Questions of Gaiety
by Jonathan Quince
Tuesday, March 1, 2005 10:09:38
As I am a scholar of sex, this is somewhat disturbing to me:
♂♀ Obviously, I understand male-female sex from a male perspective quite well: I am a male who fucks females with avid excitement. Indeed, for all my inquisitive nature, I am hard-put to question at all what it is like for a man to be attracted to females! Therefore, studying it as a phenomenon starts with but a matter of disciplined clinical self-observation.
♀♂ When I consider male-female sex from a female perspective, I do understand it (oh yes!). Fantasizing deeply about it makes me want to temporarily switch to the body of a woman so I can go get fucked by a man in ’most every conceivable way. I want to melt into strong arms and sublime myself; I want to recoil like a lithe spring and match my energy to his strength. Surrender and mastery in balance, I am open and tight and flexibly invincible… Anybody who doubts my understanding of the female perspective is free to go read those of my Sopef writings which are explicitly heterosexual; I couldn’t have written this recent piece, for example, if I lacked an intimate empathy for female-ness. (And of course, I do enjoy some salutary practical benefits from deeply analyzing both sides of male-female sexual relations.)
♀♀ I have a deep appreciation of female-female sex. This goes beyond my natural male enthrallment with the idea of girls doing each other: Many of my writings here at Sopef are laced with subtle threads of that pure and unique connection that only a female may experience with another of her species. Indeed, this “convivial sisterhood” is one of the foundation stones upon which Sopef was built. And furthermore, there is a reason that many of my first-person fantasies involving acts with females are deliberately ambiguous as to the narrator’s sexual gender: I really do believe a woman can have it both ways.
♂♂ But male-male sex remains a mystery to me. When I think about it intellectually, I can understand casual play; but while porn involving muscular manly men going cock-crazy for reach other looks to be suitably fun and interesting for them, I just don’t get the deeper connection they must feel. I know that in purest male gaiety, the attraction is radically different (duh) from that felt by a woman toward a man; so I know what it is not, but I know not what it is. Simply put, I don’t grok being gay.
Note that here, I am speaking in highly reduced archetypes. Men on feminine, cross-dressed men, for example, falls at some intersection between more than one of the above; so does a butch dyke. Sex is complex, and some intriguing patterns may be woven of a few basic threads. But in building a sexual taxonomy, I must first start with fundamentals; and those are the four most generic relations which may be attained by two sexual genders.
Given the usual subject (and object) matter at Sopef, my number of gay readers may well be vanishingly small. (If I am wrong about this, come out and surprise me!) Yet if anyone in the peanut gallery can offer me a clue here, please do step up.
Do it in the name of science.