Mark Arbour Posted August 26, 2009 Author Share Posted August 26, 2009 Whoever said I was a bottom? Link to comment
Tiger Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Whoever said I was a bottom? In my fantasies, you're a top and a damn good one. Link to comment
KJames Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Just throwing it out there but what if it's wrinkler all of a sudden? the poor boy has no sexual release that we know of...so maybe??? <snip!><snip!> Anyway i bet Wrinkler now Mark M, you beat me to it! I was seeing everyone mention everyone else, and it hit me this evening! Winkler was 'rescued' but hasn't had more than one or two encounters with Cmdr. Granger...yet... Link to comment
Tiger Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Come to think of it, Winkler does need some good lovin'. I think at this point, Granger would be open to it. In fact, I thought whoever it is will have their way with him. Still, I really hope it's Calvert. Link to comment
KJames Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 My vote is still on Mr. Winkler, he's been so discreet for so long, and has been the object of the day on a couple occasions... He deserves another go 'round. Link to comment
paya Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 What great comments and feedback. It's interesting to write Granger's character, especially after a stint with CAP's Stefan. One guy is a teenager, still figuring things out, bumping into lots of walls and f**king up like all of us (who have already been there) did. Stef is seasoned, he is who he is. You wouldn't see him in this kind of situation. And despite Granger's inbred stoicism, he is an expressive person and truly seems to have a hard time repressing his emotions, even when he does understand them. That reminds me - the scene with Fellowes in the room upstairs on the party - that reminded me of the f*ck parties in 70s in the Land Whore. As for Granger, yes, he f*cked up, that is why he deserves groveling. He started to think he knows everything in the world now when he's captain. Link to comment
Enric Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Come to think of it, Winkler does need some good lovin'. I think at this point, Granger would be open to it. In fact, I thought whoever it is will have their way with him. Still, I really hope it's Calvert. umm. There was no actual indication even anywhere that Winkler would be interested in man-man sex..... This should have even an occasional heterosexual, otherwise it just isn't that plausible. Not everybody can be turned to homosex. So, Winkler serves an important task of being in the hetero quota, i.e a token hetero in this. And, seeing that Winkler wants to remain as Granger's personal servant, perpetually, he would in all likelihood not want to complicate that good employment and relationship - and especially not to make an initiative himself. Even were Georgie to take initiative, still winkler could be wary to take that opportunity, just because of fears of complicating his livelihood. So, it should be somewhat surprising, were this unidentified rooster-grabber to be Winkler. And not a good idea, for the plausibility. Winkler's loving (or romantic fumblings) could be some friendly mid-teenage harbor girls on their routes... He is not yet at an age that usual youngsters actually get any sex, or that much sex.... others of his age throughout the world, have gone without, and having their rosy palms... Winkler is something like 15 or 16, at this time. A query: how many of you had (had) lovers at the age of 15 ?? Link to comment
Enric Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) Whoever said I was a bottom? I did not think you, when I mentioned the bottoms on this forum.... However, now that you mention it - I guess (and predict and evaluate) you are not any total top.... Edited August 26, 2009 by Enric Link to comment
Tiger Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 I do not believe it's ever been stated that Winkler is actually straight, has it? I don't recall. I think he did mention that he wasn't awfully keen on the idea of being with Granger, but I don't recall him ruling out other guys. Link to comment
Mark Arbour Posted August 26, 2009 Author Share Posted August 26, 2009 I do not believe it's ever been stated that Winkler is actually straight, has it? I don't recall. I think he did mention that he wasn't awfully keen on the idea of being with Granger, but I don't recall him ruling out other guys. But really, who could resist George? Which one of you would kick him out of bed? f**k, for him, I'd be versatile. Link to comment
paya Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 But really, who could resist George? Which one of you would kick him out of bed? f**k, for him, I'd be versatile. how about posting the next chapter earlier and let us find out? ;-) Link to comment
Tiger Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 But really, who could resist George? Which one of you would kick him out of bed? f**k, for him, I'd be versatile. I'd make him forget all about Travers, Calvert, and Sir Evelyn. Link to comment
Enric Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) But really, who could resist George? Which one of you would kick him out of bed? f**k, for him, I'd be versatile. Like I wrote a tad ago, I was under an impression that you are not a total top.... [which in my perceptions was a 'toppish', a versatile engaged in topping...] Perhaps this data you supplied just now, is one that a re-evaluation is in order. 1) George is mostly a bottom. This comes so clearly through, in these stories. Only occasionally -say, in relatively rare occasions- George has topped. Most of the time, George bottoms. And the stories are pretty well written to express how thoroughly George enjoys being bottom. Quite obviously, a person who would have sex with George, should for the most part be willing to top. something almost non-negotiable. 2) Mark says: for (George), (Mark) would be versatile. Which, obviously, is a change from the usual and prevalent situation of Mark, towards a role which would be needed in consorting with George. That role with the mostly-bottom George, would be the role of topping. 3) ergo, Mark is saying that his own prevalence and usual disposition is to be bottom. And that for the mostly-bottom George, Mark would be willing to change to become at least versatile. 4) as there is a need in this to become a versatile, it means that Mark says he is not (yet) versatile, or at least, does not perceive himself a versatile. Which would mean that Mark would be (more or less) total bottom. addendum A: Mark who writes these stories which so well describe the feelings and perceptions and enjoyments of bottoms, being bottom like concluded above, has as such the personal experiences to draw from, when making the descriptions of bottoming in the stories. Plausibility and genuinity and such, of the narrative, indicates it comes from personal knowledge. This actually independently supports the conclusion that Mark is a bottom. aargh. I am surprised. I did not earlier think him as that bottom... sniff. So much about earlier perceptions. I honestly thought him as some sort of versatile.... I'd make him forget all about Travers, Calvert, and Sir Evelyn. but, what do two bottoms do, together? two-pronged dildo? (= double-headed rooster-head as both prongs...) My prediction is that he will yearn yet more after Travers, Calvert and knight Evelyn.... each of them have shown their good competence in making proper love to his arse... Edited August 26, 2009 by Enric Link to comment
Tiger Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Enric, indeed I prefer to bottom, but even I could not resist Granger's sweet ass. Link to comment
Mark Arbour Posted August 26, 2009 Author Share Posted August 26, 2009 Like I wrote a tad ago, I was under an impression that you are not a total top.... [which in my perceptions was a 'toppish', a versatile engaged in topping...] Perhaps this data you supplied just now, is one that a re-evaluation is in order. 1) George is mostly a bottom. This comes so clearly through, in these stories. Only occasionally -say, in relatively rare occasions- George has topped. Most of the time, George bottoms. And the stories are pretty well written to express how thoroughly George enjoys being bottom. Quite obviously, a person who would have sex with George, should for the most part be willing to top. something almost non-negotiable. 2) Mark says: for (George), (Mark) would be versatile. Which, obviously, is a change from the usual and prevalent situation of Mark, towards a role which would be needed in consorting with George. That role with the mostly-bottom George, would be the role of topping. 3) ergo, Mark is saying that his own prevalence and usual disposition is to be bottom. And that for the mostly-bottom George, Mark would be willing to change to become at least versatile. 4) as there is a need in this to become a versatile, it means that Mark says he is not (yet) versatile, or at least, does not perceive himself a versatile. Which would mean that Mark would be (more or less) total bottom. addendum A: Mark who writes these stories which so well describe the feelings and perceptions and enjoyments of bottoms, being bottom like concluded above, has as such the personal experiences to draw from, when making the descriptions of bottoming in the stories. Plausibility and genuinity and such, of the narrative, indicates it comes from personal knowledge. This actually independently supports the conclusion that Mark is a bottom. aargh. I am surprised. I did not earlier think him as that bottom... sniff. So much about earlier perceptions. I honestly thought him as some sort of versatile.... but, what do two bottoms do, together? two-pronged dildo? (= double-headed rooster-head as both prongs...) My prediction is that he will yearn yet more after Travers, Calvert and knight Evelyn.... each of them have shown their good competence in making proper love to his arse... Brilliant deductions, wrong conclusion. Link to comment
Enric Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Enric, indeed I prefer to bottom, but even I could not resist Granger's sweet ass. well, perhaps.... just perhaps.... in the hypothetical situation that you manage to snare George [i know... I know... not easy to snare a fictional character...] you'd be so alluring and so forth, that our mostly-bottom George would kindly enough to conduct as top in that.... btw, that requires quite much.... Firstly, it requires from George: to be willing to do the work of a top... and from you: most tops are selective. They usually are not stirred by low-quality material. So, you really shoud then be a good-looking, interesting, .... did I already mention, good-looking.... Because, much of sexual desire of tops, is heavily dependent on whether the bottom is nice to look at... stirring willingness to penetrate [the looks of the top are not as important to bottoms, for various reasons... ] btw, this thing is as usual reason why older bottoms do not get (much) sex.... whereas older tops may often get... Link to comment
Enric Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) ch9: oh my - the unknown intruder of the so-called cliffie was that one...... looks like I was good at evaluating things as to that guy. Uh, and now they are up to a small naval war.... a siege, presumably? Edited August 26, 2009 by Enric Link to comment
Tiger Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Fitzwilliam is definitely a horny one. I half-expected it to be him, but alas I was right on both counts. Though it was not Calvert in there, it didn't take Granger long to get back with him. I think Calvert is going to be more understanding in the future. However, I wonder if Calvert will ever get to the point of consorting with others. If and when he does, will Granger take offense? He has been known to react that way, but I hope he does not. Well, it looks as if danger is coming. I am sure Granger will lead his ship well during the impending turmoil, but will everyone come out of it unscathed? Link to comment
paya Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) ch9: oh my - the unknown intruder of the so-called cliffie was that one...... looks like I was good at evaluating things as to that guy. Uh, and now they are up to a small naval war.... a siege, presumably? well you definitely guessed right but you weren't the only one and certainly not the first one to mention that so there's no reason to soar your ego more ;-) all you did (as all the time) was endless bantering about who is or is not a bottom - and to say the truth it starts being quite repetitive and BORING... Thanks Mark for early posting! I was very glad how the things turned out (and I promise I don't read your mind nor the chapters in advance ;-) ). I really enjoyed this chapter! well and I don't see any signs of a naval war (even small one) or any particular danger... they all know what is their job and what goes with it. A real danger would be some real fast Ship of the Line or well I don't know what but they still have a lot to sail to Mauricius at first place and then they are supposed to block ships around their size or smaller... Edited August 26, 2009 by paya Link to comment
Enric Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) .... all you did (as all the time) was endless bantering about who is or is not a bottom - and to say the truth it starts being quite repetitive and BORING... well and I don't see any signs of a naval war (even small one) or any particular danger... in that very day, I mentioned bottom only briefly, so that 'endless bantering, repetitive' is just your own reflection, I'd say. Another had mentioned sitting on a cock, so the mention of that as bottom was just a somewhat necessary referring, and nothing for you to get your knickers all.... Of course, another bottom is generally not an interesting one in view of a bottom. It is btw somewhat amusing that some presumably bottoms feel that being bottom, is something shameful, that sort of negative. a bottom, behaving like a mention of that phenomenon is bringing forward the said bottom's problem. a presumably bottom, finding a brief mention of bottom to be such a biggie.... Unfortunate. Perhaps our fellow Paya could try to live with talk about bottoms. Edited August 27, 2009 by Enric Link to comment
Tiger Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 There's nothing wrong with being a bottom at all. People enjoy what they enjoy. Apparently, Fitzwilliam cannot get enough of being a bottom. Link to comment
Mark Arbour Posted August 27, 2009 Author Share Posted August 27, 2009 There's nothing wrong with being a bottom at all. People enjoy what they enjoy. Apparently, Fitzwilliam cannot get enough of being a bottom. I love bottomw. Link to comment
Conner Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 I had better get my comments posted before I end up at the bottom of this page. Great chapter, Mark!! Actually, I was quite pleased that the "intruder" was Fitzwilliam. The question now is will Granger allow the possibility of further interaction, given how grateful he was to the fine lad? Men do sex well. Men do not do relationships well. Link to comment
Enric Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 There's nothing wrong with being a bottom at all. People enjoy what they enjoy. Of course this is so. It is nice to see a bottom who is proud of being a bottom. Bottoms are necessary for tops.... A horror scenario would be a gay world without bottoms, rather: full of only tops - think about the problems of any top to have satisfying sex, as it'd be more or less difficult to get anyone to do the bottoming... The thing I pointed out, is that some bottoms seem to be ashamed of 'bottomness' For example, to talk about bottoms and/or bottoming, is something which makes them feel bad. Link to comment
Recommended Posts