Awwshuck

So cute and such a nice body!. Watched the 60s movie he was in with Elaine Stritch and Juliet Prowse recently (Who Killed Teddy Bear), and he looks really hot. Didnt get the parts he shouldve gotten. But he was brave enough to be who he wanted to be.

Paul Cadmus (1904-1999) was an American artist known for his paintings of gritty social interactions in urban settings. He also produced many drawings of nude male figures.
 
http://www.daddyshere.com/gayartists/cadmus/cadmus-paul_1904-1999_photo_001.jpg
 

 
In 1934, at age 29, Cadmus painted The Fleet's In! while working for the Public Works of Art Project of the WPA. The painting featured carousing sailors and women and an erotic exaggeration of clinging pants seats and bulging crotches. It was the subject of a public outcry led by Admiral Hugh Rodman, who protested to Secretary of the Navy, writing, "It represents a most disgraceful, sordid, disreputable, drunken brawl." The painting was removed from exhibition at the Corcoran Gallery.
 
The publicity helped launch his career, and Cadmus said at the time, "I had no intention of offending the Navy. Sailors are no worse than anybody else. In my picture I merely commented on them – I didn't criticize." Kept from public view for half a century, The Fleet's In! hung over a mantel at the Alibi Club, viewed by the Washington elite--including presidents, senators and diplomats--who were members of the private gentleman's club.
 
In 1981, it was temporarily displayed at a museum in Miami, and eventually found a home at the Naval Historical Center.
 

The Fleet's In!

I love it when I miss the 1st three quarters and part of the 4th quarter and still see a fucking awesome game!

:):D:):)

:):D:):)

I prefer a young Eric Roberts to Julia.
 
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ea/53/94/ea539471da4e8f4c396117bbd68059d6.jpg

Oh, honey, that Cory gets mah juices flowing!

Thanks to the OP for this thread-fascinating. Slightly off topic, but I'm wondering how many of you who now identify as gay had regular sex (typically in the passive role anally or giving role orally) with that straight guy in adolescence or a bit beyond, then experienced a dramatic end to the sex once he had decided homosex was not the thing for him.

Thanks to the OP for this thread-fascinating. Slightly off topic, but I'm wondering how many of you who now identify as gay had regular sex (typically in the passive role anally or giving role orally) with that straight guy in adolescence or a bit beyond, then experienced a dramatic end to the sex once he had decided homosex was not the thing for him.

On a sidenote why are ppl in here whining? If topic doesnt interest you find one that does or create one you like. I would never go into a post to question why someone is talking about it. Imagine the amount of time you would need in your day to go around policing threads ad as unpaid moderator.
 
You hqve threads like " shit comes out when fucking a bottom" or "why wont you come in my ass?" You really think a dignified conversation about sociosexuality is underserving of the delis bandwith?

1. There is no such thing as an alpha male. The wolf studies on which this term is based have been discredited.
2. But since perception is more powerful than reality and placebo effect is real, why complicate things this way?
3. Why are you covering up your fetish for straight men by referring to alpha males as if gay and bisexual men can't exhibit the overbearing/domineering/decisive traits associated with the term alpha male?

What is the difference between a "real" straight guy and someone "straight-identified?" Are you saying that a "straight-identified" guy is a gay or bi guy who is misrepresenting himself as straight? In present use, when we say that some "identifies" as a certain gender or orientation, it means that they experience themselves as being of that gender or orientation. To me, someone who experiences himself as straight is "really" straight.

This discussion is interesting but in some ways misplaced. Are 'really straight' and 'straight identified' terms that make a distinction without a difference? I can understand people wanting their partners to conform to a certain set of stereotypes, and they have the right to question them to determine whether they do or not. The term 'imposter' is unhelpful and I would say presumptuous. People get to identify their sexuality as they see fit, and leaving aside the few who lie about it for whatever advantage (in this forum, commercial), no-one has the right to tell them that they are not what they say they are. Claiming that someone is not really straight because they do not conform to a set of stereotypes that an observer has decided upon assumes that stereotypes are definitive proof of someone's sexuality. In any other conversation in this forum a claim that stereotypes prove anything would be dismissed summarily.

>>>>>>>>Caught up In a rare moment of daydreaming....Shuck imagines runnin away with this stud to her childhood hideaway in the Ozarks...

To paraphrase Hank Williams, Jr: Country boy (and gal) can survive, honey.

You busted in your pants? Sounds like a Depends fetish to me!

BWAHAHAHAHA

It's gonna be in the 30s and I think 40s next weekend. I'm looking forward to the warmth.
 
Hugs,
Greg

BWAHAHAHAHA

http://68.media.tumblr.com/563ddb76d112b330432d11bcf93f9e20/tumblr_oqn40uZYQY1u9kfgwo1_250.gif
 
"Do not worry Sarah, with MAL here the gays are going to warm up the city"

As I heard it, the full phrase is:
 


As cold as a witch's tit in a brass brassiere on the shady side of an island.

Emu eggs, perhaps, ostrich ones not so much.

Then his ultimate reputation would be “a brilliant musician who was also a sexual predator and a fucking moron.” Point taken.

I liked Matt on the Today show but I was always struck by how incredibly tight his pants were - sometimes displaying a VPL. On the right person, there's nothing wrong with that - but, in my opinion, he was not the right person.