rawTOP

So the question going forward is how to be an ethical slut? I think it would be good to have a community discussion on it… One point of view is like that expressed by @Sobaystud above. That approach aims for zero risk. It's admirable, but is it maintainable? Those of us who went through the AIDS pandemic had a variety of approaches to dealing with it, and I think some of them are appropriate here. Personally I got through the '90s with 1) the best information I could find, and 2) risk reduction (but not complete risk elimination). So when the Limelight reopened a dark room, it was the first one in the City in many years. I was right in there for hours at a time. I was doing oral, j/o, and while I was vers at the time, but never got fucked in there. It wasn't the place. What shocked some guys was that I wanted them to cum on me. They thought it was really risky, but I knew it wasn't (HIV dies when exposed to air). The dark room was really hot and I'd get totally sweaty. The loads guys dumped on me would mix with the sweat and when I'd leave I was literally dripping wet with a mix of cum and sweat. I loved wiping my had over my chest and feeling it totally slick and covered in cum. The point of that story was that I took a little risk. I did stuff that was edgy for the time, but it was all based on risk reduction. That said, I didn't stop living my life. And I still had a blast. I'm not sure it's smart to tell people "just say no" – it's like religious fundamentalists – they bottle stuff up so much that when they finally let go they do some really fucked up shit. Personally I think we need a middle ground. Sensible risk reduction that might not eliminate all risk, but a strategy that reduces and spreads out the risk. So in other words, the risk you might take going to one crowded sex party – can you spread that out over different types of activities, so you might get say 2 hookups a week for 6 months that are the same cumulative risk as that one sex party? Here are some of what I think could substantially reduce risk. Feel free to add your approaches… Trusted Partners – This one is totally HIV Pandemic 101 – get to know guys before you fuck and get a sense for how much risk they're taking. Whether they've been tested and have antibodies, etc. There's this one little Asian guy I know is pretty kinky who wants to hookup when things get back a bit closer to normal. He's been possibly more conservative than me through this whole thing, so I know hooking up with him is pretty low risk. And I know him and trust him. Sex Outdoors – The news today was that a study done in China with extensive contact tracing found almost no cases of outdoor transmission. So hooking up outdoors, in parks, in the dunes at beaches, etc. could be a viable way to reduce your risk. 1-on-1s Instead of Groups – Let's say you go to a sex party and come in close contact with 100 guys, but only have sex with 40 of them. Well, you just took on 100 units of risk for only 40 units of benefit. If you did 40 1-on-1 hookups you'd get the same benefit for 40% of the risk, and probably have more sex in the process. Regulars Rather Than Strangers – If we're talking about units of risk, hooking up with the same guy 5 times, while not 1 unit of total risk, is less than 5 units of risk. Maybe it's 2 units of risk. But you just saved 3 units of risk… Quickies – That's another finding that came out in the past day or two – the shorter the interaction, the less risk. So a 5-10 minute pump-n-dump is substantially safer than an hour long hookup. I'm not going to say it's 1/12th or 1/6th of the risk, but maybe it's 1/3rd of the risk. Full Hoods with No Openings – If you like blindfolds, and you're thinking about wearing a mask during sex, combine the two and wear a full hood. It can be a $15 spandex one or a rubber / neoprene one, or a $300 custom leather hood. The point is, it actually makes the sex hotter while reducing risk. Now if giving a blowjob is important to you (or in my case felching a cummy hole), it may not be a workable solution. But if you don't feel like you're giving up anything, go for it… Here's a decent article that goes over risk reduction strategies for more mundane tasks, but a lot of the bullet points apply to sex equally well… So the next question is when… I think this one is a bit more contentious. Clearly some people never stopped hooking up. And other people are going to wait for months. And if that works for them, 👍, but it won't work for everyone. Personally there are several things I'm considering… Is the hospital system overwhelmed? Is the risk low enough to be acceptable? While NYC isn't to their target of 30% of hospital beds free and 30% of ICU beds free, they're getting there. So even now I think #1 is a big issue here. In a couple weeks I wouldn't consider it to be an issue at all. Then there's the question of risk. That's a lot more complicated. I don't interact with a lot of people normally, so my risk is primarily personal (and risk to my husband). I don't have the worry of elderly friends or family. I should also mention that my husband got both an RNA and antibody test recently and both were negative. So I'm almost certainly negative as well. Bottom line, if you catch it there's a little less than a 1% chance (on average) that you'll die. On the risk charts, being 52, I'm pretty much smack dab "average". Then there's the risk of all the other complications. If someone gave you a bowl of 100 M&Ms and said "there's one in there that will kill you", would you eat any of the M&Ms? Having candy is pretty optional, so no you probably wouldn't. But what if it were the only food around and you hadn't eaten in days? Then yeah, you'd probably risk it. But it's not like there's a 1% chance of death every time you hookup. The 1% chance of death gets multiplied by the chance you'll catch COVID in that particular hookup, and that's where the whole risk reduction thing comes in. IMHO, you have to take the risk of that particular hookup and compare it to things like going to the grocery store, or hanging out with friends in a park for an hour or two. Just because it's sex doesn't mean it's undeserving of some of your "risk budget". Personally I'm considering hooking up in a couple weeks. (Just considering at this point – this post is part of my thought process). And I'd start with low risk stuff like trusted partners, sex in parks, and quickie pump-n-dumps. A low risk activity like those once or twice a week will have a significant quality of life benefit. So what's your thinking on all this?

He looks fine. He's posted two hookups since he got out of the hospital. Who knows how many he's actually had.

That could be related to the server change, but not the DDoS protection. Email is getting sent from a different server now, and your mail service may like the new server less than the old one. That said, if some are getting through, then you're probably getting everything. Maybe look in your junk mail folder? That said, you're on Hotmail. There were issues in the past with the Microsoft mail services (@hotmail.com, @outlook.com, etc.) No mail was getting through at one point. I was just glad to see some is getting through. If you do find things in your junk mail folder make sure to mark them "not spam" – that will help you and other BZ users on Hotmail (and possibly on Outlook.com as well).

That's almost expected. If you've ever gone into chat, that happens. (Try again and you'll probably get in). Chat is not part of what got changed. Problems with posts with links has been temporarily fixed. They're working on a better solution though.

So there was a link in your response? I think that's what triggered it. When the tech gets in at 1pm I'll have him fix it. Links seem to be a common thread for triggering a block. The fact that you're on a VPN means you'll probably be challenged when you first come to the site. But if you do what they want to prove you're human, you should be able to continue on just fine.

Just an update… Some of the changes I've made to how emails are sent mean more of them are getting through (apparently). I'm going to start getting aggressive about bad emails. I'm currently trying to figure out how to best handle it. The software running this site doesn't make it easy.

The guy setting up the new server made a change last night that caused all the sites on the server to prompt for a download. Thanks to @drscorpio texting me right after it started, it was fixed pretty quickly. I can't explain why you're still seeing the problem. But here's what I'd suggest trying… For starters, close the "Clear all local data" for Breeding Zone, then quit the browser and then go back in and see if the problem persists. Also, try a different browser. I suspect your browser cached the download as normal, and because you accepted the download (you should never accept downloads – they could be viruses), that behavior won't go away until you clear the cache.

Technically, 302 is not an error –it's a temporary redirect. That said, an infinite loop of 302s would be an error. How much do you trust your VPN? Using the wrong VPN can expose you more than not using a VPN at all. If it's a free VPN, stop using it. If you pay for the VPN submit a ticket and tell them there's an error. I would need to know where they were redirecting you to, to tell you more. But chances are it was something that would have broken the encryption on the site and made you lose all privacy.

Now that we're on a new server with a new IP address, I'm trying to clean up email issues… For those of you who are technical, I've changed from PHP sending the email to sending it through an SMTP server. I've also set up SPF, DKIM and DMARC with pretty strict settings. This should help our emails get through more often. Right now there are a lot of bad email addresses in the system and because a lot of people were set to get notified immediately when something got posted in a thread they were following, it meant a lot of email bounces. I tried setting things to force people to revalidate bad email addresses, but the system kept sending notification emails to bad addresses. So I've had to change things so you'll only get one email notification for per login. This means a drastic reduction in email notifications for many of you. And I should add the German email service "GMX" and "web.de" seems to be refusing everything we send their way. Not sure if that will change with all the changes on our end.

I'm changing to a better hosting company. The one I was at used to be who (almost) everyone in porn used. Then they got a competitor and (almost) everyone moved to the new guys. I was slow to move because I knew the old host could handle DDOS attacks. (Which happened ~4.5 years ago on and off for a few months). But the new host has finally gotten as good or better at handling attacks, and the old host was sold a bit over a year ago and has really really gone down hill.

Is it continuing to be a problem? I would expect a problem like that if there was an issue with the AJAX call that figures out how many people are in chat. Or the AJAX calls that figure out if you have new messages, etc. Try deleting your cookies for the site (if you know how), then restarting your browser.

That's not a new problem

Thanks for that. My bad. That should resolve for you in 5 minutes or less. (You'll need to reload the page).

If you see any problems with the site that weren't happening before 1pm on Friday (5/8), report them here. This is to find any problems that might have cropped up in the server migration.

There are actually 3 criteria. You have to meet all three thresholds to progress to the next level. I don't discuss how they work in order to prevent people from gaming the system.

Mentioning legitimate use of prescription drugs is fine. "I've been having sleep problem so I take an Ambian every night, so when my roommate came home and saw my bare ass passed out on the couch he took advantage of the situation. I was pretty sure someone was fucking me, but wasn't quite sure who it was or if it was just a vivid dream. The next morning I had to ask if he actually fucked me." That's fine. The pills are being used according to the doctor's Rx. Not OK would be something like "I just wanted to feel like I was getting raped, so I took an Ambian from my roommates stash, went to the bathhouse, popped the pill and the next 8 hours were just a blur, but when I left cum was pouring out of my ass." That's not OK because it's abuse of Rx drugs. Likewise stories about being roofied are not OK. (Except in the context of telling a non-sexualized accounting of something that really happened to you – victims of abuse, rape, etc. can always tell their stories provided it's in an objective, non-erotic manner.) Again, think about the recovering addict. The problem is when you make it seem desirable to abuse prescription drugs.

I'll be clear then… Any overt reference to the narrator of the story doing illegal chems or any of the other main characters doing chems is a problem and should be reported. DrScorpio's example of "That night at the baths, a few guys were clearly tweaking, but I didn't pay any attention to them" is a good example of what IS allowed. The point of that statement was that the narrator had zero interest in doing chems or playing with guys on chems – and he still had a great time that night. Along those same lines – references that imply (or clearly state) that chems don't make sex better are also perfectly OK. For example "There three of us taking loads in the backroom – there was a muscular job who was in a K hole and just laying there, and there was this skinny twink who had done some T and was all fidgety. The tops would fuck them briefly when another top was fucking me, but I was getting most of the loads because I could focus on the top's body language and give them what they wanted – whether it was 'connected sex' or just a nice tight hole." Also allowed are passing, implied references. For example… "After hanging out with John my head was spinning and I wasn't thinking all that clearly but was horny as fuck". If the phrase can be read in a way that could be innocent and it's not the focus of the story, then it's fine. But if you wrote "After smoking up with John I was spinning and horny as fuck" – that's a problem unless you had previously mentioned that you were smoking pot (which I consider legal). In other words, it's all about word choice and phrasing. Bottom line is this… Could the mention be problematic for a recovering drug addict? If the recovering drug addict could look at what was written and not be certain it was a reference to illegal drugs, then you're fine. If the reference implies that one can have a great time not doing drugs, then you're also fine because that's actually the type of thing recovering drug addicts need to see – it supports their choice not to do drugs.

3% of the US is 10 million people. I agree there will be places that don’t or can’t control what’s about to happen and they will be lessons for all of us. If 10 million Americans die it will destroy our healthcare system. It will take years for it to recover. Buttigieg liked to say that “freedom” was not having to worry about things. Turning on your faucet without worrying whether the water will kill you. Imagine knowing anything that happens to you could kill you because you can’t get proper care. But there’s also the awareness that we LET 10 million of our friends, family, and neighbors die. It’s one thing if you’re a poor country and just can’t cope. But for the richest country on the planet to let it happen — that will destroy us. It’s literally the opposite of Make America Great Again.

Just so you guys know, I'm actively working on something. When I'm done chat will change a lot. But give me another week or two.

There was a report out of China that someone had gotten COVID-19 a second time. It got a lot of press and then went unconfirmed. So it's assumed that once you clear the infection you're immune. Though there are 8 strains of it going around. There are also examples of people in China who get through the illness but continue to test RNA positive for quite a while (indicating an active infection with the assumption that they're also infectious). But eventually they do test negative AFAIK. I haven't heard of any cases where people aren't able to eventually be RNA negative. IMHO, the "immunity passport" should work. It means the person can't infect. So if they shower and change their clothes at the beginning of a shift (at a nursing home), then there should be no risk. But if localities only have 1-2% of the population that's been infected that means nursing homes only have 1-2% of the staff they used to have. That's a problem. Having that "immunity passport" will be both a blessing and a curse. You'll be able to resume your life more quickly, but more will be expected of you.

Good points and this is precisely why I'm glad I'm in NY with Cuomo as my governor. He gets the importance of testing. NY State has developed a rapid antibody test that tests the correct antibody (many tests don't). Some tests show positive if you've ever been exposed to the type of coronavirus that causes cold symptoms. Other antibodies can show positive when you have an active infection (and hence don't tell you if it's safe for the person to go back to a normal life). There's just one particular antibody that you can test that tells you if the person has recovered from a COVID-19 infection – that's what the NY test tests. And it's a rapid test. BUT they're only able to create 50,00 tests per day, which isn't enough for a state with 20 million people (plus they need to test CT and NJ as well). So he's actively looking for companies that can produce the test in really mass quantities. To your other point – we're not barred from going outside, in fact we're encouraged to do so (in moderation). The problem is it's creating crowding in the parks. I won't cycle in Central Park anymore because it's difficult to maintain 6 feet from everyone else. The NJ governor just closed all the parks in the state. I'm hoping Cuomo doesn't follow suit. For now Cuomo has increased the max penalty for not social distancing to $1000. Hopefully that will be enough. But apparently even married couples who sleep in the same bed have to stay 6 feet apart when out together. On the one hand it's silly, but it makes things simpler for the cops. Apparently in Switzerland they have plenty of hospital capacity, but people heeded the "don't go to the ER unless you have to" so well that people with non-COVID problems are showing up with really advanced symptoms and some are dying, untreated, in their homes. So Switzerland is having to get the message out that if you need the ER, then go. So yeah, there are unexpected downsides to all those stay-at-home orders. As far as shielding the vulnerable, from what I've read it's pretty much impossible. Even nursing homes that have gone on lockdown are still getting infections since the staff come and go from the "real world". Ditto for seniors who have home care attendants, etc. Apparently there are hundreds of clinical trials on right now trying to figure out what might work. My hope is that one of them turns up something (but I really hope it's not the one Trump's been pushing – I don't want him to be able to say "see, I told you so").

I'm aware there's some issue with confirming emails (I haven't been able to replicate the issue so far). BUT right now there's nothing to do when you login, so I'm sorta ignoring the problem. That said, I'm actively working on profile stuff for those sites, so I'll care about the account confirmation soon enough. Then I'll be pouring over all the emails I've received and try to figure out what's going on.

Gothamist has really great breakdowns per 100,000 population. Currently about 0.65% of Manhattanites are infected. That goes up to about 1.15% of people in Queens. On a per capita basis Rockland County is up to 2% but only because the Hasidim (ultra orthodox Jews) refused to alter their behaviors to flatten the curve. They might achieve herd immunity, but it's not going to help anyone else given how insular they are. Even if you assume that a lot of people who have it haven't been tested and hence aren't counted and you double those numbers, you're only up to ~1% in Manhattan and a max of ~2% elsewhere in NYC – nowhere near the 60% you need for herd immunity. Even if you say the numbers will triple again during the next few months you're only up to 3 and 6%. "Flattening the curve" means the problem will go on for a very long time (until there's a decent treatment or vaccine). But the alternative where you shoot for herd immunity means millions of deaths and our entire way of life collapses. I have a friend who calls himself an "ethical slut" – that's an approach we should embrace. We need to start thinking through what comes next – how we can still be sluts without creating chaos in the society around us.

Bug chasers (and gift givers) never created a strain on the healthcare system like what we see now. With the advent of ARVs (1996) they weren’t really even risking death if the go on meds within +/- 2 years of infection. And with the advent of PrEP (~2013) they can’t even infect people who are responsible and take care of their own health.

Somebody is an optimist. Which, right now, isn’t a bad thing, but… NY State is clearly an epicenter. We have 82,000 infections with a population of 20 million (with some of the highest per capita testing in the world). That’s just less than 1/2 of 1 percent. You need >60% for herd immunity. Even if you say we missed half the cases, that’s still just 1%. We’re not racing toward herd immunity. Instead we flattened the curve. It’s gonna be years before we’re back to where we are unless someone figures out a decent treatment (or vaccine). 🤞