Readers Respond



In Unzipping the Monster Dick, which appeared in our March issue, Santiago Solis observed that, "By attributing ownership of the monster dick exclusively to nondisabled men, gay pornography trivializes the physically disabled man and makes him a bystander." Here's what readers have to say.


BENT's March issue was great, as usual. I especially liked "Unzipping the Monster Dick." My son struggles with the whole penis issue on a regular basis (he's straight). He is convinced that it's part of his whole image as a man. I wish he could see the tyranny of that whole idea! I'm thinking that that silly attitude holds straight guys hostage as much as gays. And women, too, for that matter!


I enjoyed the article about disabled people not being sexual and how our society prizes big dicks. As a disabled man I find that I am very sexual and my partners prove their excitement by busting a nut just from kissing my talented lips. The size of my dick has nothing to do with the heat I generate.
-Richard Allen


Santiago Solis's article reminded me of what we all know already: nine- and ten- inch dicks are far from the norm. The sad fact is that guys just getting in tune with being gay might lack the experience to find out the truth, especially with so many magazines and websites offering up monster meat. And men looking at their disabled mirror image and not seeing anything resembling porno attributes might be dispirited to find that they can't even offer up an oversized bone by way of "compensation."

The saddest thing of all is that not everybody wants a monster dick. Being something of an expert on male endowments, I will say until my dying breath that the fun of discovery is what turns me on, whether the unzipped results are truly tiny or incomprehensibly huge. I'm thinking in particular of one unhung friend, a master of sexual power games, who can reduce horse-hung submissives to jelly. I wish the readers of "Black Inches" and "Latin Inches" could see him in action.

Of course, I might be preaching to the choir. You BENT readers know how sexy you are. What seems to be missing, though, is the "cockiness" needed to show off what you've got. What we need are naked crip guy websites or contributions from crips to existing amateur sites. And that's something that only guys who feel they should be seen and enjoyed can remedy. So, I say that the way to counter the oversized/perfect-specimen syndrome is to plaster the world with undersized/average/less-than-perfect, but still incredibly hot images. Now that would be true penis power in action.
-Max Verga
New York


I don't care about "monster cocks." The fact that I don't feel sexual concerns my fear of how I would perform in a sexual situation. Yes it's true, I have all the desires and feelings of a non-disabled man, but there are just some things that are physically impossible for me to do, even though I know that what I may lack in one area I can make up for in another.

I have also noticed that some non-disabled men fear connecting with a disabled man. Is it because the non-disabled guy thinks he might hurt a disabled partner in a sexual encounter? Or perhaps he fears the ridicule of friends for having sex with a disabled man. Either way, we need to let non-disabled men know we feel all the feelings they do. Despite our differences, we are men!

Among my male friends, straight, gay, and bisexual, it's the gay guys who seem most hung up on size. I'm not saying all gay men feel this way, but it certainly appears to dominate gay culture.

I understand what Santiago Solis is saying about only seeing non-disabled guys in porn magazines, but I wonder how many disabled men would want to be photographed or filmed in sexual situations. In other words, I don't think it's just monster cocks causing a problem—it's a lack of communication between disabled and non-disabled men. -Ed


After reading "Unzipping the Monster Dick" I pulled a few old issues of "Latin Inches" from under the mattress and realized a funny thing: not once has looking at them made me feel oppressed or excluded as an average-sized fag or a crip. It's porn! And the most porny kind of porn at that. Meaning, the kind that is porn at it's basest level (you won't catch anybody trying to pass it off as "erotica"), porn that makes no attempt to be socially, artistically or politically relevant in any way whatsoever. Period. Projecting any kind of higher purpose or narrative on it is an exercise in futility.

Here's one more way to look at it. Saying that "Inches" denigrates disabled men is akin to saying that "Cosmopolitan" denigrates bass fishermen, or BENT denigrates straight guys; one makes no claim of representing the other, so how can they be expected to be representative?

Besides, what does disabled look like, anyway? Statistics make it improbable that none of the models ever had a disability. Why does the author assume otherwise?
-Ray Aguilera

2006 by Individual Contributors


Don't wait.
Let us know what you think of this BENT feature.








BENT: A Journal of CripGay Voices/May 2006