|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
This is the UK term at least for visiting public toilets for casual sex.
I am intrigued. It is not a heterosexual activity. Why is it a homosexual activity? What makes people want to do it? And most important why do gay men tacitly accept it as a part of being gay, even if it is not for them?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm...
When I came out to my father the other day one of the first things he said was that he disapproved of the promiscuity of many homosexuals. The depressing thing is that there is no real differenciation between gay orientation and gay lifestyle in the eyes of the general public. I personally dislike the term "gay" as it has some connotations that I don't like very much. Homosexual is too clinical and has too many connotations that have nothing to do with its meaning (same-sexual). (Much like paedophilia: love (as in friendship) - of children; but I digress.)
Of course, in a perfect world you wouldn't need a label as no-one would bat an eyelid if you admitted that you were attracted to another boy. But we are nowhere near there yet. And I don't think the "gay community" (whatever that is) is helping by treating cottaging as standard practice. I think that's one of the reasons that people dislike homosexuals, even though most would never indulge in it.
Deeej
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy wrote:
> This is the UK term at least for visiting public toilets for casual sex.
>
> I am intrigued. It is not a heterosexual activity. Why is it a homosexual activity? What makes people want to do it? And most important why do gay men tacitly accept it as a part of being gay, even if it is not for them?
I think the only reason that it's a homosexual activity is that public toilets are same-sex. The current heterosexual equivalent would probably be "dogging".
It seems to be true that a small number of men (& even fewer women) have a very high number of casual sexual partners. As far as I can see, this has been the case in western society since the days of Cassanova. I don't understand it, 'cos I'm not built that way myself.
Some of the drivers that are mentioned by the couple of friends I have who do go cottaging are "excitement" "novelty" "risk of being caught" "horny". I'd guess the actual reasons vary from person to person: some of the other reasons that I could think of - and seem to me to have a place in the actions of my friends - include:
- "feeling" that sex is dirty, therefore associating it with other 'dirty' venues and activities
- having low self-esteem, and getting a temporary boost by being 'wanted' by someone else
- feeling "real men are promiscuous" (and our advertising culture often pushes this!)and wanting to prove they're a real man.
- not having any alternative (lack of fother facilities to meet gay men, or confidence in meeting other gay men in other social settings, etc)
Sorry if these all seem a bit negative!
BUT I fully defend those who choose to cottage. It harms no-one (anyone pestering kids in a cottage is a paedo, and should be treated as such). Frankly, I'm about as interested in whether my friends go cottaging as I am in whether they do any other activity that I'm not interested in ( from stamp-collecting to soccer), so we might have a very occasuional conversation that touches on it but that's all.
I accept it in the same way as I accept any consensual sexual activity - because I welcome and relish human diversity. And an important part of being a gay man for me is to use my own experiences of being in a minority to inform acceptance of diversity and other minorities.
BTW, my impression is that internet-arranged meetings for casual sex are replacing cottages - at least for the under-35's. Any comments from younger guys on that thought?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
The reason I asked was because of this book: http://tinyurl.com/b7wms It is one of the current gay novels that are in fashion.
A friend has been reading it and said, quite reasonably "I am not like that and I do not want to be like that. If that is being gay I want no part of it". David has reinforced that view, too, and it coincides with my own felings of personal disgust at gloryholes in toilet (etc) walls.
The tale is about a couple, one of whom cottages. And it makes a virtue about sucking rather unhygienic penisis.
It fails to major (as far as he has read, at least) on the huge attendant disease risks for the partner. He who cottages may take his own risks, but I do not see him as entitled to bring those risks home.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm also personally repelled by the thought of cottaging, gloryholes etc - and its something I've never done, nor wished to try. But I'm also (now) personally repelled by the idea of giving oral sex to a woman - and that's something I did a number of times in my teens. I don't think that personal disgust for an activity is a sufficient reason to condemn it - that would be to legitimise the general condemnation heaped on all gay activity by homophobes and bigots.
And I CERTAINLY would consider persistent cottaging (as opposed to an openly-admitted one-off) quite sufficient reason to break up with a partner. I fully support what you say about the level of risk involved.
BUT I know (at least) one couple, who have been together for over a decade where one partner is a persistent cottager, and the other is not. It works for them. They're very happy together and (as far as I can see) absolutely devoted to each other. No, I don't understand it. But I certainly accept it and am happy for them.
Why would your friend say "If that is being gay I want no part of it". Of course that is not what being gay is! Anymore than being camp & wearing pink angora sweaters, or having a moustache and wearing a lumberjack shirt. And, of course, that's part of the reason I'm out. To help show that there do exist gay men who are non-promiscious, who have 'normal' jobs, dress 'normally' in a suit-and-tie for work, 501's and a T-shirt for leisure ...
But I have suffered far too much at the hands of those who are disgusted by the thought of any same-sex sex, or who falsely claim tolerance and say "it's all right if they don't ram it down our throats" (meaning ANY public reference to or display of affection) to impose that on others. So, while there are any number of activites that some gay men undertake - many of which I neither understand nor participate in, including drag queens, cottagers, the leather scene, etc I HAVE fought for, and WILL continue to fight for, their freedom to express themselves in the way they choose. As always, consensuality is taken for granted.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
Do please understand that I am not comdemning the acts. I just don't want them around me because, they make me cringe.
Interestingly I share my friend's repugnance. I was shocked and disturbed to find glory holes in the toilets on Epson Downs when all I wanted to do was to use the stall for its normal purpose. And I think this repulsion somehow put me off admitting to myself I was gay, because I also had the "If that is what being gay is, then I want none of it" reaction.
As with things that stay repugnant, other things become less so and others grow. I was oddly turned off by the simple sight of two men kissing, once. This despite wanting above all to BE kissed by a guy. Today I find it "only as repugnant" as any overly enthusiastic public display of affection, by any gender. Tonsil Wrestling is private, to me. Pecks on cheek and lips are fine in public, but "All over him/her like a rash" is not.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK, we're probably not actually very far apart, in fact.
I very much agree that for a couple of any assortment of genders to carry on in public to the point of becoming noticeably aroused, and to therefore pointedly exclude everyone around them, is extremely rude and unpleasant.
But there are things that I do (when I have a partner) in public that may be beyond what others would consider acceptable. In a restuarant, if my partner wanted a taste of my chocolate pudding, I'd feed him off my spoon. If he dribbled pasta sauce down his chin, I'd wipe it off for him. Nothing major - but things that very clearly showed that we were a couple and loved each other. And I could sometimes feel other diners cringe !
So I think that I wish I didn't cringe so much about cottaging, or if some camp prettyboy sashays up to me and asks me for a light, or whatever ... because it does come across as judgemental, and I truely do not wish to judge, but to be able to accept the choices others make. But as I become more exposed to the diversity of gay men, my abilty to be genuinely accepting is slowly increasing.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
Now camp I like! I flirt with camp! And who would not?
And I have no issue with "spoonfeeding" or chinwiping!
I just can't actually cope with rudimentary sex and the stench of urine linked together.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
and like most venues and prectitioners of the various methodology of sexual encounters there are good ones and there are bad ones.
Some are served A'la carte' and some are buffet style. Some are for profit (very much profit);-D and some are charitable institutions.::-)
Now I want to make one thing clear, Tea parties are not at all the sole domain of the "Gay" community. A great mant str8 men seek high tea as a matter of course. They are able to participate while maintaining a cloak of annonimity. Youth also seek tea rooms as a method of perfecting their trade so to speak. Some do it for the thrill, while many do it to provide a roof and food.
Some of the better places can be found in up scale urban hotels, resorts, golf as well as tennis clubs, and even in fine restaurants.
For the lower end of the scale there are malls, bus and train stations, subways, roadsids rest areas and parks.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting post marc - thanks for helping me understand a bit more about it.
We also use the phrase "tea-room" over here, but from the little I know of the subject it seems to only be the venues you describe as 'lower end of the scale'. That level of squalor could well be a large part of the problem I have with it (and yes - I do see it as *my* problem which its up to me to deal with). Being disabled, I don't visit golf or tennis clubs ... but I may just keep my eyes open in the occasional upmarket hotel & restuarant which I do visit occasionally, purely to see if it does go on in such surroundings, and if that would affect how I feel about it.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
The rationale for "Cottaging" 
