GermanFucker

On their own - i.e. without fever, malaise etc. - diarrhoea, stomach cramps, loss of appetite and problems sleeping are terrible indicators of seroconversion sickness. Why? Because these can also be psychosomatic and thus symptoms of great stress and anxiety. I know many neg guys that are afraid of HIV that got caught in that spiral of hornyness, barebacking and fear / regret afterwards. For them the diarrhoea isn't symptomatic of HIV, but rather their fear of HIV.

No. If I'm in the mood for men, I fuck men. Not crossdressers, transsexuals or eunuchs. Sorry guys.

Germany has a staggered age of consent law: Everything under 14 is strictly illegal. 14-16 year olds can have sex with other adolescents and young adults, as long as those are under 21. Above 21, it's illegal (but not always punishable). Parents still have to press charges or a state attorney has to decide that the case is of general interest for it to go to court. 16-18: Sex is generally legal, but there is a catalogue of restrictions. E.g. 17 year-olds cannot work as prostitutes (prostitution being otherwise legal in Germany). Employers, teachers, coaches and other persons of authority cannot have sex with students, apprentices etc.. You also cannot take advantage of a teenager's problems, like offering a place to crash in exchange for sex. 18+: No restrictions. I certainly don't want to press the "Europe is so enlightened theme", but I do think the German law is exemplary in that it is a very sane and workable compromise between the different interests. Teenagers are not being punished for having sex with each other, while predatory behaviour can be prosecuted.

I do get the control aspect. What I don't get is the "enjoy the disease" part. It's as strange to me as enjoying getting diabetes. For some sugary treats are just as enjoyable as bareback sex. And many obese people count on getting diabetes. But it's not like becoming insulin dependent is enjoyable PER SE. Neither is the fuck flu nor the nuissance of regular doctor visits.

Again, I agree, but I intentionally used the number for the whole 300 million or so US Americans. Because my starting point was that there shouldn't be two sets of laws for gays and straight guys. Hornyness. Every bottom has the desire to give in to his top and get seeded within him. All it takes for him to give into this desire is for the other guy to either: a.) Perfectly fit the bottom's fantasy of a perfect guy / dream top. If one's truly smitten with the other guy's looks / attitude etc. one doesn't think rationally. b.) Be able to talk the bottom into doing away with the condom by either incrementally rationalizing it or by establishing authority. You are a smart guy. You probably know how to push the right buttons as well. I would disagree. Sure, it's called unsafe sex. And if go to a sauna with two of my buddies who everyone either knows are poz or might assume by their looks, every bottom would ask the status question. If introduce myself to a bottom saying that I haven't got much time because my girlfriend might get suspicious, I NEVER in a million years get asked that question. A presumption of safety is surprisingly easy to establish, if the other guy has a genuine desire to get fucked by you. But the mere psychological distress for a few weeks isn't the core problem in my eyes. If the other guy actually gets infected, that's when the question of disclosure really matters. And of course, IMHO, there should be a legal distinction between both cases. Again, that is if nothing happens. I'm all for leniency when nothing happens. But if the shit hits the fan and the other guy gets infected against his will, that in the eyes of many would be punishment enough, so in that case it really isn't "totally on the poz guy".

I think that this is a very interesting and highly pertinent point. Europeans do indeed see things differently. But I would go a bit further than that. Europeans seem to feel more comfortable with shared responsibilities and complex situations, whereas in the US I feel this constant need to find someone who is solely responsible for what is wrong with a situation. From a European perspective the whole system of nuissance lawsuits and excessive punitive damages looks bizarre. And I really believe that this black-and-white dychotomy, that need to make a point rather than seek justice is weighing on this subject. So the question is: Is bareback sex rather like working for a chemical company (my example) or standing in the middle of a shooting range (yours)? I totally get that for you as a gay New Yorker it looks like the latter. But again, I think that to be the basis of a general law you have to look at the whole spectrum, geographically as well as sexually, and that's where the similarities begin to vanish. Also you have to look at what the person "pulling the trigger" would realistically assume. On a shooting range I would NEVER EXPECT someone to just step in front of my gun. The likelyhood is 0.0something percent (the stray mental case or suicidal person). On the other hand: EVERY man likes bareback sex and about 50% of all gay men have it, whereas the numbers of HIV positive gay men are much lower. So here the likelyhood that the other guy is neg is very high indeed. Because if there is practically 0% chance of something happening, I have no responsibility of taking precautions against it. If I realistically can EXPECT problem, I have to take them into account, lest I behave negligently. If I remember correctly, there are negligence laws in the US, as well. But then we'd have to talk representation of risk. Just a thought experiment: About 1% or so of Americans are poz. That would be the risk on is taking by having unprotected sex with just anyone. Many activities or products carry similar(ly low) risks. But if for some reason your product were to carry a much higher risk and you were to misrepresent that, you'd be liable even in the US. Ralph Nader built a career on that. But with HIV / AIDS the need to assign blame doesn't solve anything. Only open discussion and share responsibility will. But you have to agree that even in this day and age, for many guys (absolute numbers, not necessarily a majority) HIV is a serious, severe disease which they wouldn't wish on anyone else (even if others enjoy having it). But the concept of total self-reliance hasn't been a realistic way of life for over a century. If you aren't Amish and have thus built your house yourself, you put your health into hands of others: landlords and largely anonymous contractors, and largely you have to hope that they haven't gifted you with toxic mold. If you don't farm you rely on supermarkets not to poison your food and for most guys (who aren't self-employed) you have to rely on your employer to create danger-free working environments. So the question would be: How much of a strangers do you remain if you exchange bodily fluids? Is it more or less intimate than being landlord and tennant? But stupidity is part of human nature, especially when it comes to the propagation of the species. Sex is not meant to be rational. As before: I do agree that criminalization doesn't make much sense if nothing happened. In the case of an actual infection of a non-HIV-fetishist: HOW IS THAT POSSIBLY A REWARD? I actually didn't disagree with you on that specific set of circumstances. However, I'd like to point out that this ideal constellation cannot form the basis of a general law that says: "If you're barebacking and neg it's your job to ask, not the other guy's to disclose", as you suggested. That's why I am against both extremes. One should neither automatically blame one side nor the other, but rather look at the SPECIFIC SITUATION. And any sane law should take that into account. As to the disclosure issue, I could imagine something along the lines of: You have to disclose EXCEPT when all scietifically recommended precautions for having safer sex are being taken (which can be condoms or a med regime, subject to research and cyclical reevaluation). Which leaves most poz guys alone, but makes HVL AIDS fetishists disclose, which seems only fair to me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking morals here (morality laws regarding nudity, drinking in public etc. are already ridiculous in the US). But isn't there something as basic human ethics, just an extrapolation of the golden rule, that applies here as well, beyond all that cultural bias? But either way, you for sure made some interesting points.

Ethically speaking: No it's not. When it actually comes to infecting someone against his will, that is never ok. If it isn't clear from when I said that the reaction should fit the offense, that also means that if the poz guy took every measure to reduce the risk by taking his meds and no harm was done, that he really shouldn't be crucified. However, saying that stealthing / infecting is ok if you don't get caught is like saying it's ok for your employer (e.g. chemical company) to give you cancer, if he just has a good legal team. It's just not a sane basis for a legal system. Also it's not realistic. If someone got infected at the sauna that way he'd probably have to ask around less than a week to get all the information he needs about the guy who bred him. Most likely it has happened before and a notorious gift-giver is just too juicy a topic for the world of gay gossip to skip.

The thing is: Even though quality of life has improved drastically for MOST poz guys, there is no guarantee that you are lucky. That goes both ways: Even though most guys are on meds, you only need to look around the forums here to see that NOT ALL are. If you are not on meds you are just as infectious as in 1996. Also while MOST guys do just fine with HIV, there are more just a few who have serious health problems because of HIV, be it because of HIV itself (e.g. cancer as a result of a compromised immune system) or because of existing chronic diseases like diabetes which make having an additional disease much harder. With all due respect, IMHO the problem is the judicial system in the US. First "you" give judges almost absolute freedom and then you get afraid they might do the wrong thing with their powers and introduce counterproductive laws (3 strikes, mandatory minimums) just because of the scandal du jour. In countries with legal systems based on the Napoleonic code you usually define the scope of interpretation and sentencing beforehand in the specific law and then rely on the judge to treat each case on its own merits - instead of collective hysteria. Just because information is out there, doesn't mean that everybody is able to understand and apply it correctly. 50% of all Americans believe in creationism. It can be assumed that a large number of the religious types will not educate their children properly when it comes to HIV and condoms, with those teenagers relying on mouth-to-mouth prejudices and internet (mis-) information (like the AIDS-denialist nonsense). What holds true for the Castro or NYC doesn't necessarily apply to Kansas. Also there is the social component: Approx. 15% of all Americans lack the reading skills necessary to extract the relevant information from e.g. the internet. The basis of a law must be that everyone is treated equal and that it makes realistic assumptions about public knowledge. If you're barebacking and neg it's your job to ask, just like it is the other guy's job to disclose. Responsibility goes both ways. Also you indeed propose a separate set of laws for gay guys as opposed to straight people. Do you really want to open that can of worms? IMHO generalizations just don't work. One should neither assign one side with ALL of the blame nor give one side NO responsibility. Rather I believe the only way to do justice is to look at each case seperately and judge the situation accordingly. If a neg guy attends a bareback orgy, he has to assume at least some of the other guys are poz. If two guys meet on Breedingzone, the way of contact implies that the neg guy sought out bareback sex on purpose and is somewhat familiar with HIV/AIDS. On the other hand, if I were poz and take an 18 year-old schoolboy home from a rock concert, it would be my primary obligation to disclose, because nothing in what happened before could have made the boy jump to the conclusion I was. AND NO, my preference for bareback sex alone doesn't count jack. It could as well mean that I'm a married "hetero" and just never got the hang of using condoms. IMHO: "One shoe fits all" just doesn't work. Sorry. That is not to be meant disrespectful. I just happen to disagree.

Interesting. See, I found Palmer turning into / out to be a SUPER bottom rather uninteresting. So now he's just another pussyboy getting seeded. If he's one's type, that's fine, but in my personal opinion there are hotter / more interesting bottoms out there. However, seeing a "real" top (i.e. someone who still [almost] exclusively penetrates others) getting fucked for the first time (in a long while) makes for interesting viewing. I find that slight awkwardness and the hint of discomfort on his face rather hot. One great example would be SX Video's Miguel Timon's first bottoming flicks. But then again, that's what I'm into myself. I really enjoy fucking "straight guys", versatile "tops" and so forth. As to myself the whole point of bottoming is irrelevant. I am what I am: a top. I'm neither a versatile top nor bottom curious. I never took loads and I won't start. It's just not my purpose in life.

NO THANKS. Sometimes I'm in the mood to be serviced. Some nice porn, a good beer and a boy to suck my cock, lick my balls and hole, too. But when I'm thrusting I don't want to have anyone behind me to disturb my rhythm. I don't like to be sandwiched.

The obvious question is: do you WANT to convert or is it just something that keeps nagging in the back of your mind, which would most likely be a symptom of your general abiguity with regard to your sexuality. The thing is: This is a sex forum. Someone who wants to have sex with you will never be completely open about his personal reality, as he wants to present himself in the most fuckable light possible. Also I don't think written accounts of other guys experiences with being poz will help you much. The thing is: humans adapt and the thoughts expressed in written accounts are a result of that. If you were to get infected you too would find some way to deal with the changes in your life as a sort of fait accompli. But that doesn't mean you would necessarily choose (all of) these changes on their own merits. Better to get some real life poz friends (not fuckbuddies) and see for yourself. While having healthy kids is certainly possible - with both HIV- and HIV+ female partners - due to modern medicine, finding the right partner while being poz is far more complicated in the heterosexual world (and it isn't always easy for marriage-minded gay guys as well, because many of the monogamous, long-term-oriented guys tend to be neg). What makes it even more complicated is the fact that other than with heterosexual poz men, it is possible that a female partner would associate your HIV with your bisexuality. The number of women who would go for that is severely limited. In short: If you don't know anything about being poz, find some person in real life, who ideally shares your background, to talk to. If you want to keep your options open, don't rush into things. That goes for HIV as well as for getting a wife and kids. For the time being: just stay neg and single. Choosing one side in order to suppress the other never works. It will fuck you up psychologically. Just take your time. You can explore your gay side without intentionally seeking HIV (if it happens to you anyway, well, then it's bad luck and as said before, you will learn to adapt). Sex should be fun and as long as noone gets hurt, you have every right and opportunity to experiment. However, if sex causes you tension and leads to obsessive behaviour, you should consider getting professional help.

1.) The usual ones: Cute smile, eye contact, posture. Just sticking your ass in the air only works if you have a killer body and even then I'd prefer to see your face. However calling attention to your ass is always welcome. 2.) I'm at least not afraid to say anything. I'm not ashamed of what I'm there to do, so if the bottom wants to chat a bit first, why not. However, if all is said with looks, I certainly don't feel the need to add anything by suddenly starting a conversation. 3.) Again, posture: I present my dick (or the bulge in the towel slung around my hips), not my ass. When we start to make out I go for the ass: i.e. I grab it and work my way to the hole. If a guy doesn't get the hint, I usually wrap my request in a compliment: Dude, you have such a great ass, I'd love to fuck that right now.

That is correct. One addendum: Some long-term-nonprogressors' (elite controllers, AFAIK somewhere around 10% of all long-term nonprogressors) immune systems supresse the virus so very well that they for prolonged periods of time have (close to) undetectable viral loads. It can be assumed that - just like successful antiretroviral therapy - these guys carry hardly any risk of infecting others. The other 90% of long-term-nonprogressors also have significantly reduced viral loads compared to other patients. With around 1500 HIV copies or so they are SOMEWHAT less infectious than normal patients who are not on meds and at the same time in the course of the disease have much higher viral loads. However, unlike those few elite controllers, they can still pass it on. http://www.aidsmap.com/HIV-non-progressor-status-established-soon-after-infection/page/1432975/

There's this one guy who loves swallowing my load (if I'm not seeding his ass). One day I had herring and white asparagus (asparagus season is a really big culinary tradition in Germany) that day (either herring for breakfast and asparagus for lunch or herring for lunch and asparagus for dinner, don't remember) and the moment I came I just heard him spitting and cursing: "Dude, what the fuck, that's rotten." So there we have it: Herring and white asparagus is nasty.... and - I have to admit - very, very funny.

Really started fucking around when I was 19, used condoms for three years, fucked raw (with a few exceptions at first) ever since. I chose " If I had it to do over again, I'd do it the same", not because I'm exactly sure I would. If I had had a boyfriend at 22, maybe things would have gone differently. If I had finished school earlier, maybe I would've attended bareback parties at 20. Things are what they are. No point in worrying about that kind of stuff now.

Shame about your partner, barebandit. As to the initial question: I neither have gay siblings nor have I had sex with any of my brothers or sisters. I have had sex with gay brothers, though

If you prefer your sex sleazy and raw: BERLIN - without a question.

I don't think you're being a pussy. And even if you were: You shouldn't give a flying fuck what other people think. It's your life. My point is that you should be comfortable with the things you're doing. An endless cycle of binging and then guilt and regret simply is no healthy way to live your life. Just sort your priorities and act accordingly. So you don't have to worry anymore. It doesn't mean there aren't any risks. I know a few guys who only fuck bareback with a few "neg" buddies. They realize that one of their buddies might still catch and not even know. But for them it's easier to deal with with getting infected knowing that they took a level of risk they were comfortable with. It's a huge difference between being able to say "ah well, bad luck" and hypothesizing every day "if only I had acted differently...". What specific level you are comfortable with (sex with acquaintances only, sex with strangers, sex with drugs or pot only, safe with some or bareback with everyone, alcohol or sobriety...) is completely and totally up to you. FatFuckPig made the decision for himself. Yours can be totally different. Or not. Your choice. But it's good to get tested. It's always better to know. And thanks for keeping us informed. One always wonders what happened if a guy never shows up again.

The likelyhood of it being something else than HIV is very high: Withdrawal, flu season or one of the many other STDs that are way easier to catch than HIV. As it would be too late to do anything about it anyway (e.g. PEP, Post Exposure Prophylaxis), what you should do is just relax and take an HIV test once it will be conclusive (usually after 12 weeks, but if you can't wait that long, you can get one 8 weeks after the last risky contact and it will be about 90% accurate). Antibody tests are more accurate over time, approximately like this: 4 weeks - 60% accurate 5 weeks - 70% accurate 6 weeks - 80% accurate 8 weeks - 90% accurate 12 weeks - 97-100% accurate (only rare exemptions) So if it helps you to relax, you can get tested earlier, but you must make sure to get TESTED AGAIN LATER to do away with any doubst about the result. But with all due respect: If it gets you THIS paranoid, you frankly shouldn't take drugs and have bareback sex. Better stick to what you can handle mentally, whatever that means for you (that can even be barebacking but without the drugs). You should be able to handle the risks and possible outcomes of your action (depending on the drugs and their way of administration, that can not only be HIV but hepatitis etc.). If you are at peace with your own decisions, you can stop worrying and instead enjoy the sex.

I'm with Clinton on this one: Cocksucking is nice and it certainly is a difficult skill, but it's not really sex. I don't mind cocksuckers when I'm in a lazy mood; just sipping a beer, watching some good porn and being serviced at the same time is nice. But to me that that's like playing XBox: Having some guy time with likeminded dudes, but it's not the real thing. Or getting your dick sucked at a sauna or adult movie theater: It serves the purpose of getting you into the mood. But cocksuckers (i.e. those who only suck cock and are not willing to turn into assfuckees) won't ever get my load. If I am in the mood to have real sex, the load goes in the ass. Because that's where it belongs. PERIOD. If I'm looking for sex online and somebody only offers me a blowjob I'll say thanks, but no thanks.

As so many times: Why ask "some guy on the internet" about something that is a very personal decision. In the end it's your choice and only yours and noone should let others dictate the way he looks. Generally speaking: Talk to a specialist about your options, I've also heard of Sculptra / Nu-Fill, but AFAIK there are also others. Depending on your health coverage, it is even possible that you get it for free as an HIV patient, whereas for others it's considered elective cosmetic surgery and has to be paid. So ask around. Personally I'd say go for it, the guys I know who used it just look a bit healthier and younger. Not saying they looked bad or ill before, but you just feel like saying: Man, you look good today, were you on vacation or what? Of course, that's judging by mainstream societal standards. Which can also be important, e.g. for your job. However, if that's of no concern to you and if you like the wasted look and find fetishistic pleasure in that, again: It's your choice allone.

As so often, I agree. I do understand the eroticism of risky sex, as it is part of being young, i.e. not worrying and doing "stupid" things. It's part of the glory of youth. However intentionally seeking an infection that has you constantly thinking about your health and future effectively ages you, as it forces you to grow up if you do not want to crash and burn. I don't want to sound paranoid and I don't want to accuse anyone of being a troll, but I got the distinct impression that recently some guys just try to be provocative on purpose. "You need to get pozzed on purpose to be a true gay man" "Isn't AIDS the best thing ever?" "You have to go all the way" and so forth... I do understand that some guys feel the personal need to acquire HIV to feel complete. I don't share that need, but I do get the point. And some give thoughtful insights into these feelings. However, with those purposefully controversial posts I get the impression that it's rather about masturbation (the rush of being brash) or causing an argument. Also that's one of the minor problems I see with Breedingzone: Bugchasing isn't supposed to be discussed in the public forums, and in the backroom forums it's assumed that you are an HIV fetishist yourself and some guys will get miffed if you don't share that preference, while at the same time often accepting pretty outreageous "loads of crap" (to quote TigerMilner). For me barebacking is just about natural, unsafe sex. And while I don't eroticize HIV, it's an important aspect that I do want to discuss. And it's an aspect where I very much value input from mature, real life guys like Tiger.

As always I'd like to point out that Breedingzone is NOT representativ of the gay community as a whole. Most poz guys on here won't mind seeding neg holes. And if a slut on here says he's neg, it's indeed somewhat likely he might unknowingly be poz. However, I'd be cautious to make that a general rule. While this is technically true, there are indeed a number of neg guys where it is 99,x% likely that they are indeed neg. If you come from a place with a low HIV prevalence, your previous behaviour (mostly safer sex, bi men who only rarely get to fuck around with men etc.) only seldom created risk situations, and you get tested somewhat regularly, while not certain, it is indeed overwhelmingly likely you are neg. Also there are poz guys who really need the peace of mind that comes from knowing the other guy has HIV, too, to really enjoy barebacking without second thoughts. So saying it's ok to lie because as a neg guy you never know for sure, is a way of rationalizing one's own behaviour. It is by far not as bad as saying you're neg when indeed you're (unmedicatedly) poz. But I do believe that when it comes to sex, everyone should have the chance to decide for himself. To me, self-determination is a very important aspect of barebacking. So the best way is alway to openly discuss things beforehand. That doesn't mean one cannot test the waters. Just as one can say one's poz without actually saying it (I haven't been tested neg recently and there's a good chance I'm poz, so if a neg status is important to you, you might better skip this one), the same goes the other way around (I haven't been tested yesterday [who knows that's meant literally rather than figuratively] and I don't really care about status, but yeah, there's a small chance I'm neg, If you really insist on me being poz..."). If the other guy doesn't make a fuss then, he probably doesn't care that much himself, either.

As you weren't exclusive with him, there had always been a small risk (of HIV or any other sneaky STI not diagnosed in time). In the end, it is completely up to you. If I understand you correctly, both of you are a good with each other and at friendly terms right now, and your main fear is that this will change? In that case my advice would be: Let him be in control. Lay out the facts. Tell him that you miss the sex and would like to go back to getting fucked by him. Explain that it is his decision, that he can take his time with it and that you are fine, even if he doesn't feel like he can do it. Tell him that you value him as a friend and will continue to do so as well as being discreet, but that you just had to be honest about your feelings and urges. Because if there is a chance he feels the same and is up for it, you wouldn't want to have missed that. Prepare your reactions (emotionally and rhetorically), if he should decline or suddenly start asking condoms. I believe your moral obligation here is to be honest. If you had a high viral load and met a guy who's bugchasing behind his wife's back, that would be different. In that case I'd say run as fast as you can. But here the risk is absolutely minimal and you already put the guy at some risk before. You've got to do what feels right and what you can live with. Even if that means walking away from this one.

Nobody in Berlin uses condoms anymore, so there are far more than enough slut bottoms everywhere. Almost ANY bar, club, sauna or party will do. Other than that, Germany's most popular hookup site is Gayromeo.com, so every barebacker can also be found there, most of them also on Barebackcity.info.