has been something that I find irritates me more and more as I get older: The fairly recent "phenomena", if you will, of people treating things that used to be considered "milestone" events, like weddings and funerals and such, as "come as you are parties". By this I mean the fact that in recent years, I've noticed a disturbing trend by people-and I don't mean and teens, I mean grown-ass people in their 40's, 50's, and 60's!-to show up to such events dressed in stuff like sweatshirts, jeans, sneakers, t-shirts, shorts, flip-flops, etc.

Now maybe this is something unique not only to recent times, but geographically to Wisconsin as well. When I attended my maternal grandmother's wake and funeral in 1996, the former held in east-central IL, the latter in west-central IL, both those events were took place in winter (early March), and both locales for them were in the heart of "farm country" in the Land of Lincoln. Yet I don't remember anyone showing up to either in "farm clothes". People took the time to throw on at least a decent shirt or sweater (and often as not a tie and sport coat for the guys as well), trousers/slacks, good shoes, etc. The same held true, IIRC, when my grandfather passed in 1973. Even more so, since I remember even the who were there were dressed "properly". Heck, I can even remember going to my grandparents church with them in the summer (this during the 60's and 70's), and NOBODY came in shorts, tank tops, sandals, or any of that stuff. Sport shirts and slacks at the least for the men and boys, dresses or at least pantsuits for the women and girls.

One of the things that makes me wonder if this cultural phenomena is a more "Wisconsin thing" than an "American thing" is the fact that even as a growing up in central WI, I noticed that it had started becoming more and more acceptable, starting in the late 60's, to show up to church dressed in whatever stuff you chose to throw on that day. People that used to come in "sunday best" started to only do that for weddings, funerals, and Christmas and Easter services. More and more you saw showing up in sweatshirts and jeans, and even parents showing up in casual "everyday" clothes. Of course, the town I grew up in was a "college town", and the church was right next door to the campus, but these were not "hippie college " I'm talking about here, these were regular, ordinary, "working stiff" folk of mostly Polish descent, and though they mostly voted democratic, they tended to be about as "progressive" as Archie Bunker. They didn't simply go with every new fad that popped up (like the "guitar masses", which my father and paternal grandmother both hated). But even with all that, when my paternal grandmother passed away in 1983, and my mother in 1987, people still came reasonably nicely dressed to both the wake and the funeral (both of which took place during the cold weather months).

The first time all this really hit home for me was when I attended the wake for a co-worker who had died unexpectedly in December of 1998. The weather, which had been unusually warm that fall, had suddenly turned more "typical" for that time of year about a week earlier. The day was a Sunday, cold, with a light, slushy snow falling. Still, I and my spouse got up in our "best" to pay our respects (a two-piece outfit and shell for her, my double breasted suit, white shirt, tie, and polished shoes for me), as I had learned was proper to do from when I was a onward. Imagine when we arrived at the funeral home to find that about the only people dressed in what I would call a "proper" fashion for such an occasion were the family of the deceased and us! People I worked with, some old enough they could be my parent, were there in Badger sweatshirts, stretch pants, flannel workshirts, jeans, work boots, etc. They may have been clean and neat, and the weather did suck out that day, but that's still no excuse. None of these folks (and to the best of my knowledge, none of them worked that day), on a Sunday, could be bothered to actually take 5 or 10 min. to put on something decent, something that actually showed respect for the solemnness and importance of the occasion-the fact that this occasion was one of life's "milestones", and here they were, treating it more like a speed bump. And as the years have passed, It's only gotten worse-I've been to more and more weddings, funerals, baptisms, quinceneras, etc., where people basically show their asses up in any old thing. Not just sweats, jeans, and sneakers, but hip-hop clothes, track suits, "cholo" outfits, etc., and so long as what they're wearing has been washed, and they dragged a comb across their hair and had a fresh shave (or their monthly perm if they're a woman), and had a shower, that's supposed to be enough.

What amazes me the most, though, is the cojones with which people will defend this sort of thing today. "Well, It's the thought that counts", people will say in defence of this. "Just my showing up in and of itself shows respect", they'll say to justify it. Well, sorry, but Woody Allen got it wrong: Just showing your ass up is not 90% of what life is all about. "Maybe they can't afford anything better", was the litany I got from both my parents and paternal grandmother (all good "progressive liberals", socially) when I used to complain about people showing up for church like that when I was a , and I still hear it today. That's a bullshit excuse. The only time that excuse will wash is if we're talking about a street person or something. (And how many of them are going to go to a wedding or funeral, or even care about such things? They've got far more important things on their mind-like day to day survival). A decent man's dress shirt is often actually cheaper now than a sweatshirt, and a pair of dress slacks can be had for less than the price of a pair of Levis. And I can guarantee you that a pair of quality men's wingtips costs less than a pair of Nikes. Bottom line is: coming to such things dressed like Oscar Madison or a member of Hell's Angels doesn't show respect; it shows an abject lack of it. It doesn't show class; it shows a lack of it.

And that's my main point here. Respect and class. (And maybe even add "maturity" to that as well.) "Old School" virtues that seem to becoming more and more forgotten (and less and less "cool") as time goes on. Dressing decently and nicely, in a shirt (or at least a decent sweater or turtleneck) and tie and sport coat if you're a guy, or a dress, or shell and slacks if you're a lady, for a wedding/reception or wake/funeral shows both. It shows one is recognising that this event is something special, something meaningful-that it is not just a little "speed bump" on the road of life; it's a milestone instead. It shows respect to the other people there. It's a courtesy, and shows courteousness.

But our culture (or at least around here) more and more seems to lack what used to be considered "respect" and "class" when I was growing up. It's seen as an "inconveinence". This manifests itself in many areas, from "road rage" to athletes taking steroids to improve their "look" and "performance", and of course, it also does in the way people dress. "You live your life in a free-form style", as the lyric from an old Ozark Mountain Daredevils song goes. People want the convienence of a "free-form", "wash n go" lifestyle (or at least they seem to here in Wisconsin). They don't want to be bothered with the effort it takes to buy even just one set of "special" clothes for "special" occasions, much less have to change in and back out of them. They can't be bothered, just like most little don't want to be bothered with it. And the energy they could be using to actually get such a set of "decent" clothes, they'd rather expend trying to justify why there shouldn't be a problem with them showing up in the same ol' slobby stuff for everything.

IMNSHO, there's absolutely NO EXCUSE for why somebody can't and shouldn't have at least one decent set of clothes for "special occasions". I hate shopping of any kind as much as the next man, but if I can take the time and effort, anybody can, IMO. Don't like having some creepy men's department guy who reminds you of Charles Nelson Reily taking your measurements? So what? Neither do I. Suck it up and get over it. If you can take a shot in the arm or the ass without flinching, getting measured should be a breeze. It takes about 30 seconds at most. Over and done. Cost a problem? Most stores have sales going on all the time. A good suit can be had for less than the cost of some "hoodie" with some damn star's name embroidered across it that was made by people in Thailand who get paid 6 cents a day. Good dress slacks can be bought for less than a pair of Levis, as I mentioned earlier. It doesn't cost a million bucks to look decent. It doesn't (or shouldn't, unless you make it that way) take hours and hours to look presentable, in a way that shows respect and class for the occasion you are about to become a part of. It takes a little bit of determination, maturity, effort, and maybe a little extra $$, but end result is worth it. And believe it or not, you might actually even feel better about yourself in the bargain!

Now some will say "But respect and class come from the inside". I couldn't agree more! But I also believe that respect and class, if they are for real, will manifest themselves on the outside as well, and yes, that includes dressing properly for the proper occasion. As the old saying from when I was a goes, "Class will tell!" (Or as they used to say in the old gangster flicks, "Show a little class, will ya?")

(BTW, for those wondering, my "special occasion" outfit, which I wear not only to weddings and funerals, but also for New Years, Christmas, Easter, and any sort of other big to do, is a double-breasted pinstripe suit, old school shirt with the collar that covers up the top of my tie, a la Goodfellas, old school shirt and pocket square, tie chain, and a fresh shine on my dress shoes.)
3 Comments

Posted:Apr 14, 2007 12:01 pm
Last Updated:Feb 19, 2012 2:45 pm
6356 Views

"Little darlin', it feels like years since it's been here...." Yep, here comes the sun, and a side order of warmth to go with it, at last!

Hi folks....as those of you who've visted my blog here probably have noticed, I haven't written in a long time, not since last summer. Not that I intended it to be that way, just worked out that between personal life and issues, time constraints, and the fact that there just wasn't anything in particular going on in my life that I felt like sharing (or was willing to share in this particular venue).

So what's been up with me since last July? Well, "not a whole hell of a lot" would be the short answer. To go into a bit more detail, last summer I did manage to go to a few ethnic festivals in both Madison and Milwaukee (always fun), did hook up a couple of times with a couple of the "FWBs" I've made on the site (always fun too of course, though nothing happened all that earthshatteringly different from past get togethers that I felt compelled to write about it), and otherwise just lived live as usual....work, working on my writing, dealing with the inevitible change in the weather from nice to crappy....

Speaking of crappy weather, man, what a winter we had this year! Jeez louise! The fall last year wasn't bad up until about the beginning of November, but then it got colder than normal for the first half of the month, then warmed up rather nicely around Thanksgiving (nice for me and others who aren't fans of cold weather, not so nice for the gun-season deer hunters! lol).

Then a colder than average early December came, followed by a way above normal Christmas and New Years (second year in a row I went out on New Year's Eve and was able to leave my coat in the car and walk from it to the places I was going with just my suit on). Early January continued the trend (sure made it easier to haul the Festivus pole in and out of my car for our office's Festivus celebration!), and I thought that just like last year, we would get away with a relatively mild winter.

But MLKjr. Day weekend came, and the day after my 46th birthday, the weather made a dramatic tumble downwards temperature wise, and with very few exceptions, the weather resembled the so-called "norm" for that time of year all the way into late March (I think we went something like six weeks without ever topping 32 even once!) Of course, this wasn't so bad when the trivia contests I play in were going on, but otherwise it made it more than a little difficult on more than one occasion (both me and my car are getting more and more cold sensitive as we get older, though I've got an excuse; I was frost bit on my feet when I was younger).

Things got nice again the second to the last weekend of March, and stayed nice until Ma Nature decided to play a nice little April Fools joke, and give us about 10 days of "February in April". Now some weather forecasters are predicting one of the coldest Aprils on record, though to be honest, I think April of 1982 was way colder than this one-we've had no temps hovering around zero like we did then, and we are starting to get some decent sun and warmth now. Not as much as I'd like on either front, I'll grant you, but better than it could be, to be certain. All in all, this has been a very weird winter and early spring, to say the least! One thing I will say though is: GLOBAL WARMING, MY ASS!

As to other things going on, well, as I alluded to above, I've been busy playing in some of the other Trivia contests I and some of my friends play in every winter as a lead up to "the big one" in Stevens Point (no, I'm not going to say what team I play on-if you want to know, you'll have to ask me personally!). Plus I bought a midi keyboard for my iMac G4 about a month ago or so....first time I've tried to master a music-making instrument since my 20's, and first time I've been even half-way serious about it since grade school. Mostly though, I got it for fun, and as sort of a "stress buster". Amazing though just how much starts to come back to you though....like riding a bike for the first time in years, or starting speaking a foreign language you spoke as a , but haven't since you grew up.

The battle of the bulge: Well, this hasn't been going so well. I did manage to take off a couple of pounds last summer, getting down to 228, but then, as is usually the case (esp. if we get a lot of really cold weather, which stresses me out big time, and causes me to snack in order to relieve the stress), I gained over the winter, going up to 245-the heaviest I've ever been! I have been working on getting the weight back down again though-have quit the snacking, and am down to 240. Once the weather gets really decent again, I'm going to start up with my walking regimen in the evenings after dinner again, big time! Of course, as one gets older, the metabolism slows down more and more, so I'll have to work harder at it than before. But I'm hoping with some discipline and effort, I'll be able to get down to at least 220 (and stay there!) over the summer.

Sex: What's that? lol Seriously, I have to admit, bitter cold weather and lots of snow tends to put a bit of a damper on my libido. Not to the point where it doesn't exist, mind you, but it can definitely to the point where it isn't as big a deal as it normally would be. I expect that to change too as we get back to nicer weather (summer turns me into a major horn dog, always has!).

Well, I suppose I've written enough to make up for the 9 months plus absence from blogging on here. I hope to be making entries a bit more often now, and hopefully will have some interesting stuff to report as we swing into summer (esp. in the sex department! )
1 comment
No Drama??
Posted:Jul 1, 2006 3:04 pm
Last Updated:Oct 17, 2006 4:57 pm
6291 Views

Well, this entry won't be a "rant" like the last one; more like a "can somebody please explain to me....?"

There is a phrase that I've been seeing crop up more and more in people's (or at least women's) profiles, esp. in the past couple of years, that being the phrase "no drama". Now just what the heck does that mean, "no drama"? To paraphrase The Buddha, "Life IS Drama"! By that I mean that "negative" stuff is a part of life, y'know? Much as we might wish at times (esp. when it's happening to us!) that it wasn't, it's there. In fact, as the old saying goes, if it weren't for the "bad stuff", how would we ever know what the "good stuff" was?

Now sometimes, some women will be a bit more explict, and say "no baby mama drama". OK, but still-what the heck does that mean? Is it saying you don't want to date/hang/get it on with some guy who has ? Or does it mean that you don't want one of his ex's coming over to your place when he's there and getting up in your face, when they're supposed to be broken up? That you don't want to deal with some guy who's having to give up half his paycheck to support an ex-wife and ? All of the above? Neither? Somebody's got to explain that one to me.

But getting back to the original, simpler (and more ambigous) form of the statement, I guess when I think about it, when it comes to women who are just looking for a "fuck friend" or a "booty call". I can kind of understand. I mean, if you're just getting together with someone for the purpose of a little mutual nut busting and nothing more, then you're probably not really interested in getting acquainted with the personal aspects of that person's life. You and they are there for one specific purpose, and that's it. OK, fine-that makes sense.

(As an aside, I should say that that is one of the kinds of "relationships"-if you can really call that a relationship-that I've never been able to get into. Call me old-fashioned, or just a plain "old fart", but for me to get turned by somebody, I have to be attracted to them on the *inside* as well as the outside. What manifests itself in a physical form as sexual arousal comes not merely from me finding them physically sexy, nor even from the physical contact of things like touching, kissing, caressing, but primarily from their personality-in other words, I actually have to care about them and like them as a person. Not necessarily be "in love" with them, but find them desireable on some level "on the inside" well as on the out.)

But where I find the greatest confusion with that phrase is with the women who use it in their profiles, but most adamantly state that they are *not* looking for a "booty call" or "fuck buddy", but for a "friend with benefits", and a true friend at that. Now given what I said above that life itself, if it's real, if it's authentic, consists in some part of "drama", how can you be a real friend to someone, and yet tell them "no drama"? Isn't being a *real* friend all about accepting the other person and who they are, even the negative stuff? Isn't it about being there for them if they need someone to talk to, some one to listen to them? Isn't it about saying to them when they're down or in trouble "Is there anything you think I could do that would help?" Again, maybe I'm a little old fashioned in that area, but to me, that's what genuine friendship is all about, with or without "bennies". It's (at least in part) about being there for the other person when things aren't going "perfect", as well as when they are.

Now having said all that, I also realise there are differnt levels of friendship, of closeness, of affinity-and things that would be appropriate to discuss with one person you consider a friend might not be appropriate to discuss with one of your other friends. But that's an individual thing, and something that each must decide on their own. But in general, if I'm having a great day, I let my friends know. And by the same token, if I'm having a shitty day, I let my freinds know, as well as why it's shitty. That, to me, is all a part of real friendship.

Before I close this entry, I should also point out that though one should be able to talk about "bad stuff" with a real friend (bennies or no) as well as "good stuff", I think it's fair to say that no one likes a whiner. Sharing what's on your mind or what's bothering you with a friend is one thing; beating them over the head all the time with whatever darkness you might have in your life is something else. Nobody wants to hear nothing but complaining, bitching, moaning, etc. about what's going wrong in your life all the time, to the exclusion of all else. Now if *that* is what someone means by "no drama" within the confines of a friendship, then I can understand-in fact, that should just be common sense and common courtesy. But as selfish as people seem to be today, as obessessed with "perfection" (esp. when it comes to other people) as they appear to be, I'm not so sure. So, comments anyone?
0 Comments

To link to this blog (TravelinMan161) use [blog TravelinMan161] in your messages.

63 M
November 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
1
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
         

Recent Visitors

Visitor Age Sex Date