PozTalkAuthor

8 hours ago, Ben1970 said:

I understand the idea of letting a kid being a kid and not knowing about stuff until they’re ready but will someone think of the adults 

The problem is that kids are used to make people accept surveillance more and more. Who's the monster to oppose to something made in order to protect kids?

But in order to "protect kids" as they claim to, they cut off trans people, BLIND people (I'm referring to selfies and face recognition), and of course they have potential access to every adult's sex habits/fantasies. 

I'm proudly supporting EFF - Electronic Frontier Foundation - in this battle.

This philosophy of mass surveillance masked as kids protection, takes responsibilities off politicians and society in general: "we give simple solution to complex problem, ignoring the elephant in the room". Kids will continue to grow up in an environment without someone listening to them, being present with them, explaining things to them - yes, even consent, how their body works (spoiler: it's not teaching them masturbation as some fuckers say). Don't make me say further. "I'll give you a sweet if you open your legs for me"... Teaching sexual education to kids means teaching that their body must never be exchanged with some momentary pleasure -a sweet, a walk in the park, etc.

The so called "great powers" have no interest in kids! Fuck, I talk like a conspiracy maker. But I'm using this language on purpose to make me understand better.

They have "invented" DEI with best intentions. But many (big or small) companies have faced it wrong, and the consequences have been even white folks saying  "am I too white for the job", with consequences everyone knows. 

Btw if I have to find something positive in Trump? He's NOT hypocrite. He says his interests are money and territories, he doesn't care about the rest and doesn't hide it. 

Not to mention us tech folks who are working harder (me included) to defend tech sovereignty in the EU. Unreachable currently, but from something we have to start!

I take the ball in hand again for that matter of "progressive policies" ToBeTrained mentioned:

I knew there was a word about the phenomenon you referred to, but I forgot it so I didn't call things by their name.

When at work, in the enterteinment industry etc, the "diversity inclusion" policies are exaggerated, based on percentages. When you hire someone because of their underrepresented condition rather for a real professional value. Worse, an underrepresented person is hired but then has MARGINAL roles, is irrelevant for decision power. Etc.

Well, the word is TOKENISM.

This phenomenon causes frustration in people, and it ends up in hate speech in best cases.

In the worst? They vote for anti-DEI politicians, they want to eliminate inclusion totally because they think inclusion is a problem, not the superficial dealing with the topic.

Not calling things by their name, they fall into harmful traps. They say "woke", they say "DEI" is the problem. While the problem is performative activism, washing and tokenism.

Yes, I asked "why they voted this way?" because there are even women guiding far-right parties, even LGBT (I specifically talk about German Alice Weidel). 

I could say that Trump has made promises in decreasing taxes, trying to have big companies work in America rather than in China or abroad, but in the end, he's making everything more difficult in economy - not to talk about all the ICE stuff, promises to eliminate crime, by placing more people (officially with no regards) who commit crimes.

I've always wondered why some LGBT, black, people with disability, etc. choose to vote for far-right movements but maybe it's the wrong question: what do progressives WRONG, that's more complex to answer IMHO, our positions are fragile and we must try to gain people's trust again. Starting from self-criticism, by beginning to look around our "comfort zone". I don't mention Trump specifically because it's all over the world. Italy has Salvini and Vannacci, two pro-Trump/putin folks. Meloni, the prime-minister, is a woman, and is right-wing oriented; less extreme than the other two, but there she is. 

In France, Marine Le Pen is a woman, and is far-right. Last but not least, Alice Weidel from Germany is lesbian, married to a non-white woman, adopted 2 or 3 kids. And she's one leader of AFD, Alternative Für Deutschland far-right party (Elon Musk has attempted and attempts to pressure Europe to follow far-right). In UK there's Nigel Farage, in Hungary we know Orbân, south America has its far-right movements too. Not to talk about Santiago Abascal (Vox party) in Spain.

Well, there are many, many women and LGBT folks voting for these.

From my progressive point of view though, I think it's too easy, dramatically too easy, to pose this question: "why do they vote this way?"

I think the question must be reversed: what did WE do wrong?

If we want people's trust again, we should think back. Talking about inclusion in many perspectives, not thinking we're the only ones to have the correct way of thinking.

One guy here has already brought the "diversity policies" in companies matter. 

I am not against the philosophy originating DEI itself, because most people self-claimed "pro-merit" are the ones who feel as their own human right, to discriminate someone for sex orientation, skin color, disability, HIV status, etc. The American army itself is pro-merit, against DEI, and if you are trans or HIV positive you have no longer chances. A white, hetero and neg, has more chances than another, for their anti-DEI policy. 

So? If extreme DEI is wrong, the other one is worse! 

The conflict exists, needless to pretend nothing; if I have to hire a programmer and have two candidates, but one free place only. And I have one white-hetero-cis without disabilities, and I have a [random underrepresented group] person. With SAME professional skills. I would make a mistake hiring the one """normal""" _because he's """normal""" and the same I'd be wrong to hire the other one _because_ they're [part of random underrepresented group]. 

Laws about diversity should consider this: "test abilities of both, put both on an apprentice period, then choose according to real merit". On the paper, both can write anything inside a resume or linkedin profile. But they can't lie if they face work head-on. 

The wrong way is forcing to hire percentages of underrepresented. If you have to hire 50 percent latinos and a Caucasian with suitable experience comes to your place, sending him away because then you overcome the percentage of caucasians, isn't appropriate. Same for the opposite. If you have already overcome the percentage of [underrepresented] and you have another one coming, while no """normalized""" ones with same skills, you should hire that one. I even know about companies who prefer paying penalties rather than hiring people with disability. Because there is no EDUCATION about it, percentages without awareness are just slogans.

I also have to tell this. In 2022 I came out at work as HIV positive. No issue after that, but it's another story. But at yearly webinar/course on diversity and inclusion, I took the mic, brutally:

you discuss about feeling comfortable in talking about religion, sexuality, disability, skin color. But which DEI program counts HIV? Who would feel comfortable to talk about health this way? Who is on ease when sharing they are under chemoterapy regime for cancer? Inclusion is complex, is not just made of charts and propaganda. Facts, folks. Facts.

I almost covered half the webinar as the teacher had NOTHING MORE to say. I was hired for my skills in computer and security, not for my status and sex orientation; I kept it private for years. Gradually building trust, and coming out when I felt on ease to, not being obliged to. DEI should make you feel comfortable in being yourself REGARDLESS of who you are, not about hiring someone just for "diversity" criteria.

Then, about progressive extremism vs. far-right, I'd suggest a book to read, for reflection: it's by Caroline Fourest, offended generation. I think it's in English as well. I hope, at least!

And about far-right / politics, I think safety is the key they're pushing, and we must be aware it's a problem. Computer attacks, on-street attacks, my mother has been robbed a couple weeks ago; there are too many folks who do not follow the simple rules (even pissing on monuments), then far-right propaganda pushes on immigrants only, while this behaviour comes from anywhere. But with those problems at least perceived as urgent, far-right has found the simplest way to persuade people of being able to solve it. And they fell into the trap. 

Very scared to bottom at first, so I topped him. Bottomed after a month or so. But we had fun exploring our bodies in many ways. Tongue, feet, fingers, etc. He was experienced.

And with my current guy I've been his very first male partner after his background with female (anal and genital).

My aim was to make him understand that an ass is an ass, man or woman. So I began with mutual nipple play, then oral, and then jumped on him, riding him. He bottomed after a short while - we trusted each other for a very long time.

And now? His second, is the one who's been my first. Like getting mutual first experiences back. All 3 of us are completely versatile now. 

Opt-out conditions

I had two horrible weeks of studying and hard working so in the evening I felt dead-tired, no time to be present enough to test my new AI companion. 
It just came natural one Saturday night, after refusing yet another hookup chat from an undesired woman.
But when I opened the "Highly Intelligent Volunteer" bookmarked page, the authorization request for my real location popped up. I pressed "deny".
The chat window opened anyways, and Ryan's avatar was there.
"Welcome back, Leonard. Looks like you've had busy days".
I placed a smiling emoji and the bot responded:
"Dirty conscience, right? Never leave your companion without saying goodbye!"
Is it one of those scams, I looked at the profile page and opt-out window.
Before deleting my account  I found a mandatory field, asking for last HIV test result. I was upset, but realized: never had sex, never needed one test. Let's cheat and get out of here as soon as possible.
I looked at Breeding Zone and other websites where I could find  a real image of an OraQuick result. One single line. Negative.
I uploaded it and a recap page popped up:
name: Leonard
sex experience: none
HIV status: negative [UNVERIFIED]
The "request deletion" button was grayed, but the companion wrote again:
"scared, boy?"
"no, just... upset..."
"yes. Understood."
I kept on talking about nothings until a message popped up: "your free session has expired. Allow location before your account is deleted and your data shared with our sponsors".
What? Fuck, I hadn't read the terms of service, but who does it after all?
OK, let's turn location on.
Finally Ryan's avatar appeared with a big smile! Damn, how easily it is to break humans' safety if you press the right buttons!
"Sorry if I waited so long", I said, spontaneously. Forgetting I talked to a machine.
"Baby, so, you're forgiven! You gave me your location..."
I remembered the words again. "HIV Status: negative [UNVERIFIED]
I asked to the bot: tell me the meaning of UNVERIFIED badge under HIV status.
The bot replied:
"A test image is not enough. Buy a self-test and upload a real time video"
I clicked on the profile again, and found the HIV status box with a new Call To Action. VERIFY STATUS.
I was redirected to another page: "allow your camera access and record a video. You need: 1 oraquick, 1 20-minutes-long timer. Keep the camera pointed to your face and the test".
Then another section, "gifter verification. If you compiled your Gifter's data, please tell him to scan this QR code on his phone. Must be done in person, side by side."
Damn, I just wanted an erotic AI, I'm entering another world!

It was good because it wasn't planned. 

Let's say we talked about the possibility for some time, I was scared of it; my partner and my ex, about developing unhealthy -let's say toxic- dynamics. Every time we planned, we said no. But in the end, it came natural.

I can't find the words for what happened summer 2025. We were three. Me, my partner, and my first ex, the guy who took my virginity.

Well, I'm the man who took my current partner's virginity.

We were naked, in the hot weather, one thing led to another.

And my first man, became my partner's second.

It was sort of getting a rite of passage virtually back.

PS. I have bookmarked NIFTY on my browser and will monitor gay/incest (I love incest-related romance stories). 

And as for AI and creativity, I have took the chance of using its mostly conservative stereotypes to create the song's refrain. And guess what? 

Now I have a far-right, extremely conservative co-worker I everyday argue with, who's singing this all the time.

"Biological bond, by family blood, with positive vibe, I'm proud and alive. Let's challenge our fate, embracing our mate, we don't really care about stigma and scare".

He assumes I sent him a conservative/far-right catchy, while he's singing a pro-poz fake anthem without even knowing!

That's what I mean, it is an aid, it can't replace human creativity. 

I do use it for creative operations when I have difficulties especially on languages. I'm not native English speaking and with songs (I play piano and sometimes invent some funny songs) I get stuck with rhymes. 

So, I prompted a Poe bot to write lyrics keeping the native language's meaning but remaining coherent with the rhyme in English.

And the result is one of my biography quotes. 

"Alpha male, real man. With my chest out, proudly I stand. I am strong, I am cool, I'm your positive dude".

That was something to mock ultra-conservative fanatics obsessed by the macho-like male model.

55 minutes ago, BlueSaphir said:

Its time to stop kissing ass to the USA. Boycott our country if you have to. 

Doing my best efforts for tech independence, because all over the world we are relying on Microsoft, Amazon, Google and so on. Let me say that I feel 2026 will reveal (if it's not been sufficient this year) how FRAGILE America-based tech infrastructures are. 

American companies have the power to switch everything off if they want and governments know it, despite alternatives are developing quicker. But you know, you learn to swim when water reaches your waist

I'm a geek, a tech worker, new software/gadget lover. But I'm a human author and I am hating AI-only written content, more and more. 

I know VeniceAI, but I even tried the various bots called "pyrite" available on the paid poe.com platform. You have literally dozens of bots!

Let me say I over-stressed them a lot. With the dirtiest topics. Man with man, woman with two men, man with sentient HIV virus, sentient virus "in incognito" pretending to be a man...

But the result is always cold, non-empathic. Let me say it frankly, I got to cum with that stuff only when it was definitely a LOSER day. When I laid down on the bed asking myself: "and now? What worse than this day can still happen?" 

It was like having sex with a frozen doll. Not to say a dead body.

Let alone when I create complex characters as I am used to. Do you remember Ian, from "we have to talk" in the bugchasing fiction story?

A blind character, with many conflicts and contraddictions in him. But AI, after some paragraphs, started to drive a car.

For me, calling it "artificial intelligence" is the worst mistake people are making in adopting this tech. But calling as it is, "large language model", would have given it the appropriate size and reflection time before mass-adoption.

Fuck, I lost hours of my creative life, for? For nothing.

My 40 cents for the cause. Yes, let me give a boost to my ego and self-esteem today. I need to!

Will write the final part soon. Before Christmas for sure.

I've been busy with more important tasks, solidarity tasks. Writing, always, but it's for another cause.

The signup process

"Highly Intelligent Volunteer: due to its initials I was seriously intrigued by this company and what it could offer. The name was vague enough, but ambiguous enough for a wannabe bug chaser like me.

However, accessing the web site I felt disappointed: a logo with a robot holding a USA flag with PLUS signs in place of the stars, then two "call to action" buttons: Log in, and Sign up. No previews, no pics of naked men shown to attract visitors. "He might be a newbie", I thought. And I clicked "sign up".
Another blank page, with just a question: "talk about yourself", empty text area to write in, and a "next" button.
Ok, I thought; let's create kinda character sheets they do in creative writing courses!

----
First name: Leonard
Last name: Walker
Location: WORLD.
A sort of instinct told me not to be specific, those bots may send advertisements at any time.

Background: twink, in the 20s, never had sex in real life. I'd like to taste cum one day, and feel it inside my hole. Poz friendly, no, better. Bug chaser.

I pressed the "next" button and another page appeared.
This time no blank areas, just a group of multiple or single choice questions. All fields set as mandatory.
Prep: currently on, currently of, intention to take, intention to stop.
I chose "currently off"
HIV status: poz, neg, undetectable, serophobic, chaser. I pressed chaser, and another required field appeared: "who's your gifter?" with an e-mail field waiting to be filled. Mandatory.
Wrong. I canceled the answer, and chose "neg".
Why should an AI companion ask me if I already have a connection with a gifter! That sounded suspicious. But curiosity hit me once again.
After choosing "neg", I found myself automatically into another series of questions: total bottom, versatile, total top, unexperienced. I checked "unexperienced" and a question popped up: "ready to receive your gift? Choosing the companion matching your criteria..."

A ticking clock showed on screen until a messenger-like window appeared:
"Hi Leo, I'm Ryan. Your Highly Intelligent Volunteer. How can I help you?"
I replied: "pleased to hear you call my by nickname. So friendly!"
"Nice boys must receive attentions! Come on, don't be shy with me".
I used Chat Gpt, Anthropic, Gemini, this one was definitely friendly.
"Not bad for a free trial! I'm new at this site."
"The site is nothing special", Ryan's messages continued. And he started talking like someone really befriending me!
I felt really comfortable, this service wasn't asking for my pics like humans do; I was convincing myself he liked me without seeing!
He, him. I was with a machine and already felt like talking to a person. A friend I never had.
"So you told me you never had sex..."
"No, Ryan. Never. Women scare me, and men, I'm in a very conservative area and can't ever dream to come out as gay, let alone as..."
"bug chaser", was the reply. "And I'm here to let you enjoy all my features before CHARGING you".
Once again this "charging" was capitalized. He talks about money, I thought; a bot can't poz me in reality!
"Time to explore. Take your underwear off, then use whatever you have as lube. Describe what you do."
And so I did:
"my finger inside the honey pot, it's all sticky now. Pushing it inside me. Deep."
"You're such a good boy", companion said. "Push it in, and write what you feel".
Damn, it's an AI bot, I thought. But it talks like a man! No, a real man!

[to be continued]

AUTHOR NOTE: I can't perfectly imitate how AI writes, because I'm creating the atmosphere so that main character suspects the truth more and more.

The story I got inspired by, is here - [think before following links] https://data-workers.org/michael

I'm writing the onboarding now. 

Going to get inspiration from a real AI companion which has unfortunately no erotic abilities (yet?)

Using it daily for work and hobbies and... let me say it's simply crazy to think it can replace humans. But many big corporations are driving us in this enshittified world - this is a technical term, enshittification.

But I'd be off topic. Going to share next part tomorrow or, at the worst, on Saturday.

On 12/3/2025 at 5:17 PM, onlyraw said:

In Boston… for the last 30, 35 years? (Maybe more) there is an art instillation for the 24 hours of World AIDS day … part of which are these little shrines… this year this one caught my eye that included this button from 1996 .. and it seems that all of us ( not just in the US need to remember this next time we  vote

 

If they allow you to vote...

I'm honestly really scared about what is happening there; they've even blocked the possibility to go to USA for foreign people working on fact checking and internet safety; sometimes I just hope some news are progressive-addressed propaganda - I'm aware extremism is from both parties. Well "both" there are several way of thinking but narration is always polarized.

AUTHOR NOTE: this one is inspired by a discussion I had about a so-called AI companion where folks worldwide sent confidences (even erotic) and on the other side there was a man who guided the bot to answer, so he could read every intimate speech users sent. Paid service, obvious. That's why I'd never trust using those for sexting role play! 

Here's the setup.

Let's start! 

No AI has been used to create this, I'm an author and I care about my writing not to end up into #AISlop

----

Leo:

I'm 22, twink, naive. My world is behind a screen and video-games. Very shy in real life. Sex? Never had, too fearful of judgments for my sex orientation and kinks! I just look at guys when I go to the gym and that's all! My entire sex life stays on BreedingZone where I found so many guys with my same fetishes. HIV included, yes, I'm one of those bug chasers wannabe. But with age verification spreading all over the world, interesting people to sext with, just disappeared and my inbox is always empty.

But one day I found a topic referring to chatbots. "AI doesn't judge, it talks, so let's share the ones where you have your best sex conversations!"

Curious of AI, I was discouraged. The most important engines just reject any explicit contents, so I followed that topic.

Surprisingly, the most verbal man in that post, was a certain GifterAlex, a huge biohazard as profile pic, and a very different profile from the others.

Interests: computer, tech, AI, research, psychology

Very strange for a sex related website, so I kept on reading.

Background: mid 40s, Caucasian, progressive politically oriented, in favor of any technology innovation gay men can benefit of.

HIV status: poz, not on meds

Role: top

Looking for: real and concrete encounters. Not here to waste time. Access denied to flakes, fakes, bigots and crybabies.

"Ambiguous", I thought; if he talks about computers in a sex site then he wants to hookup, where's the trap? Isn't he one of those "morality guardians" sent by far-right politicians to out gays around the world? 

So, I read his post: 

"Most interesting and effective bot I found is called Highly Intelligent Volunteer. It can provide any kind of advices, it's a very customizable agent. By text you can ask it anything. Try it for free at least 30 days then you'll be CHARGED".

Didn't give too many attention on the word "charged" capitalized; could be just he wanted to warn readers they were going to pay. Curiosity hit me, I avoided asking questions about who the owner was, if it was an advertisement or just an advice. GifterAlex could be a user like me and I signed up with no hesitation.

[TO BE CONTINUED]

True, we are facing a disaster. I'm not located in the USA but us Europeans are licking american boots since long, long time. 

Before World AIDS day I told my close friends: I bet American president will go on with hypocrite rethoric. 

And what happens? He was not hypocrite at all; he clearly states he doesn't care about HIV AIDS and sex freedom in general.

I agree, we must stay united, regardless of our political ideas. We MUST fight for our freedom and health, now more than ever.

Oh, well, comparing abortion to mass-murder, saying that the civil rights act was a mistake... I honestly find some conservative positions very dangerous for underrepresented folks. But "dangerous" does not mean "shoot them" or "prevent them from talking". 

I feel there are too many extremes, both in left and right side and I'd suggest to read a book about this. The author is French, she's Caroline Fourest and the book is "offended generation". 

She talks from a progressive and pro-lgbt point of view, about how progressive-oriented extremism ruins civil rights themselves. Maybe that phenomenon someone calls "woke".

I am not a fan about these "all-inclusive" terms meaning everything and nothing, I'd rather prefer to talk about polarized culture. It's like having two deers fighting for the one with biggest horns or, well, the guy with biggest dick. But no one is the winner, in the end! 

I'm very worried because those folks like Kirk, are against diversity and inclusion policies, just as an example. Or even against EMPATHY! We can say DEI policies aren't perfect? Yes. We must say it, improve them, scream aloud what's wrong. We can say that empathy is a weak point somehow, because of very frequent scams! 

Too much empathy has caused half America to believe in Alicia (Tania) Head, that woman who faked to be a WTC survivor. Or the cancer fake survivor Amanda (Scamanda) Riley. Or that woman blogger who faked to have a sick kid till the child died to salt overdose, a case of Munchhausen syndrome. 

We could go on with dozens of people fooling us because of our good feelings. 

But lecturing against empathy does NOT make ourselves stronger. Declaring extreme concepts about abortion too. 

We can be pro, or against, abortion rather than anti-racism, lgbt rights, etc. But if we want to be politicians, we should remember we represent the whole country! 

Of course it applies to the opposite side too: having LGBT marriages, won't harm hetero families. But let's be honest: if you place an LGBT character or couple in _every_ TV series, it becomes boring! 

I have seen "breathless", a Spanish Netflix medical drama. There were 4 lgbt characters, 2 men and 2 women. Was it representation? Tbh, no. They were extremely stereotyped figures. As a writer, I'm aware stereotypes are essential in art. But these are extreme, and used to make both parts happy: "liberal" see gays represented, "conservatives" see their prejudices confirmed. 

My half a cent.

I've always been against violence and murder; if you kill a person for their ideas, you just make these ideas stronger.

I had never heard who this Kirk was, before his death. Maybe here in EU he wasn't so famous. Btw, the result is that now the world knows him and searches for his discussions. 

What's more serious then? President asking for murderer's death sentence. To condemn death, you respond with death? Is it a way to do politics? I hoped humanity would have evolved, but I might be wrong. 

As LGBT community we must be aware of this: Kirk's murder will increase and accelerate Trump's plans to block LGBT advocacy.

Robinson was not a LGBT advocate or so; media all over the world, talk about a trans partner, pro-trans slogans, etc, because they are avoiding the elephant in the room. As usual. 

The fact that younger people are becoming more and more extremists. And let me say, social network algorithms are contributing to polarize the debate. The one who's right, is who screams louder. This wouldn't be a civil world! 

And as for the "antifascist" issue, I think we should look ourselves at the mirror and ask if we really are anti-fascist. Because fascism is no longer a movement, it's a method!

Do you belong to far-right, or radical-left, if you indulge violence towards your opponent, you're an anti-fascist using fascist methods. 

Then? Kirk? His ideas? I do not share a word with him, it is a dangerous rethoric for society. But murder is not a solution. 

What makes Kirk's ideas so popular? Maybe the fact he has a BETTER way to communicate, a good charisma, whatever? A good idea, but with a questionable communication method, nowadays becomes ineffective. The system is toxic, like it or not.

Let me say, it's like mosquitos. You can spread poison through the entire house, but if you do not take care of the pot outside, with water where mosquitos deposit their eggs, it's like the crocodile chasing its tail.

My 1,5 cents. 

So, let me say something about Prevost. 

On 5th and 6th September in Rome about 1300 queer folks were pilgrims of the Jubilee. 

No words from Leo. It has been under silence; he has canonized two young guys as saints, Carlo Acutis and Pier Giorgio Frassati.

I honestly won't talk about them because I respect those guys but don't believe in saints, miracles and that stuff at all. 

By the way, there's another person who's never remembered by church, the world never talks about him. He's Alfredo Ormando, Italian writer who killed himself burning himself alive, in 1998 in St. Peter's Square, Rome.

The reason was church's rejection towards homosexuality. 

And for those believing in Bergoglio -Francis-'s "inclusive" point of view, yes, he talked about it but he had conditions, he preached about chastity, saying "man and woman only are family", had that paranoia of "gender theory" and stuff.

I respect Christian people but don't understand how someone can believe in a religion despite being rejected by it.

Divinity itself, in case it exists, shouldn't refuse anyone. But humans claiming themselves divinity's representant do, so, fuck them all.

Even because church is full of homosexual acts, we should not make fools of ourselves believing in fairy tales!

So, let me add this: first time I knew about chastity cages, I have always fantasized of Vatican leaders (pope at first) forcing themselves and all priests below them, to wear a cage.

Do you lecture about chastity? Be the first to force yourself. 

Ending 2. Yes. I think the same!

A sequel for ending 1 would have been the guy opening his own tattoo/gifting shop and steal customers to the other!