All Activity

Exactly my preference: load first, spit second (ass juice third)

Wish I had hot amazing doctors like them!

I must have missed a post way back. I love these adventures, but I never knew Drew's dad was really his father. Wow. Makes these posts all the hotter.🔥🔥🔥

He's all over Tumblr and its clones, holy shit is he one hot motherfucker. I'm not usually into hairless muscle dudes, but he's HOT AS FUCK and that cock is EPIC. The smirk is what seals his sexiness for me. He's gotta have some weird mind control over his orgasms. He can seem to just make himself shoot a load. It's so fucking hot.

My first was a CL m4m hookup in college. I was 23 at the time. I posted an ad with this picture of my ass saying that I wanted to suck and fuck. A 42yo bbc answered my ad saying he could host. After exchanging pics and stats I asked him if he would fuck me raw and he obliged. After that I knew I would only take cock raw. Call it intimacy, or it "feeling better", or what not. For me, its really the idea of me taking his cum willingly. My ass was meant to take his seed.

ii wonder if it ever happened?

Did youguys get any replies?

yes Im into homeless dudes hmu

This story gets better every time when reading it

Tonight at the bathouse in Antwerp. I arrived at 20h. There was very little action, but took one load. Pushed it out and felt the cum dripping out of my ass and over my balls. I left at 21h. Very dissappointed, but luckally I got a load...

Wow definitely need a report on this!

Strictly a fantasy but I have always fantasized being adducted as a kid and sent to re-sexducation camp with other abducted kids.

I don't have a lot of pics of myself sucking cock, most tops prefer to lean back and enjoy instead of fumbling with a phone while I'm sucking them off. But my gifter made some videos, on the day of my pozzing. This pic is from the video of me blowing my gifter before he puts his toxic cock in my ass and converts me.

Another update, I've been cumming a minimum of 3 times a day now for 2 months. It has definitely made it easier for me to get an erection even under circumstances that are psychologically adverse for me. This weekend I was able to get hard and start instigating activity by fucking available bottoms, even though no one else seemed to be fucking at the bathhouse. This was after I forgot to take my Cialis on Thursday and Friday, they don't do anything for me the 1st day I take one, but continue to work 3 days after I stop taking them. I had been taking them to improve the odds of getting hard even if it turns out to be a blue ball no mating dance. It really wasn't working very well in spring and early summer when I was cumming a lot less frequently, the cock blockers were pretty much killing my hard one even with the Cialis. Last night I fucked at least 10 guys and came in 3 of them on an otherwise inactive night at Steam, which is always a boner killer for me. On the downside, 2 weeks ago there weren't any guys trying to bottom, so after getting fucked and bred repeatedly I had to jack off before going to sleep after a night at the baths. If I'm interpreting my research correctly, this means I need to make sure I cum 3 times a day, instead of resorting to erectile distinction drugs, and save the drugs for when I take a sexcation and want to fuck all day for several days in a row.

We'll progressive taxation is actually equal, in my book. it says, everyone get the same tax within this range. And so on up while it's a person's choice to take the higher and higher salary. It may sound like semantics, but I don't think so: Flat tax is used for state/city sales tax, for instance. To illustrate above not-semantics point, imagine -- as is suggested from time-to-time -- sales tax is based blindly on receipt total. That's wealth redistribution. But it's hard to do a true progressive tax system for sales tax, for let's say grocery: base avocado price now is what $3/small so the first $3 is 5% then organic, etc, etc, is $4.5 so the $3.01-$4.50 incremental cost is taxed at 10% etc It gets complicated quickly industry-by-industry, item-by-item. But you get the point, if you choose the options, the tax goes up for those increment(s) of the price. But here's a very VERY fun test of political fortitude when you know someone's political background, and their socialist-lefties, in a non-politics related conversation: "If you won the lottery and it's a given you live for 50 years from that date, would you take a lump sum with the high tax or take the installments?" It's amazing how many moralize wealth in terms of being wrong or even evil then, when given the option -- knowing they'll live to enjoy the $, they pick "over time" and not "lump sum" to save on taxes. It's a really really fun test. And yes, of course I throw it in their face, immediately! 😃 You literally don't even have to ask, e.g., "So every wealthy person -- except you -- should pay their 'fair share', got it. Thanks for playing." Didn't they have... what, "materializers" or something like that to get around the issue? no one had to work for income as nothing was required, it was materialized. I know that's the wrong word. In a different context, I did some stuff too. Here are (dated) links I dug out. How do these figure consider an 80%-90% failure rate? ...meaning the pharma company uses the 10%-20% of profitable drugs to offset losses? Science 2016: [think before following links] https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/only-two-out-ten-drugs-really CBO 2021: [think before following links] https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57126 Pharma profitability vs other industries NIH 2020: [think before following links] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7054843/ But this also part of the misconception of wealth and it's role in spurring innovation in our economy. This doesn't mean free-reign, right to 'no tax,' for the wealthy or the like, but it's definitely not included in most thinking out there: "The success rate of venture capital investments is relatively low, with studies indicating that up to 75% of venture-backed startups do not return cash to their investors. Overall, the odds of a startup being successful after receiving venture capital funding are estimated to be around 8%, translating to a total success rate of about 1 in 2,000 for startups funded by top VC firms." In part, this is why the US and Swiss private medical systems are both more innovative and more expensive. Not all of it. And, the comment is not targeted to medical norms, either. Just a generalization. Where I was focusing was purely on people. I don't disagree on the contractors, etc. But national defense, we all indirectly and equally benefit by it's role in our society -- we're all, theoretically, safer from those Canadians on husky-driven sleds and their killer snow balls. And, it's aboot time, eh. In part, this was my question to you re a UHC is Trump would be in charge. More government means more ways our leaders can be tyrannical. How do you future-proof for tyranny while demanding more levers of potential tyranny? But I would add to this the other side, and that's using government programs to win supporters and aide your own political base, see Biden/Democrats and the attempted $1 trillion give-away. [think before following links] https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2022/8/26/biden-student-loan-forgiveness At no time in that "debate" were the actual costs of tuition, etc discussed. It was a give-away to a political base allowing colleges and universities to continue to over-charge. For instance, a relative of mine is a professor in the UC system (CA). Her take-home of student tuition is roughly 20% (in algebra terms, she make "x" and the university keeps 4x of her students' tuition). The university get a state disbursement roughly similar to their tuition revenue from the state, varying thru time. So, if she's average to other instructors, instructors get "x" while the university is now at 9x, or keeping 90% of total revenue. All that before cost-offsets from grants and the like. There is something so messed up in the administration of these institutions. And those institutions put in on the backs of students and tax payers, the latter thru state funds and federal grants. And then a double-down of that by Biden/Democrats? Still seething. Dems want to complain -- rightfully -- about Argentina and Trump... I think a mea culpa on support for student debt forgiveness needs to be the place to start. I think this starts with our political outcomes. As I stated privately, even Obama's large 2008 win wasn't even large enough to break down a classroom of 20 students. Obama's 7.3pp national win was 10.75 students to McCains 9.25. Even Reagan in 1984 wasn't even a 12-8 split of 20 students. The media, politicians, and supporters also embellish anything and everything to create a mandate. We're just divided.