The Rear

BY DAVID HOLLY

When I was young, much younger than I am now, guys would habitually make unsolicited, albeit most satisfying, compliments about my posterior (admittedly shapely and well-honed in those days). “You have beautiful buns, man,” a passing Jim, Ricardo, Mikhail, or Abdul would say as I strolled through a park, down a sidewalk, or along a beach.

While attending college, I worked a variety of jobs, usually behind the desk of a hotel, and it was no unusual occurrence to feel an exploring hand on the curves of my rump. Then the male switchboard operator named Garcia or the bellboy named Stein would flatter me with “nice ass.”

These compliments and random gropings happened in other places besides the workplace, most commonly in the grocery store. Of course, the grocery butt gropers were more often the female of the species. Nice to hear the compliment, but the gender role was not to my taste.

Lest any reader think I’m bragging, let me own up, with a sad heart, that the days when men would worship my rump are behind me (pathetic pun intended). In the absence of compliments on my butt curves, I compensate by turning pen to paper (a metaphor for pounding finger pads upon a keyboard). I attract not, so now I write.

However, the human gluteal region—especially the bum of the male of the species—provides particular problems for the gay author: what to call it, and how to make it sound enticing.

Some of the names for the rear end are depressingly technical: gluteal region, glutes, buttocks, gluteus maximus. In these words, the thrill is lacking.

Some have a crude sound, as if this delightful body part were unattractive. No sane author is going to write “your tuchas drives me wild with lust,” because the Yiddish word tuchas implies “ever widening,” which is perhaps not the intended compliment. Can, keister or keester, nates, hams, bum, and wazoo just don’t sound enticing. An author writing, “I was hot for his wazoo” or “I want to get into your keister” is more likely to provoke a laugh than an arousal.

Other names are cutesy, but not erotic, such as haunches, hunkies, hunkers, prat, heiney or heinie. Some words are neutral in themselves; nonetheless, fundament, posterior, backside, behind, hind end, tail end, rear end, hind part, and hinder part, can be made more erotic with adjectives.

“Nice posterior, guy.”

“I love your sexy rear end.”

“Provocative backside.”

The alternatives bootie or booty, buns, and cheeks aren’t so bad.

“Nice booty.”

“Cute buns.”

“Hot looking cheeks.”

Neither are seat, seater, stern, hips, curves, breech, tush or tooshie, breech, caboose, cheeks, duff, fanny.

Ass, butt, rump, rear, bottom are okay but not so erotic. Ass is an Americanism for the British arse and generally works well. For example, in my novel The Moon’s Deep Circle, bsb_the_moons_deep_circle_small__26137my character Tip is aroused sexually by a mere glance at his teammate’s ass: “The curves of Jeep’s ass were enticing, and my cock was soaring.” In another passage in The Moon’s Deep Circle, I write, “Lyle’s eyes were transfixed on Tizzy’s curvy buttocks,” evoking the power of the human posterior to hold another person in thrall.

From my novel The Raptures of Time:The Raptures of Time 300 DPI “He caressed my ass as if he were worshiping it. His hands massaged my buttocks gently, sliding slowly into the crack.” I have to believe that the description works.

Butts are nice to ogle, but difficult to write about. In the end, call this divine form what you will, its delightful curves and sweet invitations deserve a comfortable seat in gay fiction.

 

8 Responses to “The Rear”


  1. 1 misterdangerous July 8, 2014 at 2:51 PM

    I read the title and thought, “Oh, it can’t be about THAT.” I was wrong. It was about THAT. I enjoyed reading your blog post. I wish you the best.

    Like

  2. 2 richardnatale July 8, 2014 at 2:58 PM

    Thanks for the blog. As someone who’s always had too much junk in the trunk, I understand your mixed emotions. Like any notable physical attribute, that kind of perfection is transitory. And like being young, hope you got some enjoyment out of the attention. Perhaps you’re too close to the experience to come up with satisfactory ways to describe the idealized posterior. It’s a challenge for all writers when describing delectable body parts. Keep at it. Richard

    Like

  3. 3 Franci McMahon July 8, 2014 at 4:27 PM

    From the woman’s view…so interesting our arousal, the difference between (many) men and women. A pair of lovely full moons may catch my attention as one of the landscape’s curves from breasts to calves. Most often her voice is that which makes or breaks my attraction.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. 4 Andrew July 8, 2014 at 6:47 PM

    I think this is a case of less is more (at least on the page). I’ve read some very amusing descriptions — “like two babies’ heads wrestling in the back of his pants” — and that pretty much kills the eroticism.

    Like

  5. 5 Dena Hankins July 9, 2014 at 6:18 AM

    I like my body descriptions like I like my vegetables – raw and with a certain snap to them when you sink your teeth in. Ass is my go-to, but it needs to be surrounded by sexiness to avoid the donkey connotation.

    Other than that, I try to use the words my character would use – and I can imagine writing a character who wouldn’t get more graphic than bottom or would be happy to leer and call it your can.

    Here’s word that’s not exactly the butt, but is remarkably sexy in an animal way – flank. Some people think horses; others think steak. What did you think?

    Like

  6. 6 S.A. July 10, 2014 at 10:36 AM

    I hadn’t much thought about this conundrum, but in retrospect I can see why gay writers would encounter this challenge. I don’t have any particular suggestions beyond those you pose, I’m afraid.

    Like

  7. 7 Eric Andrews-Katz July 10, 2014 at 10:41 AM

    Good article and it brings to the front the situation of thesaurus usage. In porn, writers are taught to start off clinical (buttocks, gluts…) and then work up to the ‘money’ words such as butt and ass. It’s never easy to use in (sexual) description, but David provides at least an alternative way of dealing with it.

    Good job.

    Like

  8. 8 sawyer caine July 10, 2014 at 5:10 PM

    Lol, well said!

    Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,031 other followers


%d bloggers like this: