WE'RE ASSHOLE BUDDIES.

[cimorene]

cim: So. 3.7 and 4.5 were... there was an American phrase he'd heard once, 'asshole buddies.' They hid it well; neither of them seemed at all--well, gay, or effeminate, or whatever.
perhael: OMGGHGGGGGGGDBGFNKGMKNKJFFHSHDF
cim: ASSHOLE BUDDIES?

cim: it's american? i feel so culturally impoverished!
wax: *goes to the urban dictionary*

1.        Asshole buddies
       
During WW2, sex was hard to get, and masturbation and fellatio were totally unacceptable practices. But in a foxhole environment asshole buddies could sodomize each other, in turn, without problem, as long as it was kept on the down low.

I get along pretty good with Pvt X. We're asshole buddies.

I'll bet those guys are asshole buddies.


2.        asshole buddies
       
Pals, accused of being so close they have become fudge packers.

John Kerry and the Breck girl weren't exactly asshole buddies until Kerry bit his tongue and chose him for Veep.

okay, so, several things strike me about this.  like for instance:

1. ASSHOLE BUDDIES?
2. anal sex was more socially acceptable than masturbation?
3. ASSHOLE. BUDDIES.

cim: there should be like an ann taintor icon. a 50s guy making a thumb's-up, going, "WE'RE ASSHOLE BUDDIES!"
perhael: YES.
perhael: now i want icons with like, every otp i've ever had
perhael: with ASSHOLE BUDDIES on it!

Comments

[perhael.livejournal.com]

[hollsh.livejournal.com]

*fucking dies from laughing*

I WANT THAT ON A SHIRT!

[cimness.livejournal.com]

with the thumb's-up!!!

[eleveninches.livejournal.com]

During WW2, sex was hard to get, and masturbation and fellatio were totally unacceptable practices. But in a foxhole environment asshole buddies could sodomize each other, in turn, without problem, as long as it was kept on the down low.

WHAT.

[claire.livejournal.com]

John and Rodney = ASSHOLE BUDDIES.

Also, this brings up disturbing thoughts about my grandfathers time in the army during WW2. DO NOT WANT.

[cimness.livejournal.com]

THAT WAS MY FIRST THOUGHT.

john and rodney. not your grandfather.

Re: 2

[miriam-heddy.livejournal.com]

It actually makes a lot of sense that anal sex would be more acceptable than fellatio. If you fuck another guy, you can tell yourself you're pretending he's the woman, and he can tell himself he's doing it so that you will reciprocate, and nobody has to touch anybody's penis. Fellatio, on the other hand, means getting pretty intimate and in your face (so to speak) with another guy's incontrovertible masculinity.

I love slang.

Re: 2

[kyuuketsukirui.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I can definitely see the advantages over a blowjob in that department. I kind of want to write WWII fic now...

Re: 2

[anatsuno.livejournal.com]

I was thinking the same about the acceptability - it is close enough to what I guess would be considered 'natural intercourse'; while both fellatio and masturbation are not only somehow very intimate for the first, but also totally looked down on and forbidden by customs and the church both. I mean, it was normal to raise boys to think that they'd incurr the wrath of god for touchig themselves, so while homosexual activities would have been just as frowned upon by religious people, still, I bet it wasn't something that got mentionned a lot, by comparison, in people's education.

Man, I want one of those icons too now.

Re: 2

[cimness.livejournal.com]

granted, by the church(es), masturbation is (and was) frowned on, but do we seriously believe that there were many guys in the 1940s who never did it? i find that nearly impossible to credit. what crack-headed loophoole of inside-out logic would lead them to - i mean, if you're taking the church THAT seriously, you could make a case for sodomy being forbidden by the bible - a stronger case than for masturbation being forbidden! i just. ahhhh. SOLDIERS. ahahhahahahah.

Re: 2

[cimness.livejournal.com]

fellatio, yes! but masturbation?!

Re: 2

[copracat]

Masturbation would mean touching the other guy's semen?

Re: 2

[cimness.livejournal.com]

yeah, i dunno, maybe that's why. or just touching his cock. of course, you're touching them anyway with your ass in anal intercourse... but maybe that doesn't count. or it's uh, passive touching!

Re: 2

[copracat]

Ah, the twisty minds of people and how we justify our actions.

[coquettemoves.livejournal.com]

This is maybe the best thing ever. EVER.

[ida-pea.livejournal.com]

I'm speechless. That's so funny.

[pickledixy.livejournal.com]

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA!!!

Cock: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

*falls over laughing*

[la-bien-rose.livejournal.com]

Suddenly the subtext of "The Soldiering Life" by The Decemberists has become incontrovertible, uh, supertext?

Hi, don't know you, clicked a sweet-ass orgasm banner, thought this was HILARIOUS.

[copracat]

Classic fan fiction is special, people.

[cimness.livejournal.com]

*FERVENT AGREEMENT*

[phineasjones.livejournal.com]

can't. stop. laughing.

[apoplexia.livejournal.com]

Okay, I was skeptical. My slang dictionary doesn't give it a particularly WWII context, although it does note that from the 1950s on denoted "a normally heterosexual man who, deprived for whatever reason of women, enjoys anal intercourse, both as an active or passive partner." I guess stuck in a foxhole counts as deprived of women.

[cimness.livejournal.com]

well, the urban dictionary is user-edited, so it's possible the origin given was just conjecture or unconfirmed. but the 50s is close enough to WWII that the drift from definiton 1. there at war-time to the definition in your dictionary by the 1950s (which is closer to definition 2. it seems to me, maybe an intermediate stage...) seems like a credible progression.