GermanFucker

A fuckbud of mine says: Ich habe kein Alterslimit, aber ein Attraktivitaetslimit - I don't have an age limit, but I have an attractiveness requirement. So no, I don't have a number set in stone, but age does play a role when assessing compatibility. Others might look for maturity, experience, i.e. daddies or even granddaddies. When I fuck around I look for adventure, comradery and yes, sometimes youth. I need to be able to relate to a guy, so that usually means that we have to at least belong to the same generation (i.e. +/- 15 years). Of course, having other things in common helps, too, like when you're both gym rats.

I think the most common reason for this disconnect is paranoia. Some fear their new boss will suddenly develop an interest in gay dating sites, even though she's a mother of three daugthers. Some say they don't want the local condom nazi seeing a save sex optional profile and badmouthing them in their small gay community. The guys who openly advertise their willingness to have unsafe sex on mainstream sites (A4A, Gayromeo etc.) are often already well known amongst their friends for being HIV-positive and having a very adventurous sex life. In German there's a saying: Ist der Ruf erst ruiniert, lebt sich's fortan ungeniert", once your reputation is ruined, you're free to live your life without false inhibitions. Those who still try to maintain an image of responsibility might fall into one of three categories, and often there's no telling which one from first impressions. - Sluts who really never use condoms, but think that way they can avoid controvery. - Guys who will bareback in reality, given the right circumstances (e.g. neg-neg), although they might embellish on barebacking sites (e.g. "any and all loads taken") - Guys who don't usually bareback, but fantasize about it. The fact that you don't know beforehand makes it more complicated and sometimes frustrating. As to the bugchasing thing: Bugchasing is 98% fantasy and this includes Breedingzone. On the one side all these fresh young virgin asses who discovered gay sex three weeks ago, but beg to be knocked up asap. On the other side all these no-meds tops, who have been full blown for 6 years and counting. Yeah, right. Don't get me wrong, bugchasing exists, but it's more nuanced. Some guys realize they probably are poz already, so bugchasing gives them an illusion of control when it has already been lost. Other submissive guys just give in to the inevitable.

Also keep in mind: Many guys feel some kind of inner pressure to "confess" their sexual "depravity" at the doctor's office. But most doctors aren't interested confessions, only in medically relevant information. (Yes, when assessing if something might be HIV it can be relevant to know whether the patient has a lot of unsafe sex. Or if someone is into fisting when looking for HepC.) You can get syphillis by receiving a blowjob. So you don't have to tell anything that you're not comfortable with. You can be as specific or not as you like to. Some of my standard lines are "I'm young and sexually active. .... No specific risky situation comes to mind, but out of responsibility and for the sake of my partners I just want to be sure."

Jockstrap?

To the best of my knowledge. The difference between an ingrown hair and a syphillis chancre is that the first will turn to pus, so after a while the "hardish" part will move to the surface and will become more elastic, usually you can just pop it like a zit in the end, whereas a syph chancre is more like a frozen pea stuck under your skin (you can't "pop" it, because it isn't pus, it's infected tissue), and it will become wet and oozy not unlike a herpes sore. The thing about syphillis is: The earlier it's diagnosed, the easier the treatment, sometimes it's just one shot of penicillin. Once you get to the stage where body is covered with the typical rash, it has spread throughout your body, often requiring more antibiotics / longer treatment. So if you think that it's syph, get tested and treated ASAP and PLEASE: Don't have sex with other until you treatment is finished. Be fair. As to the "freaking out" part: Syphillis is 100% percent completely curable, if it's caught early, the only possible effect might be some scarring where the chancre was. Be calm and relaxed, just don't procratinate: see a doctor, if necessary get treated.

I don't know about Dr. Phil, but I know there are many scripted "reality" shows and talk shows. The producers look for a certain type and usually go through talent agencies to find "ugly hooker", "underage sex addict", "overweight cuckold husband" or whatever the script for that episode says. It's sometimes funny to watch the same amateur actor play a straight pizza guy, a gay boyfriend and a naked cleaner within ten days on three different channels. But hey, it's a paying acting job. Being used to performing in front of the camera, there are a number of porn stars who also do that kind of acting job. Some do it for the fun, some for the extra cash, for some its a stepping stone to a more mainstream acting career. So if I don't know the exact rules of the format (scripted vs. actual reality, pseudonym vs. verifiable identity, etc.), I wouldn't necessarily believe everything I'm being presented.

As to German: Germans will know what you mean when you talk about fucking bareback, the term is quite common, but will think of minced meat when you use the word "raw". Mostly you'd say "blank ficken", with "blank" meaning naked or uncovered. Also used is "ohne Gummi", without rubber. Sometimes the term "AO" as in "alles ohne" (everything [goes] without [protection]) is used in personal ads / on message boards, but mostly by heterosexual hookers ("AO Nutten"). To breed / seed would be "besamen" (inseminate) or "abfüllen", as in "füll mich ab" = "fill me up". To knock up would be "schwängern" (impregnate), rarely also "befruchten". But that can mean anything. If you are talking about pozzing, you'd use the English word (but with a German ending): "pozzen". HIV is HIV, and negative is "negativ", positive is "positiv", sometimes also "poz", as in English (depending on the speaker with a soft "z" at the end as in English or with a hard german "s"). There are thousands of words for cum, such as: Sahne (cream), Soße (Sauce), Rotze (literally "snot"). A term often used for cumming in a guy's ass would be "in den Arsch rotzen", to blow snot up his ass (it sounds a lot hotter in German, believe me). Seldom, the portmanteau "Potze" / "Pozze" (pronounced po-tse) is used, made up of "pos" and "Rotze", i.e.: poz cum. But that is mostly only with HIV fetishists. I'll add more terms when I have the time / think of them.

AFAIK the problem with "mild strains" is that it's never the strain allone that decides the progression rate, but rather the specific interaction of that strain with the patients immune system, whose response is largely determined by his genes. So IMHO there is an ethical difference between experimental treatment for cancer patients, be it immune or even gene therapy and infecting a hitherto healthy patient with something that might be harmless to many, but still has the potential to do harm in specific cases.

IMHO fat vs. skinny isn't the most important factor, it's muscularity that counts. Fucking an overly skinny, bony guy isn't enjoyable, because without muscle to cushion the blow you immediately hit bone which is uncomfortable after a short while. Neither is fucking an overly soft and wobbly ass fun, because it lacks the muscle tone to milk your dick. Pun intended, it's like pounding water. Some belly fat is ok, if there's overall muscularity. E.g. I do enjoy fucking stocky weightlifter types. So one shouldn't get obsessed with being skinny, which in itself isn't all that attractive.

You misread completely. I didn't judge. At all. My statement was in response to the question if there's a need for discussion. If you look at the echo Lee Daniel's recent statements had in the media, there sometimes can be such a need. As I said, it usually (as in "in most of the cases") really doesn't matter. Not to me or others. However, there are exceptions. And I listed two examples of criteria (there are others), when it begins to matter. If these criteria don't apply to you, you needn't identify with them. As to integrity: In the end there's isn't much difference between cheating on your boyfriend or your wife. Being bisexual doesn't make one morally superior or more acceptable than the other. What makes it forgivable is the fact that we're human. Men are cheating horndogs. Pure and simple. I've cheated on partners. With other cheaters. Bad, bad me. But it was hot. As I said: Most of the time I really, really don't give a flying fuck. If one however strives for total integrity, that demands total honesty. It also means giving your wive / partner the same chance to look elsewhere. Which can end in open marriage or divorce. Because as long as there are lies involved, we either have to chalk it up to human fallibility. Or we are indeed living delusions if we keep pretending to be morally unassailable. One has to live by the standards one sets for oneself or else the self-deception will fuck one up in the end.

Well, agreed. It's just sex. Fucking around should be fun and not burdened with reading too much meaning into it. However: It matters when someone's sex life is a lie wrapped in a delusion inside a deception, when someone is pretending to be things he is not and aspects of his double life begin to have a negative impact on others. It's not ok to be a bugchaser while pretending to be faithful to your wife. It's not ok to be an asshole to your children just because you have problems accepting you're bisexual. As with everything: It usually doesn't matter - within reason. Speak of yourself, dude. I'd rather fuck Nick Jonas (well, I'd fuck Nick Jonas, period). Sure, Adam Levine is somewhat doable, but not someone I'd fantasize about.

[quote name='cougkdc99;107812 ]I love straight guys' date=' but when there dicks are buried in man ass and all they can think about is depositing their nut juice, are they really straight and what are they thinking? [/quote'] If a man who usually sleeps with women, is willing to put his dick into a man's ass or mouth, he isn't straight, he's bisexual. Period. Simple as that. Depending on where he falls on the (Kinsey) spectrum, it is possible that he enjoys fucking a guy even more than fucking his wive, but sticks with her due to social conventions. Or it can simply be a matter of a combination of horniness, alcohol and the availability of a male ass and the guy fantasizes about wet pussy the whole time while pounding manhole. Sexuality is indeed fluid that way. But if someone is "really" truly heterosexual (i.e. he falls into the very heterosexual end of the spectrum), he wouldn't fuck around with guys. So when you talk about "straight" in this context, what you are talking about bisexuals who are either (at least slightly) more into women, so that they usually have no need to seek out sex with men, or whose lives are dictated by social pressure to conform. I'm always amazed (or should I say amused?) how in the US heterosexuality is more of a social concept than a sexual reality. To quote Tony Kushner's "Angels in America": "Because what I am is defined entirely by who I am. [i am] not a homosexual. [i am] a heterosexual man who fucks around with guys." I believe this indeed has to do with the fact that the traction the fundamentalist notion that you can choose your sexuality has gained traction within the public discourse. It's the other side of the same coin. Just as fundamentalists believe that being gay is a choice, they are willing to accept that you're straight as long as you declare that you are, so that they don't have to concern themselves with the somewhat more complicated and murky reality.

I don't do it often, but yeah, I sometimes jerk off thinking of nothing, mostly when I'm not in an especially sexual mood, but would like to enjoy my cup of endorphines before falling asleep. Sometimes it's kind of a zen thing. Just wanking without a special goal or purpose. But mostly I jerk off to the memories of good fuck dates.

There's another possible explanation. Just look at how Leah Remini is trying to stick it to Scientology. Maybe Jackson Taylor really believed that he would just do a normal porn shoot and naively trusted TIM not to portray him in a certain light. So when he was made to look like the posterchild of bug chasing, his feeling were hurt and his ego bruised. In that case some people take their revenge by throwing as much shit as possible at who they feel wronged by, knowing that one way or another some will stick (In Remini's case I'd say: You go girl, Scientology richly deserves it). That is not meant as taking sides with Taylor or anyone involved with the matter, I wasn't in the room for the contract negotiations and when the content of the shoot was discussed. I'd just like to point out that when some people feel wronged they go at it regardless of the consequences.

I don't get that Justin Bieber thing. Though I have to admit I'd like to handcuff and gag him. No sex, god forbid. Just gag him. Taylor Lautner on the other hand, why not, I'd seed that ass.

I truly believe that everyone has the right to look for sex according to his own preferences. Even if that means that most of the dating pool doesn't match these criteria. If someone is just looking for a certain thing and is willing to forgo having much more sex with a wider variety of guys, who am I to judge. I reserve the right not to have sex with someone, so I really can't expect others to have bareback sex with me if they are into different things. The only thing is: one doesn't have to be a douche about it. There are always two ways of saying the same thing. OK: "Neg bottom looking for neg tops to have bareback sex with" - is a factual statement of preference, even if one thinks it's naive, it deserves to be respected. Stupid: "Be clean" - Manages to be both confusing and insulting at the same time. OK: "Sexually not attracted to XXXX" - not the nicest thing to say, but sometimes necessary. Sometimes a guy always attracts a certain type of suitor, and if the interest isn't mutual, its better to be upfront. I also know Asian bottoms that have to defend themselves against "pervy old white men" spamming their inboxes. Douchy: "No Asians" (categorically), "Blacks not welcome", or even more surreal "I don't like Israel's politics, so I won't have sex with jews"... seriously, WTF? OK: "Gym rat looking for other muscular guys" - If that pisses one of more that "bear looking for other bears and otters", it says more about one's own insecurities than the guy who wrote the profile. Why should one scene be worse than the other? Shallow and mean: "No fatties" - As if that was all that is to another person. OK: "Just checking things out", "not looking for sex right now" etc. - Not everyone has the experience, time or sex drive to manage ten hookups per week and it's ok to say so. As RawTop said: Also gives others a chance to move on. Just pointless: Misrepresenting oneself - Pretending to be aloof when you're constantly looking for dick. Or saying you're up for fun when in reality you rarely show up and just jack off to online conversations. OK: "Especially into Latino types", "age 22-25 preferred", "more into tall dudes" - Precise statement of preference without being denigrating Nonsensical: "Be hot" - as if there were an objective standard, just like MMM said, it doesn't mean anything because it's all in the eye of the beholder.

For otherwise healthy poz guys: no, it doesn't. Other than diet a number of factors can influence taste like the genetically caused variations in metabolism in general, metabolic diseases like diabetes or the broken-down metabolites of chemical compounds such as medications or tobacco smoke. But in general, diet is the major factor, with hydration and time of day determining the "strength" of the piss' taste (Drinking lots of water -> weak piss, morning piss: quite strong.)

It's not like they're not there. I'm sure that if you grabbed him in the love handle region you could feel the body fat (not that that's a bad thing, the dude in the pic is quite hot and totally fuckable). I think it's a combination of a few factors: 1.) As Jake said, genes play a big role, that goes for the bone structure (e.g. hips / shoulder width ratio), the softness of the fatty and connective tissue, the elasticity of the skin as well as fat distribution. 2.) When talking about the skin, age also plays a role. The guy in the picture is made to look mature (beard, hairy breast etc.), but probably is quite young still. 3.) Then there is overall muscularity. The guy is seriously muscled, also when it comes to the center section / lower back. Most guys who want "to look good on the dancefloor" train their arms, pecs and abs, and magazines like Men's Health cater to that market. But dumbbell curls and crunches alone don't help shit when you're beefy. You gotta put in the work and do all the uncomfortable stuff (300lb+ deadlifts, heavy squats, pull-ups etc.). 4.) Also look at the legs. Many guys in the gym just ignore them, but you need substancial legs like the guy in the picture to balace the upper body. Broad shoulders, substancial lats / lower back and tree-like legs make for a harmoniously wide frame. 5.) Clothing. Expertly chosen for the guy in the picture. If you try to fit a beefy frame - even a muscular one - into e.g. skinny jeans your love handles will show. IMHO - besides genes - one of the most important factors would be if you train correctly, i.e. heavy and intense with the right exercises. Yeah, but there's a lot one can do. Believe me, switching from a Men's Health type training regime to serious weight training will pay off.

Playing devil's advocate here, but: Why should anyone feel proud about being poz? Or ashamed for that matter? For most gay guys it's just an incidental aspect of life, not a reason to behave or be treated differently. For most guys it's something that happened along the way because they liked natural, bareback sex, but the vast majority didn't seek out HIV. I didn't seek out being white / european. I just happen to be. Just as some guys happen to be poz. Big whoop. There isn't something wrong with appreciating poz culture, but neither is there an imperative to celebrate being poz. I'd compare it with MENSA. Yes, it's obviously nice to be able to talk to likeminded individuals and to be stimulated in a way only such a setting can, but most smart people don't join MENSA, they just happen to be smart and contribute to society in any other way they see fit. So to me - same as with so many things - it's about choice. Accepting being poz still means one gets to choose what to do with it, how to define oneself. I mean, why should this be any different for poz guys than for neg guys? Why should a neg jock be allowed define oneself as a jock but a poz triathlete can't do that? Why should a poz guy just want to be sought out because of the virus, not because of any other aspect he deems more important, be it body hair, athleticisms, culturedness, whatever? So I think there is a huge difference between being in denial about being poz (bad) and just choosing not to let it define one's (sex) life (one's right as an individual).

It is a breach of etiquette. He was out of line. And you should make him pay, or else he won't learn his lesson. Punishment is necessary, what kind is up to you, you know the guy best. Maybe he has to organize the next three gangbangs before you bring your fuckbuds over again. Or he has to organize 3 or 4 bottoms and share you with them. Or you organize a very hot gangbang for another slut and he has to watch gagged and tied to a chair. Be creative! At least he certainly has lost his right to be picky.

I prefer my sex partners to be SANE, OPEN and HONEST. That usually means discussing status. Not knowing doesn't turn me on. On the other hand, someone who is able to stand by his status, actions and preferences shows me he has his shit together and can act like a man. That is a million times hotter. I have knowingly seeded both neg and poz guys, but that doesn't mean I will seed ANY neg guy or ANY poz guy.

That is fantastic to hear!

Again, just my ramblings: I think there is a difference between intensity (One thing I hear from Americans all the time is that "you Germans are so intense", I think you might fall into the same category.) and - for lack of a better word - heavy-handedness. TIM is very successful with the heavy / raunchy stuff (gothic setting / design, ominous music, drug allusions, "come join the club" text intros etc.) and I don't want to criticize that in any way. It's a valid market. I just think that the majority of the (gay) population wants to be young forever and act carefree as if their deeds didn't have consequences, in the same way that Hilfiger advertise their clothes. I think it's a choice: Do you want to be McDonalds and have the broadest audience possible (at least 50% of all gay men bareback if the circumstances are right, so that's a very broad target group) or do you want cater to the poz fetish crowd. I actually agree with coyotesmiles: Many guys on breedingzone are looking for a better HIV fetish platform. You could totally corner that market. But you would limit yourself to a niche (nothing wrong with that). So I don't think you should turn everything upside down. But I think the question of what route to take hinges on which market you want to serve: Do you want to be no.1 in hardcore poz fetish? Then it's about community and a feeling of security (from censorship, condom nazis etc.), not necessarily cutting edge technology. Do you want to bring barebacking into the mainstream? Then it's about being welcoming, unoffensive and offering interactive features). Or do you want to bring new guys to barebacking? If you want to get the 19-year-olds everything has to center around mobile devices and cater to a 15-second attention span like Twatter. Don't take me too seriously, but yeah, something like that (It's just to hot and humid here right now to think clearly). What I probably want to say is: Maybe you should come up with a kind of mission statement (what do I want my new platform to be / to be the best at) first and then think about ways of implementing that. Without abandoning BreedingZone, of course . I just think that having a tube site isn't a purpose in itself. It's just a means to an end. As coyotesmiles said, if that end is creating a social experience for HIV fetishists, it clearly serves a purpose and certainly isn't a thing of the past.

Take it as philosophical meanderings, I'm really not a specialist myself, either. But personally I think that HTML5 and with it the ability to directly access videos, webcams, location data and navigation is the future. But it agree that this probably will lead to a technological arms race between internet sex companies. So again, the middle-sized players are probably gonna get squeezed between the big businesses and individuals that just use somebody else's infrastructure. I think this community as it is now works. So I wouldn't say "change the formula". I just don't think that this is the kind of community one could exponentially grow and take mainstream. I think that a truly mainstream bareback offering - and I think now is the time that is possible - has to be light(er) and fun. But there is always a market for the heavy, raunchy stuff if you focus on it. As many successful prostitutes would agree: People will pay for stuff they don't get at home.

Just my two eurocents: Blogs and Tube Sites are mature markets. Generally speaking: Many of the guys who started blogs 10 years ago either went corporate and now serve as some kind of gossip dispensary or now stay in contact with their friends via facebook. Same goes for porn: Blogs are great as a "cheap" tool to promote existing content, but if you want a blog to succeed as a traditional blog it has to have its distinct personality as a main selling point. You said it yourself: Otherwise microblogging like Tumblr serves up cheap visual thrills as well. Tube sites are great if someone tells me "hey check out that pornstar". They just don't involve one emotionally and make me want to spend money. So as I see it the business model relies on advertising, which is never future-proof in an already overcrowded market. When I watch porn I either go for high-quality stuff with beautiful guys (the likes of Sean Cody, Chaosmen etc.) or true amateur stuff. I don't see a point in paying for "normal" guys having sex (like it was the case with HDK ten years ago) if I can either see them for free on a cam site, which is much more real and therefore interesting, or fuck them myself. So I believe the "middle of the road" is indeed eroding. As always, it's about the value proposition. If you want your sites to be a hit, you have to offer something fresh that doesn't exist yet and make a personal connection with the user. I'm always amazed how much money some guys spend on Cam4. So it's about the interactive experience with other "normal" guys and lowering the threshold between pros and just eager amateurs. That can mean something totally new, I'm sure an interactive site that combines the functionalities of Grindr, Twitter and Cam4 would be a huge hit. Or it can just be better integrating existing platforms, like Facebook took blogging and messenging and sold it as something new. I think you are on the right track when you say you want to be community-focused. One caveat however. Bareback is the new mainstream. There is no denying that. But breedingzone isn't. Many of the most prolific posters are here because of the backroom forums. HIV fetishism will always be a niche, whereas fucking without rubbers is the most normal thing in the world. So you have to ask yourself which market you want to serve, how broad you want your audience to be.