GermanFucker

P.S.: But then again, this is just me. I haven't used a condom for 15 years and never worried. Sure I use PrEP, because it is available, but it was never something my decision to fuck around bareback depended upon. Before PrEP barebacking kinda was for rebels only, so very few fuckers came to the table with prejudices. With PrEP there is a whole number of "mainstream" gay guys doing away with the condom, so I sorta understand why questions that should have long been laid to rest are popping up again.

To be honest, the question "Would You Consider A Long Term Relationship/marraige With Someone Poz" sounds a bit more 1998 than 2018 to me. Because in the meantime there were two important events. Around 2000 HAART was proven to be working, which meant that when you started a relationship a poz guy, you knew you he wouldn't die soon. Poz guys on meds were still considered infectious, so you would still be using condoms out of fear, but hey, the heart wants what the heart wants, even if there's a small price to pay. But even that changed around 2008 when studies showed that guys on meds do not pass on the virus. So in most cases the whole thing hasn't been a question since 2010. PrEP makes a difference when fucking around, sure. Most guys feel they have less to worry about. But honestly, managing a serodiscordant relationship was doable long before. All it takes is openly adressing the issue, which in most cases means for the poz guy to make sure he takes his meds regularly.... which the vast majority of guys does anyway. So yeah, sure I would consider a LTR with a poz guy, because once you're mature enough, you realize it's just one of those things that in the grand scheme of life don't matter a flying fuck, like the colour of your skin or wearing the right brand of clothes. I would consider dating a guy who was poz, had diabetes or his foot amputated. Or rather I wouldn't waste my time thinking about it all the time. If I'm interested, I'm interested, minutia be damned. Now would I consider dating someone below average intelligence? Or a dullard? Probably not. So not a saint here.

No side effects with PrEP whatsoever.

296 (286 if the twins question refers to a threesome only. Believe me, I've tried, but had to settle for separate occasions ;)). .... but you have to keep in mind that as a total top I had to say no to about 30% of the questions

Not living in New York, LA or Berlin I have to say that attending a bareback sex party isn't really THAT anonymous . Als to the question at hand: Have to agree with bbalphaboy, 2-3 loads is a good rule of thumb. I however usually make sure that it's always different guys who get bred by me

*LOL... couldn't be farther from the truth I'm muscular in the way a contruction worker is, not a like roided-out gym rat. I don't even have perfect definition. And I'm no Joe Manganiello, Matt Bomer or Bratt Pit. I'm certainly not pretty. Maybe somewhat handsome in the same sense as a David Duchovny or a Daniel Craig. Interesting upon close examination, but with a certain weirdness. That's not why I'm able to fuck a dozen guys each week. I just ooze manliness and, more importantly, I actually do enjoy fucking (Why does everybody love Antonio Biaggi? Because he's able to smile during sex, he doesn't make it look like a chore or has his mind somewhere else.). And yeah, that 8 inch dick thing helps a lot, too.

For me it's the other way round. My life is kinda like a porn clichee. I'm a 6'5" muscular total top with a an 8 inch dick. I'm extremely sexually adventurous. E.g.: The next four days alone I go to four bareback orgies (all with different guys). And if I have nothing scheduled I meet up with top buddy of mine, we drive around town and pick up 20-year olds off Grindr, tag-team their asses and seed them. Online I'm pretty open about my sex life. Everybody is interested, but very few guys actually believe it. So the reaction I (or we, in case I'm on the prowl with my fuckbuddies) get all the time is: "Oh, my fucking god, you're for real." "Those are 8 inches?.... that must be 10!"... "You actually are just like your profile says".... etc. A guy a top buddy and I worked over a few weeks ago texted: "Wow... just wow... unbelievable... wow" for an hour after we had left. He was a cute one, though.

Huh? Dieux du Stade is a rugby calender, is has nothing to do with soccer football. As to the age-old "soccer sucks" debate: Appreciation comes with understanding. Hardly any European "gets" the appeal of American football, a game that is more interruption than actual play. I never really played association football, and I don't really partake in the excesses of sports fandom (I'd rather go to the gym or go swimming myself), but I do appreciate the athleticism of 90 minutes of continuous play and the spatial awareness shown by great (soccer) football players. As I do appreciate the intensity of a great rugby match. It's just apples and oranges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor Sometimes a cough is just a cough.

I think with a sober guy it's totally different. At least he's there in the moment with you. If he's squirmish, it's for a reason (He has to get used to the size of your cock etc.). You can give him a moment to relax and everything's fine. A partier is constantly distracted, his disjointed movements make no sense at all. There's just no rhythm to the whole thing. I'm not saying EVERY PnPer is like that. There's the rare exception,where the guy knows what (and that's seldom Tina) and how much to take and is really into the sex aspect (instead of the drug aspect). I guess one in a hundred guys is actually a pleasant fuck. The problem is: the 99 others think they are that guy. To those guys, let me tell you something: No, you aren't. That reminds me of a group session I went to. I was welcomed with more or less these words: "Thank God, a sober guy! We've been fucking for two days.. well, not so much fucking, most of the time we were just to high to actually fuck. Finally someone who can actually thrust and blow a load"... Ummmm, yes........ I really think the sex among tweakers is just as shitty as the sex tweakers have with sober dudes. They just think it is better.

I think every dramatic life change makes one re-examine one's life and realize what is really important. The problem with the article is that you really don't need a chronic disease to become enlightened. All you need to do is to open your eyes and free your mind. Exactly because what distinguishes poz from neg is negligable compared to what unites us. 1. HIV tests: There is no reason to feel anxiety or fear over an HIV test. None whatsoever. The test doesn't make you poz. It only shows what you already are. If you got infected, you're still poz, whether you take the test or not. The only thing the test does is give you options. Which is a GOOD thing. I've always found getting an HIV test to be a very relaxed, serene experience. 2. Growing old: You just don't need HIV for that. All you need to do is take good of yourself. Whether you're poz or not. It's the same for us all. 3. Dating dynamics. In short: One doesn't need to get pozzed oneself to stop being a douche and treat poz guys as what they have always been: members of the community that aren't any different from the rest. We all like sex and cherish basic human kindness. 4. Doctors: There is nothing keeping a neg guy from seeing a doctor once in a while. 5. Freedom from anxiety. What the author omits to tell is that a large number of poz guys first have to deal with phases of depression and readjustment. It's not the virus that sets one free. It's the realization that at some point you can just choose to stop worrying (because worrying has never changed one thing). For fucks sake, everyone can get informed. Read up on HIV, talk to poz friends. And take HIV for what it is. Not a fairytale monster, but a real life condidtion that can be dealt with. 6. Realizing that the human experience means that things can both be a big deal and no big deal at all. Everytime I see a picture of Alex Minsky (If you don't know him, google him. Seriously, do it now), I ask myself: Would I want to lose my foot? NO. It would change my life a big fucking deal. But at the same time, I know I would adjust. Because as humans we are wired that way: We deal with shit and we adapt to new circumstances. It's not hypocritical to let both these truths coexist. If you catch HIV today, you WILL BE ALRIGHT. But avoiding it means that you will have an easier journey through life.

I think even that is high. When the viagra patent expired in Europe in 2014, prices per dose dropped to around 1.20 - 2.50 Euros per dose. So I'd say that 1.50 - 3.00 Euros per dose for Cialis should be realistic when the patent expires here in 2017.

It's called a VIRAL VECTOR for gene therapy. They have been around for decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_vector

That picture is so gloriously 70s.... including the sideburns, penis-guns and the semen-shaped spaceship.

I both agree and disagree with you. No, I don't think the old day were that good. And for a number of guys they still aren't. I know guys that are thin as rails because HIV has already wreaked too much havoc on their bodies to put some weight on or they just can't find a therapy that doesn't fuck up their digestive system. I know guys that got cancer because HIV wasn't detected early enough and are still suffering from the long-term effects of both the cancer and the cancer treatment. And I don't close my eyes to that part of reality. I think the problem is that some guys just don't care, they don't give a shit. And that ultimately comes across as disrespectful. Because it is that much harder to vicariously have fun while at the same time respecting what your choices actually mean.

Don't worry about getting "hugely muscular". Maybe two or three guys in a thousand will get the "bodybuilder physique" without steroids. For all the other guys that will never happen the natural way. As a personal thought: Trying to get a body that others are envious of is a valid goal, But it's hard to keep motivated that way. It is easier to stick with a training regime, if you find ways of enjoying going to the gym. Over time your body will reflect your attitude and the way you train automatically. That is basically true, but with a BIG CAVEAT. First, you need to find out what your body needs. If you just pump away at the machines in your gym, that might not give your body the right impulses to get lean and or gain muscle. Its about VOLUME vs. INTENSITY. Some guys react to volume training, meaning they can do resistance / weight training 6 days a week and do thousands of exercises, sets and repetitions - and it will work. For others that means they will get fatigued and they will have no results at all. These guys need fewer, but more intense iron pumping sessions and should only do moderate cardio (biking, swimming, etc.) on the other days. Try to find out what works for you and gives you the best results. Try to see "reaching a plateau" as chance to readjust your workout regime. It is also about finding the right mixture of ISOLATION vs. COMPOUND exercises. If you start by doing isolation exercises exclusively, you wil never develop a great physique. Only compound exercises will build the foundation of a great body. But do it the fun way. Basically there are three ways of doing the same thing, like training your pecs: You can use exercise machines, free weights (bench presses), or your own body weight (push ups). Try to find a mixture that works for YOU. Just remember: Sculpting your body is a journey. It will take time and lots of trial and error.

As far as I know he started out as a straight bodybuilder who realized that there are a number of rich gay guys willing to pay good cash for solo vids. So he started a side business to pay his bills and would do on camera pretty much what the client wanted and was willing to pay for. Of course the vids got leaked on the internet, hence his dickish reaction. Maybe he is still offering fantasy performances, maybe he has since gotten a taste for dick.. who knows ?

Sure. doctors, medical students, psychologists and social workers who work with AIDS patients...

One of the greatest things in life is ease of mind, because it lets you enjoy the great moments in life. Be it the afterglow of sex, a nice barbecue with friends or mountainbiking into the sunset. So I do hope you can enjoy life without having to worry about things too much. If starting therapy can do that for you, I wish you good luck with it and good health!

Bar: Blue Jeans, black T-Shirt (tight) ABS / Adult Movie Theater: usually the same Park / Forrest: Sweatpants, Hoodie in all three cases: going commando. Sauna / Bathhouse: Only a Towel (unless there's a theme party, that should be the only thing to wear at a bathhouse, everything else just shows a lack of appreciation for bathhouse culture).

That's exactly the issue with selfish bottoms. They think it's all about them and they want all the loads, but in reality they don't have the best attitude for a gangbang. A gangbang is not only about the bottom. It's just as much about the comradery amost the tops. If the bottom is cool, relaxed and willing to take loads, the tops will feel comfortable and just let loose. If the bottom is pushy, needy and envious that just spoils the whole atmosphere. Also many bottoms overestimate their stamina. If you have 3 tops, that's on average 6 loads and hours of fucking. That's about what most bottoms can handle. I can't understand if there are 10 tops how a bottom can still think he's missing out if he's not the only bottom. Hell, he will probably still get a load from all 10 guys, they will just shoot their other load of the evening in the other guy. Yes, in porn bottoms are seeded by 10 guys. But for the performers that's work. As a top if you get paid, you don't mind standing around for hours, but if you just wanna have fun, you want more than 1/10 of the time actually fucking.

No apologies needed. It's an emotional topic, I think we all have some kind of emotional impetus to contribute to this topic. Yes, giftgiving / bugchasing and stealthing is 98% fake. But that doesn't mean that there aren't true cases. A good friend of mine got stealthed, exactly like you'd expect from the stories. His T-cells rapidly declined, he got cancer, which he defeated, but the chemo had side effects. Wounds won't heal, he's been in and out of doctor's offices for years. I've even been offered to add my poz cum to a stealther's "dirty" load when he's fucking some innocent young thing. Which is ironic, because I actually still am neg. I still disagree. Even though I admit there are a lot of hysterical and archaic laws that need to be purged. Ideally, a legal system should provide fairness for all, meaning there should be no double standards. I don't think there is ever a need to have a law specifically for HIV, but that doesn't mean willful transmission of diseases or infliction of bodily harm (any kind, not just HIV) should be legal. Stigmatization should never be a tool for HIV prevention. And if an undetectable man has sex with a condom without disclosing, that shouldn't even come near a courtroom. But if there was clear intent or reckless disregard, there should be accountability. If your employer gave you cancer because he recklessly disregarded safety precautions when working with asbestos, don't you think he should be held responsible? Even if it is just a very small number, there are SOME HIV-related cases that warrant legal examination. Categorically exempting POZ people would indeed be a double standard. No sane person would beat up another human being for fun. The fact that there are some that do, means that there's something wrong with them and they need psychological treatment. But it doesn't mean that the deed should automatically go unpunished. The legal standard for impunity isn't the existence of a psychological issue. You also need to consider whether the perpetrator was so delusional that he was unaware that what he did was wrong. A child molester is a sick person indeed. But he usually is aware that he's about to hurt and emotionally scar a child. (Of course, the exact degree of awareness should be assessed by experts and taken into acount when sentencing someone like that.). So are most stealthers. They know it's wrong, but hey, it's fun. It basically boils down to disregarding the other as a person. I agree. That's why I hate the media hype around cases like these. If I were to form an uninformed opinion: I think Johnson is above all a horny idiot. But he's hot (I'd do him if he also likes to bottom ). Hotness is usually how idiots get away with being idiots (if it were any other issue).

That's the problem with these kind of cases tried in and by the media: It's always "he said - she said". As it appears you have a number of guys accusing him, who all tell more or less the same story and thusly paint a convincing picture. On the other hand there's the racial stereotype and an atmosphere charged up with media hype. I wasn't in the courtroom so I cannot say anything as to the truthfulness of the victims' statements. I cannot say if a fair verdict was reached or if a bunch of sexually frustrated housewives on the jury were out for blood. That's why I HATE, HATE, HATE discussing such cases online. I personally think that one has to get rid of laws from the 80s that single out poz people, but I do think that in certain cases intentionally passing on a disease should be punishable, be it HIV, syphillis, or even measles (If you infect your child because you're one of those anti-vaccination idiots, there's a 1 in 1000 chance it might die, and if it does you should be held accountable). Any law shouldn't be mainly concerned with the type of disease, but instead with the following factors. - was it intentionally, with "reckless disregard" or by accident? - was the other person informed beforehand? - did an actual transmission / infection take place? - what safety measures were taken to prevent transmission? - how easily is the disease treatable or even curable? - what is the change on the quality of life? Should a poz guy be punished for having sex with a condom? No. Sentences could range from none at all, a slap on the wrist to severe punishment. Just like you would get if you paralize another person because you drove drunk or worse, because you just wanted to break someone's spine. So even if I might disagree with Missouri state law, even a better judicial system might find that Johnson did something wrong. I know it's hard to prove whether his partners were informed or not. But IF there is compelling evidence (like: all witnesses seem believable and don't contradict each other and there is computer or video evidence - "you're clean, right?" / "yeah, sure" - that supports their story) that he acted with reckless disregard, he should be held accountable, even in a perfect world. What I hate about these cases is that everybody immediately jumps to an opinion: Those who scapegoat Johnson and those who make him a poster child for discrimination. People talk more about their own prejudices, stereotypes, issues and agendas than the case a hand. Because that would mean actually being informed. And I don't claim I'm informed. I don't have the time to read a billion pages of court transcripts. But at least I try not to be judgmental. As you, drscorpio, said, Johnson isn't the undetectable guy always wearing a condom, who is suffering from overly intrusive, outdated laws.

Yeah sorry, I think that was misleading. What I mean was someone with a high viral load who doesn't receive treatment. To the best of my knowledge the viral load first spikes upon primary infection, then drops and remains low during the latent phase only to rise again as the body's ability to keep the virus in check deteriorates. That is if you don't take antiretrovirals. Only immediately before death I can imagine that the situation gets a bit fuzzy, when there are no more T-cells left that could serve as an incubator for the virus. If it's not rude to ask: was your partner one of the denialists / did he oppose medication? Or did he receive treatment which might have supressed the virus in the blood but the damage done was already more than the body could sustain? I realize he would still be classified as an AIDS patient. So yeah, bad choice of words on my part. What I meant was: Someone with an incredibly high viral load.

Short answer: yes, case closed. Long answer: The question shouldn't be "Is it safe" but rather "is it safer than getting hit by lightninig", i.e. safer than general risks in life. Some scientists say it's zero, some studies suggest there is a minimal (like 0.0x%) risk when the guy nuts in your mouth. The problem is that in reality there are only a few anecdotal cases who claim to have gotten HIV from oral intercourse alone, so its absolutely possible they just forgot about the 20 loads they took in the ass when drunk to the point of blacking out. Common sense says that unless you're bleeding profusely from your gums and the other guy is a end-stage AIDS patient, the risk is absolutely negligable, i.e. it's more likely to get hit by a bus or struck by lightning. In other words.: even if there WAS a risk, it's so incredibly low there's no point in worrying about it.