Tastes and Kink

Part of the examination of my wrestling kink is to evaluate my tastes.  Taste interests me for a number of reasons, lately for the fact that my taste and my personal ethics do not strongly correlate.  This used to trouble me more than it does now.  Now the contradiction simply intrigues me.

For example, on the most general level, I abhor violence in real life and have not the least bit of interest in real bullies (e.g., Wall Street, multinational corporations, homophobes, white supremacists, the Bush White House), yet I'm erotically drawn to fights, even brutally realistic fights, and arrogant bastards with a cruel streak are my favorite guys to watch in the ring.  I like horror movies, elaborately choreographed battles in action movies, and even YouTube vids of kids or drunks punching it out in parking lots.  I like military men; I just hate the military, and, more to the point, war.

Also, as a gay man, I know I should be more catholic in my tastes.  It's not fair, it's probably not even "right," by some people's estimates, that my tastes in men, while individual, often do parallel typical points of attraction for gay men.  Fatties, fems, neurotics usually don't ring my chimes, however much I may like them on a personal level, however much I want them (and everyone) to find what they're looking for in life and love.

Others might use the word "prejudice" here; I don't.  Taste and desire discriminate for me, despite my high principles, and I can't make my dick like what doesn't arouse it.  (Even "worse," unlike most gay men today, I have little interest in establishing a LTR and marrying and starting a quasi-mainstream family.  This is something I do have spasms of guilty feeling over, from time to time, given the tenor of the times.)

So in tracking my sexual desire I've created a short rubric of "types" I like to see wrestle, and have ranked them from "most likely to turn me on" to "least likely."  To give this a pseudo-scientific code, I'd label myself as R-B-M-T in my wrestling tastes right now.  "R" for regular guys, in the number one slot, then "B" for bodybuilders, then "M" for models, especially fitness and underwear models, and "T" for twinks.

Further, I am a "D" (for daddy), but daddy-fights have only an unpredictable appeal to me, and then, only if I am one of the daddies.  By "daddy," by the way, I mean men over 35, with some balding and/or graying hair, with or without facial hair, but with a lot of history plus know-how or wisdom or guts that come with age and experience.  (I'm interested in hearing readers' suggestions for other categories, and how they might rank them.)  There are days, though, when I would rank myself as R-B-D-M or even R-D-B-M.

Almost always, in first place are regular guys, height/weight appropriate real men, without remarkable symmetry or tone, but who have a fire inside.  These are the number one turn-ons in my world.  They are athletic without being gods.  They aren't hideous, but they don't turn heads in the bar either.  In fact, the way they catch my attention is by fighting ... or stripping down and revealing a tough body that looks like it can take a punch or two.  Often, they are in their 30s, ranging from 5'8" to 6'2".

Next are bodybuilders, thick men with hard round pecs and biceps, six-pack abs or firm convex stomachs, bulging thighs, broad shoulders.  They shouldn't look steroidal.  Overly developed bodies just look lumpy and ungainly to me.  They must be agile enough to really fight, not just bounce off each other in the ring.  Like the regular guys, they don't have to have cover-boy faces, so long as they've got a body that draws the eye.  Narcissism, with an openness to body worship, is a plus.

Next are models.  I like a beautiful face.  I actually favor faces over bodies, usually, though, in the context of wrestling, a face without a rugged, taut body is like a ham sandwich without the meat.  Like my friend Bard over at neverland, I like to see models dolled up as fighters, especially, of course, models with muscle.  Often their doll-like faces make it painfully obvious that they have no real fight in them, but the pretense is attractive and usually hot.

Last are twinks.  I like guys in their teens and early twenties too.  Slim guys, even skinny, but not girly.  I like tough little dudes who, as Chuck Palahniuk states in Fight Club, don't quit in a fight until they're burger.  Even fairly soft, pale, emo-style dudes turn me on if they unexpectedly exhibit a yen for rumbles and skill in delivering and taking on pain.  Unlike the other categories, I'm only interested in twink versus another twink.  I can get a charge watching a regular guy taking on a model, say, but twinks need to stick with their own kind.  I feel more or less the same about bodybuilders, come to think of it.

The fighters, in general, need to be well-matched.  I just don't get into bodybuilder-twink squash jobs ... or, except on rare occasions, the David versus Goliath scenario.

So, egalitarian and liberal though I am, I'm still drawn to fighting, both real and staged (if well staged).  Without regard to political correctness, I am drawn to whom I am drawn to, even while I recognize the injustice of sexual desire.  Maybe I should be ashamed of myself, maybe I should count myself a hypocrite because my heart and my cock don't see eye to eye ... but I'm 56 ... I gave up that self-lacerating shit decades ago.


  1. What a beautiful, provocative post, Joe. As always, it's as if you're in my head. Critical self-reflection is a bitch, sometimes. I share pretty much all the kinks and quandaries you've mentioned here. The only thing I'd add is the recognition that my tastes have changed as time has gone by, which is a fascinating thought in and of itself. Thanks for sending my mind spinning this morning!

  2. I agree with your point about discriminating, the word has such negative connotations, many are troubled by its use, but all of us discriminate to a certain extent in determining what attracts us to a sexual partner, I am all over the place in choosing who I have sex with, but their are always a few common dominators, they are generally younger, in shape and always of my choosing. Oddly, given my obsession with wrestling, I have never chosen a partner for a LTR based on wrestling compatibility, though I will admit that sex was more enjoyable over the long term if I fantasized that they were a wrestling opponent.

    My attraction to a particular wrestler is always based on 2 things, but they are not primarily a physical characteristic, (i) their ability to fight and (ii) the gear they wear, the look or type is secondary to me. For instance, as attracted as I might be to Stoney Hooker, when he wrestles in baggy pants, it does nothing for me, I need to see him in the bikini tights for my wrestling attraction to be fulfilled. That’s one of the things that I like about Naked Combat, they start out in skimpy gear that soon comes off and though naked is completely sexy, if there is no arousal, or engorged dicks then I am dissatisfied with the fighting and wish they had left more to the imagination by leaving their gear on, but Naked Kombat always delivers, often with raging hardons. This was a feature that always appealed to me in Can Am’s naked fighting, the guys always had hardons, and in the pre-viagra days I could forgive the strangely tied cock rings that many of them wore. For instance, as sexy as I might find Arnyx Quinn/Tristan Baldwin from BGEast, when he strips down to a flaccid penis, my attraction to what is undeniably a near perfect body diminishes significantly

    So in addition to the Model; Regular guy and Bodybuilder I would have to add a G for Gear reflecting the correlation of attraction with the importance of the right outfit to pique my interest and A for Arousal as evidence that the fighters are as turned on by fighting as I am watching them.

    Lastly, I gotta say I concur with your observation about squash jobs, one sided fights are not of interest to me, though I prefer that the eventual victor win convincingly and overwhelmingly, I prefer to see the opponent put up some fight and maybe even look like he might win.

  3. @Bard: Thanks, and I agree about tastes changing over years ... and often even rapidly from mood to mood.

    @topher: I always thought gear didn't matter much to me, but your comment reminds me that it does, in fact. It makes a world of difference whether the wrestler wears baggy pants or tight lycra briefs. And, yes, in nude matches, arousal is a requirement ... otherwise put your clothes back on. Show a little appreciation ... sheesh!

  4. Joe: Damn the post today was one of the best that I read since I started following your writings. I agree with most of your comments, and having watched a lot onthe puter lately as well as as a teen on TV, your coding is great. (R B M T) The B category is good, I would consider say Danny D to be almost a B now from a T. However, as sexy as I find wrestlers, when they hit the big time my attraction diminishes. the last big name I thought was hot was Alex Wright or maybe it was just his trunks and the carrot shots on cam. I also agree with comments on attire. When I see the young ones in baggy pants or even baggy shorts, I loose interest as I feel they are hiding bird legs. A true wrestler should wear appropriate clothing. Give me an RBMT in square cuts or tight trunks and I am happy in both heads. While i have no attraction to the heavy set out of shape opponents, regardless of age, I am starting to think, not sure, that they me necessary to my attraction of seeing a young cute one get pulverizerd or in some instances score a victory. Of course I wouldn't mind seeing a 3 way match with Tex, Danny and Greg king just to see how I felt about it....lol. Any how you encapsulated a lot of thought provoking message in your post and I am glad that I am not the only one who has these thoughts. There is a huge dischotomy between what I believe morally and what I want to see in wrestling. i think that is why I wrote you aoriginally asking about the fake versus realness of teh fighting. In that I told you I wrote Mr duggan, i did ask him how much his cruel summer (double knee drop) hurts if applied properly versus improperly. Will let you klnow if I get an answer. Comptroller

  5. When I was in college, I remember one of my profs talking about the notion of an "attraction template." It was the idea that, over the course of our lives, most of us find ourselves attracted to people who resemble some of our first "crushes," and sometimes we will find ourselves asking, "Why do I find this person attractive? On paper, they may not stack up as all that great, but there's something about them that I find gives me the desire to fuck 'em." Then, if we search back to some of our earliest turn-ons, we see that there is enough of a resemblance to cause our erotic impulses to make the ol' connections.

    I first made this connection when I fell head-over-heels for Tommy Rogers back in the early 1980's. Obviously, Tommy and his muscles and his bulges and his masculine good looks were more than capable of stirring the juices of men who had never met anyone who resembled him. But the added jolt for me was that he had exactly the same smile and hairstyle of a guy at my dorm in college who was already serving as fantasy jack-off material, and the first time I saw TR in his bulging trunks and matching ring jacket, the theory of the attraction template became much more than a theory, it became a serious puddle on my dorm room rug....


Post a Comment

Popular Posts