Suck on this!

July 12, 2004 5:51 PM

Selfellatio (NSFW) [via Jane's Guide]
posted by eilatan (77 comments total)

There is something to be said for cutting out the middle man (so to speak), and being in business for yourself. Heck, if wanking is commonplace, this is simply trying a different positiion to achieve the same ends. Alas, when someone tells you to "go fuck yourself," even yoga will not prepare us to say: With Pleasure.
posted by Postroad at 5:58 PM on July 12, 2004

I'm more impressed with autocunninglingus—but both are, you know, pretty cool.

So now I'm wondering if anyone is going to overshare in this thread.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:59 PM on July 12, 2004

Go blow yourself.
(let's get THAT out of the way now).
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 6:01 PM on July 12, 2004

"Go slow and stay focused."
posted by donovan at 6:05 PM on July 12, 2004

Spit or swallow?
posted by alms at 6:16 PM on July 12, 2004

only when I'm in the mood
posted by bob sarabia at 6:19 PM on July 12, 2004

Now I understand why yoga's so damn popular around here...
posted by RakDaddy at 6:21 PM on July 12, 2004

great. now i'm stuck like this.
posted by quonsar at 6:23 PM on July 12, 2004

One of my personal mottos is from the guy who saw a dog licking its nether-parts and commenting "If I could do that, I'd never leave my house."
posted by wendell at 6:28 PM on July 12, 2004

Could you imagine walking in on your dad doing that?

Hey, Pop. Autofellating again, I see.

*Murrphght*
posted by black8 at 6:35 PM on July 12, 2004

great. now i'm stuck like this.

Shouldn't that be:

Great! Now I'm stuck like this!
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:41 PM on July 12, 2004

[inevitable]

If I could do that I'd never leave the house.

[/inevitable]

Actually (and this may just be a heterosexual bias) I imagine cock, even my own, tasting nasty, so that would rule this out for me.
posted by jonmc at 6:53 PM on July 12, 2004

Okay, so the last time I had an extended conversation about this, most of my straight male friends wouldn't own up to having even tried it, as it's somehow 'gay'. To me, that would mean that any manipulation of your genitals by any male equipment--even your own--makes the activity gay. Yet most guys will admit to using their hands at the drop of a trou. Strange. (on preview: well, I guess that explains it, jonmc, but you never know til you try, eh??)

In contrast, most of my gay male friends have admitted to having tried it--and many succeeding when young, but losing the ability as they get older. Wonder why that is ... I mean, if you keep trying, aren't you still maintaining whatever flexibility you had to give you the ability in the first place?

Shouldn't that be: Great! Now I'm stuck like this!

Sure ... until you have to go to the bathroom.
posted by WolfDaddy at 6:54 PM on July 12, 2004

Wow, but yeah/. I like boobs, so even if I could . . .
posted by tr33hggr at 6:55 PM on July 12, 2004

WolfDaddy, I think this may be more reasonable than you suspect. Imagine the visceral experience of A) holding your dick; B) having your dick in your mouth. A is very penis-centric in experience, I think; more on the having one's dick held side than holding one's dick side. In contrast, B is very mouth centric; more on the sucking a dick side than having one's dick sucked side. Heterosexuals have their dicks held, and their dicks sucked, but they don't primarily hold dicks or suck dicks. Autofellatio is more like cocksucking than it is like having one's cock sucked.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:05 PM on July 12, 2004

Okay, so the last time I had an extended conversation about this, most of my straight male friends wouldn't own up to having even tried it, as it's somehow 'gay'.

Well, I don't know how to say this witout sounding homophobic, but I guess that's the crux of it. I don't like the idea of a dick in my mouth, so that means I'm heterosexual. Not that i'm begruding anyone else their dicks in the mouth, but there ya go. I don't like brussels sprouts or almonds either, it's not homophobia, it's just the way I'm biologically programmed, ultimately.
posted by jonmc at 7:09 PM on July 12, 2004

Actually, I just got into a discussion about this with pips and I told that while the idea of sucking a dick (my own or anyone else's) is a definite turn off (and she said the same for the female equivalent), I admitted that idea of another guy sucking my dick didn't neccessarily turn me off, since, in the dark anyway, it's just another wet hole.

This means I have the gay, dosen't it?
posted by jonmc at 7:17 PM on July 12, 2004

Wasn't there an SNL skit about this, where Will Ferrell (I think it was him, maybe it was the guest host) is a yoga instructor who finally attains this position, and basically stays there with his sweatpants up over his head for years, until he's this old bearded guy?

Anyway, I'm intrigued by this "Gary Griffin" guy. "Many doctors refer to Gary Griffin as the Ralph Nader of penis enlargement." Uh-huh. I'm sure many, many doctors do that.
posted by LairBob at 7:20 PM on July 12, 2004

also...gotta share this....
posted by jonmc at 7:22 PM on July 12, 2004

Jon, I think that's a bit simplistic. I sort of like a dick in my mouth, and I'm very straight. (Maybe I'm orally fixated a la Freud.) Anyway, that's about the only thing I do like about gay sex (other than its, um, vigor); not to mention that I don't find men attractive in almost any way, nor can I imagine being in love with a man. While I accept the idea of a genetic basis for sexual orientation, I have some trouble with the claim that this becomes as specific as disliking dick-in-mouth. I think this is more cultural than biological.

On preview: your "guy in the dark" thing also points to the fact that it's silly to focus on physical sensations as the defining basis for sexual orientation. It's not. It's romantic and sexual attraction in general, not a specific act.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:23 PM on July 12, 2004 [3 favorites]

I don't find men attractive in almost any way, nor can I imagine being in love with a man

Well, I can look at say, Brad Pitt or John Corbett and say, yeah, that they're beautiful people in the same way that the Mona Lisa is a beautiful painting.

Hell, I can even dig why a man might want to fuck another man. I just don't understand not wanting to fuck women.

It's a weird-ass continuum.
posted by jonmc at 7:26 PM on July 12, 2004

I actually can't judge the attractiveness of men other than in a very broad, obvious, sense. My best friend, who's gay, like other gay men and straight women finds the claim that straight men can't tell how attractive other men are to be absurd. But it's true, at least for me. I can look at any two women and make a judgment about who is more attractive, both to me and within our social context, and also describe in great detail what's attractive and unattractive in each. With men, not even remotely. Other than the stereotypical things, I don't have a sense of what makes men attractive.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:31 PM on July 12, 2004

We went so far we could as well try delightful puppetry of penis. Good for housewarming parties.
posted by elpapacito at 7:33 PM on July 12, 2004

Well, EB, I buddy, in different ways, we're both a little bit gay.


[monkees]

I'm a little bit gay, I'm a little bit straight....

[/monkees]
posted by jonmc at 7:34 PM on July 12, 2004

And i've heard similar reports from the other side of the fence as well. My freind Pete, a man so gay he makes WolfDaddy look like Jack Nicholson, told me that he watches straight porn exclusively and can discourse at length about the nuances that make Raven De La Croix hotter than Nina Hartley.

Also, when I told him that I graduated from high school a virgin, patted me on the back and said "that's tough, man, cause I got pussy thrown at me." I told him that was proof that universe was an unjust place.
posted by jonmc at 7:41 PM on July 12, 2004

My favorite joke:
Two rednecks are walking down the street. They see a dog licking itself.
Billy-Ray: I sure wish I could do that.
Bubba: Billy-Ray, that dog 'd bite you.
posted by tayknight at 7:43 PM on July 12, 2004

I don't like the idea of a dick in my mouth

But what about the idea of wrapping your hand around a dick? Sorry, just same difference from what I can see.

[weezer] You say we're all a little queer, why can't you be a little straight? [/weezer]
posted by wackybrit at 7:48 PM on July 12, 2004

I thought this was an article about blogging....
posted by gimonca at 7:48 PM on July 12, 2004

But what about the idea of wrapping your hand around a dick? Sorry, just same difference from what I can see.

Well, when a straight guy jacks off, he's getting his pleasure from the sensation of the hand on his dick, not from the sensation of his hand on a dick.

Hairsplitting, yes, but crucial hairsplitting.
posted by jonmc at 7:51 PM on July 12, 2004

But what about the idea of wrapping your hand around a dick?

But holding your dick is a normal part of everyday straight-dude life. Since I've been a day out of diapers, not a day in my life has gone by in which I didn't grab my naked schlong and gush forth a mighty stream of golden elixir.

This is, to put it mildly, distinctly not true of having a cock in my mouth.

Similarly, having a cock in your mouth is being penetrated in a way that's simply not true for ordinary or garden-variety bashing of the bishop.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:10 PM on July 12, 2004

wasn't this on the cover of a tool album? it was holographic and supposely there were 3 women watching a guy do it.
posted by Stynxno at 8:19 PM on July 12, 2004

your all gay
posted by Evstar at 8:42 PM on July 12, 2004

Stynxno, it was in the booklet and on the cd, and it was the band members watching a 'performance artist' do it. If you look closely, one of the members throws something on the floor to the person.
posted by angry modem at 8:43 PM on July 12, 2004

I sort of like a dick in my mouth, and I'm very straight.

[blink] [shakes head in bafflement]

When I look at those pictures, I think of Tylenol 3s. With extra codeine.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:50 PM on July 12, 2004

Well, when a straight guy jacks off, he's getting his pleasure from the sensation of the hand on his dick, not from the sensation of his hand on a dick.

So, does this imply that gay guys get twice the enjoyment out of masturbation?
posted by stet at 8:57 PM on July 12, 2004

this is great and all, but being able to fuck yourself in the ass, that would be a neat trick.
posted by bargle at 9:03 PM on July 12, 2004

>>I don't like the idea of a dick in my mouth
>But what about the idea of wrapping your hand around a dick? Sorry, just same difference from what I can see.

That argument almost never worked with my girlfriends in high school
posted by Tenuki at 9:15 PM on July 12, 2004

I find this whole thread hard to swallow.
posted by bluedaniel at 9:16 PM on July 12, 2004

god. damnitt.
posted by Satapher at 9:29 PM on July 12, 2004

it's a documented fact that many men dream about this particular activity with relative frequncy... if it weren't for throwing out my back, this indulgence could rival MeFi in the level of addictiveness...
posted by moonbird at 9:55 PM on July 12, 2004

THE WOLF
Well, let's not start sucking each other's dicks just yet.
posted by eyeballkid at 10:40 PM on July 12, 2004

I've done yoga long enough that I probably could do this, but frankly, blech.
posted by homunculus at 10:44 PM on July 12, 2004

We went so far we could as well try delightful puppetry of penis. Good for housewarming parties.

As is Testicle Theater.
posted by homunculus at 10:46 PM on July 12, 2004

it's a documented fact that many men dream about this particular activity with relative frequency

Say that happens to a 'friend' of mine... often. what the hell does that mean? It freaks me out.
posted by bdave at 12:05 AM on July 13, 2004

And Googling it is not recommended. Can you back this up moonbird?

Confused,

Australia
posted by bdave at 12:08 AM on July 13, 2004

I like the pics because they almost all look like one man wrestling matches in that moment before he's about to pin himself.

As for autofellating being gay or not? It leans towards gay but its also sort of an extreme masturbation technique.

And skinny guys do it to piss off the fat guys.
posted by fenriq at 12:10 AM on July 13, 2004

Similarly, having a cock in your mouth is being penetrated in a way that's simply not true for ordinary or garden-variety bashing of the bishop.
I think this is the crux of it - being penetrated is something that heterosexual men "just don't do". Kind of like the straight men who go out in secret and have sex with men, yet would deny to the death being gay, because they are only a top, never a bottom.

Still, it would be interesting to try at least once. a day

I find this whole thread hard to swallow.
Try spitting instead.
posted by dg at 12:53 AM on July 13, 2004

Bdave, does it need to "mean" anything? Similar to what I wrote above, if I had to guess (and although I am definitely not a Freudian) I'd say that it's a combination of an oral "fixation" (I'm using the terminology, but I really only mean to refer to finding it pleasurable to suck on something—Freudian and/or other infantile psychology theories are left to the reader's imaginations) with just memories of pleasant sexual stimulation wrapped into a dream mastrubatorial fantasy. Or something like that. Whatever it is that makes autofellatio semiattractive to straight guys (and it undeniably is—see all the jokes about it), is probably the same thing that makes it attractive to one's sleeping psyche. I don't think there's any reaso to suppose, for example, that it would indicate that one would want to have sex with other men.

Anyway, dreams are very much not necessarily what one might want to do in waking life. It should be noted that fantasies, too, are not necessarily wishes for real-life activity. (The canonical example is that many women have rape fantasies, but this does not at all imply that they wish to be raped. Rather, the entire psychological context of the imagined activity is different in a fantasy than it would be in real life, and that difference is key.)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:56 AM on July 13, 2004

Kind of like the straight men who go out in secret and have sex with men, yet would deny to the death being gay, because they are only a top, never a bottom.—dg

Interesting point. I have a hard time believing those men aren't just closeted homosexuals or bisexuals, however. And of course there are gay men who very much dislike being on the receptive end, too.

Furthermore, there is the whole issue of "pegging". A lot of straight men like to be be pegged by their wives/girlfriends and I don't think that necessarily indicates a homoerotic desire.

I don't doubt in the least the deep psychological implications of penetrating and being penetrated. And it stands to reason that for many men being penetrated is homoerotic because of the natural association of the two—but I don't think it's inevitably homoerotic. Turn it around: is a woman who is doing the pegging doing so out of a homoerotic desire to penetrate a woman?

If I had to guess, though, it seems to me that the more that sexuality is closely associated with power/violence in someone's psyche, the more the penetration thing may be associated with traditional sexual roles and orientation. That is, if to someone what sex means is to penetrate or be penetrated, and those roles are closely associated with gender identity, then, for a man for example, to be penetrated is essentially homoerotic.

This may even be true for the majority of people, even across cultures. But that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. I don't think it's true for me—various possible sexual activities are essentially gender identity neutral for me while, in contrast, my sexual desire and attraction for the same sex (very low) and opposite sex (high) is unchanging regardless of the sexual activity.

Oh, this brings something else relevant to mind. For me, masturbation isn't about me, either. People don't talk about masturbation and masturbatory fanstasies much, and so I made it through three decades of life without realizing that lots of folks masturbate by concentrating on the physical pleasure they are giving themselves. Not me. But I had a recent girlfriend who only masturbated this way—concentrating on the physical sensations and enjoying her own body directly, and never fantasizing or whatever. I, in contrast, while masturbating only fantasize (or fantasize indirectly via porn); and, frankly, thinking about what I'm doing directly makes me uneasy. (Which bugs me 'cause I hate to discover any form of sexual guilt or shame in myself. It's stupid. Besides which, it seems healthier to me to simply enjoy the sensations directly without projecting them into some fantasy.)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:19 AM on July 13, 2004

Your word count's going up again, eb...
posted by dash_slot- at 6:15 AM on July 13, 2004

That's it...never again will I read MeFi before having my third cup of coffee.
posted by ChrisTN at 7:03 AM on July 13, 2004

Re: autocunninglingus

I knew a girl who could do this in high school. It was one of those 'parents out of town' parties that went a little haywire when she demonstrated by licking the crotch of her bikini until she had a cameltoe.

She was an alternate on the 1988 Olympics Gymnastics Team. Very flexible.

The memory haunts my morning showers on occasion...
posted by DragonBoy at 7:52 AM on July 13, 2004

lots of folks masturbate by concentrating on the physical pleasure they are giving themselves.

FWIW, I heard that pinnacle of authority Dr. Drew say that men "always" fantasize during masturbation. It could be a gender thing.
posted by callmejay at 8:45 AM on July 13, 2004

Why four galleries though? Seems there's the front shot, the rear shot (literally), and the side shots. Oh, and the shots in a barn (?). And sometimes he's in slightly different poses. But really, when you come right down to it, all you really have is a bunch of pictures of one guy with his dick in his mouth. The photography's just redundant, is all I'm sayin'. Of course, maybe I'm just jealous.
posted by pardonyou? at 9:19 AM on July 13, 2004

This means I have the gay, dosen't it?

Someone set up us the gay.
posted by Tin Man at 9:53 AM on July 13, 2004

So now I'm wondering if anyone is going to overshare in this thread.

bwah!
posted by t r a c y at 10:05 AM on July 13, 2004

I imagine that most straight guys don't (and I know this straight guy doesn't) want a dick pointed at them. If a straight guy is getting a plo chop or a ham chop, it's not aimed at his own face. So this does strike me as a bit gay.

LairBob asked about this.
posted by emelenjr at 10:13 AM on July 13, 2004

jonhmc: I admitted that idea of another guy sucking my dick didn't neccessarily turn me off, since, in the dark anyway, it's just another wet hole.

A while back, I used to hang out with this very gay guy who got his jollies from "seducing" otherwise straight men. There is this long tradition in the folklore of homosexuality that gays are just people who bottom.

On the other hand...

dg: I think this is the crux of it - being penetrated is something that heterosexual men "just don't do". Kind of like the straight men who go out in secret and have sex with men, yet would deny to the death being gay, because they are only a top, never a bottom.

A suprising large number of straight men seem to get off on being penetrated.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 2:39 PM on July 13, 2004

Tell me about it. The plethora of "straight guy on straight guy" websites informs us thusly.
posted by WolfDaddy at 3:55 PM on July 13, 2004

...actually, I think the rejection of the label "gay" isn't a rejection of homosexuality, per se, but of the attendant culture.
posted by WolfDaddy at 3:56 PM on July 13, 2004

That is interesting, WolfDaddy, because I have never differentiated between the term gay and the term homosexual. I wonder if it is possible in some way to be known as homosexual without being considered gay?
posted by dg at 4:05 PM on July 13, 2004

...actually, I think the rejection of the label "gay" isn't a rejection of homosexuality, per se, but of the attendant culture.

We have a winner!

I have never differentiated between the term gay and the term homosexual. I wonder if it is possible in some way to be known as homosexual without being considered gay?

Absolutely. A homosexual is a man who is sexually attracted to other men. "Gay" (at least in some contexts) stands for the collection of stereotypes (fashion-obsessed, arch, effeminate, diffident) that were associated (erroneously) with homosexuality. I find the "gay" traits not-my-bag no matter the sexuality of the person they're attached too.

I'm probably making the point clumsily, but you see what I'm getting at.
posted by jonmc at 5:08 PM on July 13, 2004

Ok, turn the question around - is it possible to be considered gay without being homosexual?
posted by dg at 5:19 PM on July 13, 2004

Of course, look at all the metrosexuals.
posted by jonmc at 5:23 PM on July 13, 2004

Also, it's entirely possible the "on the down low" phenomenon amongst black men is a rejection of gay culture not because it's too gay ... but too white. This has been mentioned to me more than once, and it troubles me.
posted by WolfDaddy at 5:33 PM on July 13, 2004

I used to love it when an ex-gf stuck her finger (or whatever she had handy) up my ass during oral sex. Although I didn't like that she felt the need to punch dents into the wall behind the bed during sex.

As for the subject at hand... that seems like too much trouble to really be enjoyable. I think most of the appeal of oral sex is that you just sit back and relax and enjoy it.
posted by bargle at 5:33 PM on July 13, 2004

For me, at least one of the more hopeful things in one of the faqs was that the guy didn't start stretching out until he was 38. As someone who has had to give up some sports because I roll like a brick, I'm less interested in the sexual aspects of regaining some flexibility than some of the other aspects.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 5:52 PM on July 13, 2004

That is an interesting analysis, jonmc. I have always associated the two words together and always cringe when I hear people criticise something by saying "that is so gay!". Maybe the word is undergoing some sort of transformation from being a "polite" word for homosexual to being a derogatory term for the stereotypical attributes formerly associated with the word?

WolfDaddy, why does that trouble you? Is it any better that a group of people would reject a culture because it is associated with homosexuals than because it is associated with caucasians? It sounds like just another case of *ism to me and equally bad.
posted by dg at 6:35 PM on July 13, 2004

Well, wolfdaddy the consumerist/fashionista aspects of the media version of gay culture may turn off working-class gays too. Or there may be subcultures (or more acurately new identities) forming in these groups as we speak. Hell, I know two hispanic gay guys (one from the South Bronx, One from the projects on Avenue D) who are as street tough as any straight guy from their neighborhood.

Stereotypes are a bitch.

and bargle, that's not even taking rimming into account, even us straight guys have erogeonous butts, dude.
posted by jonmc at 6:36 PM on July 13, 2004

dg, it worries me specifically because the "on the down low" culture seems to be fairly closeted ... many of these guys have wives or girlfriends who are at risk of HIV infection the whole while never knowing what their partner is really up to. The "whiteness" of gay culture might, by some black men, be interpreted as its visibility.

This is what I've picked up from several black men who have long-term 'sex only' relationships with a friend of mine.
posted by WolfDaddy at 6:57 PM on July 13, 2004

I wish I could credit the comedian:

"I had a dream last night I could suck my own dick."

/beat

"Anyway, all I know now is I give one hell of a blowjob".

Disclosure: I have that dream all the time.
posted by Turtles all the way down at 7:03 PM on July 13, 2004

A homosexual is a man who is sexually attracted to other men.

Nope. Add a word like "exclusively" or "predominantly" and you might be on to something. Bisexuals exist.
posted by NortonDC at 7:55 PM on July 13, 2004

Thank you, Captain Obvious. You know what I meant. But bisexuals everywhere are sleeping soundly tonight, because of your nitpicking.
posted by jonmc at 7:58 PM on July 13, 2004

If you want to have a semantic pissing match about culture versus sexuality, make sure you've accurately covered the semantics of the sexuality under discussion.

Sorry that your attempt at sounding authoritative was broken. But calling me names might make you feel better about being wrong.
posted by NortonDC at 8:12 PM on July 13, 2004

Please. In the context of the thread it was obvious what I was trying to say. But if pointing out minor semantic flaws makes you feel better, go right ahead, you brave crusader for justice.

*salutes, wipes away tear*
posted by jonmc at 9:17 PM on July 13, 2004

It's true, Norton, that was pretty sad. We're (mostly, predominantly) adults here, and we don't need holy language crusaders holding our trembling hands as we step timidly through the pitfalls of discussion on mefi.
posted by kavasa at 3:37 PM on July 14, 2004

Sorry, but no, it wasn't me that made language a focus of the discussion. Do try to remember the posts on "gay" versus "homosexual," which were followed up by the thoroughly fumbled attempt at an authoritative pronouncement of what "homosexual" means.

Much of the discussion is about fine shadings of meaning, and why certain accepted definitions seem inadequate in this context. It's a linguistic discussion, one in which precision and accuracy are a large part of the point.
posted by NortonDC at 6:08 PM on July 15, 2004