Jun 4, 2007

First times and last times

I know that the first posts of my blog state that I won't go into my sexuality, and that later posts, I say I'm bisexual. The truth is, I don't really know. I am powerfully attracted to the opposite sex, but not so powerful, it seems, as my fellow men, especially the ones who spend all weekend, every weekend in bars, picking up women they don't know, getting laid. The getting laid part must be fun, but - let's face it - I have a hard enough time getting along with people as it is and taking women I don't know to bed just seems weird.

Then there's the other side of the coin, the part of me that absolutely feels sexually attracted to other men in certain circumstances. Not nearly as many circumstances as with women, but I know what turns me on in guys - unfortuantely, I am a PICKY. And to that end have had some brief relationships that never went beyond kissing and heavy petting. I have never had receptive anal sex. Yeah, I know how hypocritical that must sound coming from me, but it's true.

Except. For. Once. One short period of my life.

I think I related this story before, but it remains a fact that the first time I had sex at all was when I was eight and it was with the neighbor boy up the block, who was about 12, I think. Anyway, he and I would go out to the woods behind our house and fool around. And by fool around, I mean hump each other. In the butt. He'd bring butter and we'd have a good time. I distinctly remember the very first time I felt the rubbery tip of his cock touching my asshole and then penetrating me; how extraordinarily good it felt. And I also remember reciprocating in short order - the first time I lined my little cock up with another person's asshole, leaned forward, and slid into the tight, slippery warmth of Greg's butt. (Oh, yeah, that was his name; Greg.) I remember the delicious cushion of his ass cheeks against my hips - our fucking was always with the person on the bottom laying flat, face down - sort of a modified missionary position I guess. Our trysts were quick and somewhat furtive. We weren't rushed, exactly, but the danger of discovery was real.

Then came the day when I we were playing on my family's swingset and I wondered why we hadn't done that fun thing in the woods in a while. I made sure no-one was around, then asked him about it. He feigned ignorance and I had to be explicit about what I wanted. He said he didn't want to do that anymore, only "fags" did that. So that's where I simultaneously learned a) what a fag was, and b) that it was something to be ashamed about.

Only the shame didn't take. It was years before I returned to boys, and by then, they'd grown up into men - men who were in a hurry, wanted only one thing, who didn't kiss well, who acted like smarmy...well, MEN. Oh, I've found a few exceptions. Laid back, interesting guys who didn't crank the "let's have sex" dial up to 11 in the first 15 minutes. But they are few and far between.

In the meantime, my sex drive continued unabated. I masturbated a LOT as a child - I think most kids do, but I know my frequency was perhaps abnormal. I also played doctor with the neighborhood girls a lot. This was beyond showing each other our parts - I had anal sex with both the neighbor girls, one my age, one three years older. I want to stress that none of us thought we were doing anything wrong and that it was all consentual. Though I masturbated a lot, I never initiated sex play as a child - the girls did! The nine year old, Cathy, dragged me, literally, into those same woods one misty Friday and proceeded to get bossy with me. Her sister, the 12 year-old, cornered me in a downstairs bathroom in my house one summer afternoon.

I guess what I'm saying is that I find the question of childhood sexuality fascinating, because I was there, I KNOW kids are sexual beings - given the freedom to do so. We were practically nudists in my family, so there was no shame about our bodies. I suspect things were similar in Kathy's family. No, I don't think there was adult-child molestation happening in any of this.

So there are interesting questions arising in the news these days, what with the rash of "female teacher fucks underage student" news flashes. It has exposed a double-standard - the vast majority of people would say this is, somehow, OK, because after all, if we were young and a teacher had taken such an interest in us, would we have turned it down? Well, yes, possibly. We need to look at each case and ask if the sex was consentual or coerced. It really isn't that hard to define those terms and to discern in each case what was what. There is no one set of rules of thumb that will sort out all cases - we must bring intelligence to the table. In many cases, the student and the teacher formed powerful, loving, mutual relationships; why should we tear that apart just because the rough facts of the picture - age - are similar to other, abusive, relationships?

What of the cases of male teachers and female students? Hey, in my high school, it was well known which female students were fucking which male teachers; and not for money or grades, but just because they weren't the immature shitheads teenage boys are.

My point here is that we as a nation have to approach these questions of legislating sexuality in a much more intelligent, discerning fashion than we historically have. The problems and questions aren't going to get easier just because we keep passing laws. And now some of the new laws are creating problems of their own. Where a 13-year-old and 14-year-old can both go to jail for doing some heavy petting on a date! Where a 15-year-old can get arrested under child pornography laws because she took a cellphone picture of herself naked! This is retarded. And we, in the sexually active and sexually adventurous, have to stand up and say, "Hey, you! Yeah, you, the sexually repressed ones - why are YOU making the laws, when you have no real grasp of the subject matter you're attempting to pass laws regarding? WE should be making the laws, for we can discern what is criminal and what is not easier than you; we can act from a base of EXPERIENCE, whereas you act merely on the suggestions of expert witnesses, who, likely as not, are as repressed and inexperienced as you are."

Shit. I should probably not even publish this post. The very mentions of "child pornography" and "I got buttfucked when I was eight" will probably have me on the FBI's watch list. Or maybe they'll come arrest me for breaking a law passed in 2006 way back in 1979. They've been doing that, by the way; oh, yes, they have. Under this administration, our legal protections are being eroded, our privacies done away with, and even the simple freedom of expression is in danger of becoming a footnote in the history books (probably filed under "dangerous and criminal notions", since the history books will be written by the winners, remember). I wonder when, or if, this will all turn around. I wonder if, by allowing unwarranted wire-tapping, suspension of basic human rights and legal protections in "enemy combatant" cases, and the like - if we've just used the Constitution as toilet paper? And even though the Democrats pretty much have the next election in the bag, I have never trusted Democrats to be particularly effective at restoring freedoms, managing the country, or getting much done. They think and act independently and thus can't act as a concentrated unit like the Republicans. Catch-22.

Enough of this shit for now. More later, I'm sure.

3 comments:

EL said...

Hi, I live in Europe, and a lot of the amplified US "think of the children" nonsense has recently been making a landing here as well. And I agree with a lot of what you said. I don't think it's a good idea to just put your head in the sand with regards to childhood sexuality.

I think it's a harmful way of thinking to just declare children nonsexual beings without actually finding out if such is the case. You can do a lot of damage that way.

BTW, I'm into buttplugging myself and I've read everything in your blog so far. You're a good writer, and I hope to see some more (especially pictures).

flor said...

keep the comments coming please

Anonymous said...

Addressing the paragraph of your
posting beginning "My point is ...",
there are cases involving under-age sex by persons with a special relation to the minor which are beneficial to both, and the press reports the filing of a lot of court cases where they were not. Under the usual statutes, the minor's consent is not binding, and we do know that minors have a tendency to flip their opinions. A lot of religious and other institutions have sort of arbitrary rules governing staff's exposing the institution to liability if a regretted sexual touching, etc., should occur. These are restrictions on everybody's liberty. The risk to both parties entering into these relations is that they don't know how they will ultimately come out. The point of all this is that these sexual contacts can in children raised in certain families warp their lives. The general rule of law is that the defendant takes the plaintiff as he finds him. The law is ermitted to adopt broad rules to head off the risk of psychological injury in less than all cases. The problem with some of these laws may be that they're unduly restrictive, which one tends to attribute to hysteria, and one finds a whole range of hysteria among parents, even of the same socio-economic class. And, of course, no one wants to stand up on the other side. If this is a defect of democracy, it seems unavoidable.