tallslenderguy

^^This^^ One doesn't even have to be or become more progressive to contrast to the regressive Republican cult members driving their party into the ground.

If only everyone had such clarity! That's why i have qualifiers like "for me," "i see" and "i think," throughout that paragraph. i don't think this can be "known" or proven either way. So i think to say "i know" on either side of the fence is an overstep, and a projected bias. i still believe i am correct, i don't think we can separate sex from other parts of our being, our emotions, the desires/needs that motivate or drive us to have sex in the first place, whether we are aware of those drivers or not. But, i realize that's just what "i think," not a universal truth.

Thanks for keeping us on the straight and narrow 🙂 Re gut health.. post or pre is not a factor. Antibiotics do not discriminate between whether one takes them before or after sex, either way, broad spectrum antibiotics can have a deleterious effect on gut health because they kill beneficial bacteria as well as killing potential pathogens before they multiply. In terms of resistance. Overuse of antibiotics can result in bacterial/pathogen resistance to an antibiotic. Doxypep is presumptive treatment, and there are going to be guys who don't follow the guidelines and will take it indiscriminately. But even if taken according to instruction, it has the potential of facilitating resistance. It's a numbers game, there's a broad range of pathogens doxycycline is used to treat, if one unknowingly is infected with say a respiratory, or urinary or dental issue that has a bacteria that can currently be treated with doxycycline, that bacteria can develop resistance if the person taking the med is just taking a dose after a night of sex, a dose inadequate to resolve one of the other issues. i think the advantages of Doxypep outweigh the disadvantages though. There are other broad spectrum antibiotics that can treat those other issues, and if we could take a big bite out of STI's it would be a huge win. But it's not without a down side.

A PA only carries most of it's risk of infection initially when it's put in, once the skin heals, the only other issue is bacteria colonizing on the PA and since it's at the entry of the urethra, it poses some risk for urinary tract infection... but that can be avoided with proper care. i love a PA on a Top, it's sexy as fuck. It can be worn or not, so i think it just increases Your options. Here's some reputable info from Cleveland Clinic "Cleaning and caring for your penis piercing If you choose to pierce your penis, you’ll want to take some precautions to ensure it heals well and to avoid infection. Dr. Berglund offers these tips: 1. Choose a reputable piercing facility This isn’t the time to DIY or trust a friend with a sewing needle. Do your research and only go to a professional piercer who practices highly sanitary procedures. 2. Keep it covered You’ll probably leave the piercer rocking a bandage down under. You’ll want to continue to keep your new piercing covered, changing the bandage at least once a day to keep it clean and dry. Wearing tighter-fitting underwear will help keep the bandage in place and keep it from rubbing uncomfortably. 3. Wash well And we mean wash really well — but also treat it gently. You want to keep that piercing clean but also be careful not to pull or tug on it. In addition to showering (no baths or pools for now), clean your piercing at least twice a day with a mixture of salt and water. Use six parts water to one part salt. You can either soak your piercing in the mix for a few minutes by putting it in a bowl or cup. Or use a clean cloth or gauze to clean up. Dry your piercing with a paper towel (not your germ-infested bathroom towels). Only touch your piercing with freshly washed hands. 4. Abstain from sex until you’re healed No nookie while you’re healing. That includes vaginal sex, anal sex, receiving oral sex and masturbating. Keeping your new piercing free from others’ germs and reducing friction will promote healing and help you avoid infection. Some piercings may take three months or more to fully heal. 5. Watch out for signs of infection Inside your pants is a dark, damp, warm environment — just the kind of place where germs love to multiply. Those germs can easily make their way to your new piercing and cause infection. Signs to watch out for include: Redness. Swelling. Burning and pain. Discharge from the piercing site. Skin that feels warm to the touch. Fever. If you’re having trouble maintaining an erection or showing signs of infection after a piercing, talk to a doctor for advice." [think before following links] https://health.clevelandclinic.org/penis-piercing

To the original question, to me it depends on several factors. Social evolution has sex attached to all sorts of moral questions. For instance, a lot of religions promote that sex should only happen monogamously, and then only after marriage. That notion got rooted in tradition and general culture. Whether one is religious or not, were effected by it, consciously and unconsciously i believe. i think asking the question is evidence of that? i do not think sex needs to be a moral fact of life. i believe sex is a human need and appetite. We don't moralize eating, another human need, another human need/appetite. We don't saddle eating with contracts and tax breaks. Of course, eating and sex are not the same thing, but i think they share a lot of similarities, though some have managed to combine the two appetites... another topic for discussion, eh? For me individually, i see sex as an intrinsic and intimate part of who and how we are. Sex for me is about connecting to another man at a deep, vulnerable level of need and desire. i see all of those as key elements. i don't think sex is ever 'just physical.' Though i think many guys are pretty expert at avoiding or hiding from the some of the emotional aspects of sex (dare i use the word "spiritual?"), i still think we are all affected on those levels, whether we are aware or not. To me, "cheating" is about hiding a part of our essential self from another. "Cheating" in an intimate relationship contradicts the notion of intimacy. To me, if one aspires to have a committed (goes by a lot of names) relationship to another, one of the central reasons is to actually be known and accepted ('loved') for who and how we are. Hiding from someone who we are supposedly in an intimate relationship with, to me, makes the relationship itself sort of a farce.

Doxyprep is a trade off. Discriminate use can prevent getting infected with the result of having to take an even stronger dose of antibiotics to resolve the infection. Indiscriminate and/or long term use of antibiotics has a lengthy list of side effects. Doxycycline is a broad spectrum antibiotic. One of the side effects of broad spectrum antibiotics is they also kill beneficial microbes that live in our gut. We have 10x more bacteria cells living in our gut than we have cells that make up our whole body and we live in symbiosis with them. At this point, science is in the process of working to map the gut microbiome, but the process is just past the infancy stage. What we do know is the gut microbiome plays a huge part in our overall health. The excerpt below is sort of specific to the question asked and from a lengthy article citing a boat load of studies. This is just one tiny out take, the effects are numerous, i'll link the whole article for those who wanna nerd out and read the whole thing. "Broad‐spectrum antibiotics reduce gut microbiota diversity (Dubourg et al., 2014), and as well as killing the pathogen of concern can eradicate beneficial microbes (Blaser, 2011), with deleterious consequences for the host. The gut microbiota is responsible for the production of many essential metabolites including SCFAs and amino acids (Mills et al., 2019). Studies have reported that commensal‐produced butyrate and propionate have anti‐inflammatory roles, promoting the generation and differentiation of regulatory T cells (Arpaia et al., 2013; Furusawa et al., 2013), with roles in energy metabolism (den Besten et al., 2013; De Vadder et al., 2014). By impacting the composition of the microbial community, antibiotics also alter microbiota functionality and thus the metabolites produced (Ferrer et al., 2017)." [think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8756738/

Faux warning?

Nah... i'm fine. i don't really dedicate a great deal of time or energy to politics. Yesterday i painted all the trim on my porch, the day before i stained it and the cedar shingles on the gables of my house. Picked blackberries in my garden, made tomato juice from the harvest. Got bred. Meanwhile, i think the process of selecting who is in power can affect our every day life... finding a mate to fuck with included in the mix. Wish i lived in Your neighborhood, i'd love to be Your regular cum-dump. ❤️

i don't know what else to call this thread, i have so many thoughts and feelings running through me right now. One item off the list is, i have come to think of the Republican party as exclusive. i haven't always thought that way. i used to think there was a place for LGBTQ+ people in the Republican party, but Trump has elevated the extremist component in the party to the point that i think they pose a threat to LGBTQ+ people, and to minorities in general. "Conform or be cast out." i've experienced this personally. i know first hand the thought processes and results when extremists have power. As i was leaving the gym yesterday, there was a guy in a compensatory pick up making a purposeful spectacle of himself, hot-rodding up and down the street with a large American flag flying from a pole in the bed of the truck, and an almost equal in size flag flying underneath with this: i He's not alone. i live in a town of 50k in Oregon, and there are more than a few trucks with similar displays. i did a search of who sells this sort of thing and found this particular item is "Sold Out." Check out the link, the material they sell is very informative of the approach and mentality some very vocal Trump supporters have. They're the ones that concern me mo, i could easily see this guy throwing a beer bottle at the 'faggots' walking on the street, or worse. This is how the owner explains his merchandise: Our Goals and Mission At this very moment, our first and very own Keep on Trumpin’ store is operating along the Grand Strand! We hope to serve you and your family with all of the things you could ever need! Our Goal at TSS and our Keep On Trumpin’ store is to provide you with a way to laugh at your frustrations. We should all strive to be our best selves, while still holding firm to our beliefs. Come and hang out! [think before following links] https://trumpsuperstore.com/product-category/political-flags/ Historical precedent shows people like this come out of the woodwork when a civilized government is no longer in power to hold them at bay.

Part of the power and effectiveness behind 'the big lie' approach is people often question and doubt their self before they question and doubt those they emotionally accept as authorities. To me, the number of people who were part of Trumps inner circle confirming that the emperor truly has no covering, is particularly damning. i don't think such expose' will help the cult members, but hopefully will awaken the intelligent, thinking segment. There are many who supported Trump first time around who realized at some point that he's really as crazy as he appears... but then there are others who are intelligent supporters who know full well who and how he is and hope to be among those pulling the puppet strings. i think that's particularly tricky for them, like trying to co-opt a nuclear warhead with booby traps... i can't help seeing similarities between Hitler and Trump. To me, both are loose cannon sociopath, paranoid personalities who didn't/don't hesitate to eliminate their staff if they do not feel their undying loyalty and agreement. The power brokers who would exploit Trump have to always maintain a straight face in front of a dancing, naked emperor, can't drop their guard for one second.

Cool discussion. i don't watch often, and never the professionally produced stuff. i go to Squirt (used to go to xtube) and watch the stuff recorded by real guys vs staged. For me, the pro stuff is off-putting and i always feel like i'm watching a production vs being a voyeur lol. Porn is definitely supplemental for me though. If i am regularly getting the real thing, i don't need or want it. Usually an expression of extreme hunger by the time i get to watching porn. As an aside, i got to thinking about those who prefer reading stories and wonder if the guys who go online and engage others in erotic conversation to get off (often aka "flakes") are engaging in a form of porn? Even when i watch porn, i more often than not edge to it. i don't like to masturbate to cum, it leaves the physical part of me feeling released, but the psychological side of me is disappointed. But i can edge for hours if i am doing it to be horny for a real Man. The ultimate for me is to not cum, but regularly receive a Tops orgasm, and hold off on my own so i'm always at a high pitch need/desire for His desire, cock, orgasm.... i think it's because that's the most profound bond/connection that i feel with a Man, and everything else feels watered down or compromised.

How do you know this? Not saying that you don't, i want to understand how you determine, then conclude, what most Black people care about? i confess i didn't know much about Harris until more recently. For instance, i always saw her as a Black woman and didn't realize she was of mixed race until more recently. But as mentioned in another post, things i see as a good, on a very base level, are Kamala is a woman, Black and Indian. Again, it's a very base response on my part because i think those factors will bring perspectives to the office that we have never had. i appreciate your perspective that Kamala is not relatable to you as a Black person. And i get that on some level. Tom Cruise is not relatable to me as a gay person (sorry lol, tongue in cheek). But, as i see it, even if Kamala spent most of her life trying to distance herself from being Black (not saying she has, speculating here), one thing she cannot change is how others see her. i'm thinking stuff like racial profiling. If she was alone and unknown and driving down a street, or walked into a store, i think most Americans would see a Black person and a woman? And i see both as unique perspective for the office. i have no experience of what it means to be a woman, and no experience of what it means to be Black... or both. She does. How she experienced and responded is individual, but she cannot have gotten away from being either of those through out her life, and it has affected her and given her perspectives that the primary office of the white house has never had. i wish our political system was such that more refined issues were the major considerations for voting, but as diverse as this countries population is, we only have two choices of who will sit in the seat of power. i think it's sad that it's come to this, but i'd vote for just about anyone to keep Trump and certain (not all) of his zealot supporters out of such an influential power position. i'm just as concerned about some of the people Trump brings with him as i am about him. i can easily imagine pushing through agenda that is harmful to me as an individual, and i think harmful to us as a society.

Project 2025 leaders are interviewed around the 23 mark, but the whole vid is informative with lots of interviews with former Trump administration.

Hey, just read this thread, and didn't really have a response, then went out and washed my (German) car. While i was washing it, what you and some others wrote started to work in me and i have some random thoughts/feelings to add to the mix. You self describe as a "Normaldude. Honestly i think most of use are just that, that we all have certain things in common: we want and we want to be wanted. Sure, the devil is in the details, but i think that's a common thread that binds us all together. i think you set yourself up for what at least felt like rejection. You really don't know what others were thinking about you, you just filled in the blanks because you didn't leave with what you needed/wanted. When i think about it though, you are a "normal dude" who went to an exclusive party, then wondered when you felt excluded? Berlin is a huge city with a lot of sex venues, i'd be willing to guess that there were other places you could have gone that had guys who know they are like you, who are not busy trying to be more special than everyone else. Guys who want YOU and who want You to want them. i go to the gym every other day and am in pursuit of an ass Tops wanna fuck. It's really sort of silly because not all Tops have one standard ass they wanna fuck. i'm on a meet up site and am frequently "rejected" because i don't have a big belly. i work hard to not have a big belly, and now i wanna pizza. This is going to sound very cliche, though ironically, some gay situations are cliche. Communication is a largely no verbal process. We can tell when a person exudes confidence, is happy, etc.. i think trying to be what we think someone else wants doesn't work. i think you need to be happy with yourself, and then present that person to others. i believe there just isn't one standard guy that you can become that will get you more cock or ass, that you have to be you and put yourself in situations where guys who are not trying so hard to be superior, rather, they are looking for someone like You... because in more ways than not, they are like you.

Competing for sex makes me cringe. Every now and then when i'd go to the ABS, there would sometimes be a guy who'd go around closing doors to either side of the booth i was in, trying to isolate me? Keep others away? idk, but it always felt creepy to me. To me, sex is an expression of mutual desire, not just one sided. In the above scenario, i think the top played a part too. or should have. Why didn't he clarify who he wanted? Or did he by going with you? idk, something that bothers me about a lot of guys in general is lack of communication, lack of willingness to take a risk, be vulnerable and express desire or need. i'm ridiculously obvious when i want to have sex with a guy, but if i don't get some sort of reciprocity, i move on... the desire has to be mutual for it to work for me. Cruising irl can be pretty amazing and subtle though. i've shared this a few times on BZ... i was driving down a main road in Portsmouth VA and a Guy glanced over at me as His car passed. We only made eye contact, and He pulled ahead and in front of me... i followed and He pulled into a Burger King parking lot... i followed Him into the BK and He went straight into the restroom... i followed and when i entered, He locked the door behind me, He took HIs cock out, i can't remember if He pulled my pants down or i did, but He wordlessly had His cock in my ass in short order, quickly came inside of me, put His cock back in His jeans, unlocked the door and left. Cruising communication can be pretty subtle lol, but we clearly both wanted it, it wasn't one sided. If i don't feel another guys desire, i move on and keep looking.

Trump is really good at bringing disparate groups together by sticking to three word sentences that mean different things to each group. One of his strengths is in his lack of specificity that would end up dividing the anti semites from the evangelical christians. It's really wild to realize how Trump has managed to capture both fanatical groups to support him. This is from Pew Research: "While most White Christian voters say they would vote for Trump over Biden if the election were held today, there are some differences by religious tradition. Trump draws support from: 81% of White evangelical Protestant voters...Among Christians, support for Trump is somewhat higher among regular church attenders than non-churchgoers. Overall, 62% of Christian voters who say they go to church at least once or twice a month support Trump over Biden. Among Christians who go to church less often, 55% would vote for Trump if the election were today." [think before following links] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/04/30/voters-views-of-trump-and-biden-differ-sharply-by-religion/ If one has never been part of Evangelical Christian culture, it might be harder to fathom their stance on Israel. Here's an informative piece on Evangelicals and Israel: "Since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war, American evangelicals have been especially vocal in backing Israel. Last week, 90 prominent pastors and other leaders issued “An Evangelical Statement in Support for Israel.” Citing “just war” tradition, the statement affirmed “Israel’s right and duty to defend itself against further attack.” Evangelical leaders around the country have expressed sympathy, as The New York Times reported, “for a country to which many of them feel intense spiritual, cultural and political connections.” But evangelicals’ support isn’t simply driven by a theology that compels them to love the Holy Land, detached from its convulsive domestic and global political implications. For many “Christians Zionists,” and particularly for popular evangelists with significant clout within the Republican Party, their support for Israel is rooted in its role in the supposed end times: Jesus’ return to Earth, a bloody final battle at Armageddon, and Jesus ruling the world from the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. In this scenario, war is not something to be avoided, but something inevitable, desired by God, and celebratory. At the heart of Christian Zionism is not a love for Israel but rather Christian nationalism. What happens to the Jews and Palestinians is, to put it very mildly, collateral damage. Christian Zionists are anticipating, and hoping for a war to end all wars, and a resulting Christian world that they claim will vanquish evil and bring peace. Only those who accept Jesus as their savior will benefit from these events that Christian Zionists claim the Bible predicts will happen. Nonbelievers — including Jews and Muslims — will not survive them" [think before following links] https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/truth-many-evangelical-christians-support-israel-rcna121481

A good question me thinks, did a search and found this interesting article... i kind of like that it's from Aljazeera ... perspective wise. Here's an excerpt and link: "Looking towards the Middle East, Harris’s selection of Tim Walz as her running mate locks in the missing piece on her ticket and provides further insight into what her administration could mean for the region. A sparse record on foreign policy makes it difficult to ascertain Harris and Walz’s exact stances on various critical issues. Still, we have enough clues to paint a picture of their future Middle East policy which, despite some nuances, looks like it would mirror that of President Biden. Subtle differences on Gaza Harris’s carefully crafted “As Israel defends itself, it matters how” approach to Israel’s war on Gaza since October 7 and her recent declaration of “I will not be silent [on suffering in Gaza]” in the wake of Netanyahu’s Washington, DC, visit have created some distance between her views on the conflict versus those of Biden in the eyes of American voters. Reports that the National Security Council had to “tone down” her language during a speech delivered in March, in which she referred to the conditions in Gaza as “inhumane” and directed Israel to increase the flow of aid, further highlighted this distinction. Although Harris has drawn a contrast with Biden through her slightly tougher rhetoric towards Israel on the growing death toll in Gaza and even did not preside over Netanyahu’s address to Congress on July 24, these choices do not hint at a deviation from ongoing, mainstream Democratic policy. After all, despite skipping his speech at Congress, Harris had a one-on-one meeting with the Israeli prime minister the next day, and publicly reaffirmed her ongoing support for Israel. In a campaign rally this week, Harris was interrupted by individuals protesting the war in Gaza, which she deflected from and said, “if you want Donald Trump to win then say that. Otherwise I’m speaking”. Her response was telling, and may indicate how she does not want the Gaza war to be one of the core issues of the campaign." [think before following links] https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/8/8/biden-vs-harris-on-the-middle-east-same-dance-different-steps

i remember this. my oldest brother was also gay, and i watched at San Fransisco General Hospital as He died of AID's in the 80's. He had pretty much every opportunistic disease that came with HIV, and was 90 pounds, Kaposi sarcoma, it was awful. And i flew back to Virginia and continued to receive bare cocks and loads. Out of the probably thousands of cocks i have received, i can count on one hand the number of condoms has been on them. i understood the rationale behind pulling out then, and had similar fears as anyone else, but to me pulling out is even worse than a condom. i cannot remember a Top ever actually pulling out to cum on me? i've had Tops pull out because they still wanted to fuck and didn't want to cum yet... i don't really like that, but i can accept and respect that, but interrupting an orgasm and wasting a Tops seed is just something i have never been able to accept, even when it carried a death threat. i'm really glad i made it to the era of U=U and that HIV is no longer that big of a deal, i never was a chaser and was always nervous about getting HIV, but the drive and desire to completely connect with the Top i'm with has always had priority and has only deepened as i have gotten older.

i don't think Trump has ever used or relied on substance to get a following. He uses short trigger phrases that appeal to his followers and sort of unites them: "immigrants are bad," "Joe is bad," "Kamala is crazy," etc., ad nauseam. He hasn't come up with any phrases that appeal to his followers with these new people, but i don't think he's never relied on evidence or substance, he just makes stuff up on the fly. He's on unfamiliar turf now and at a loss for three letter phrases.

Ah, i'd stop well shy of the title "medical expert." i know diseases like heart failure, diabetes, kidney disease, etc., more than i do sexual function. But one thing i do know is how to find reliable sources that are more evidence based vs authority based. There are several guys on BZ who have similar understanding and know the difference between speculation from and authority and study evidence. And science is always an ongoing process, the best studies always seem to have a disclaimer that "further studies are needed." The body is an infinite universe. One of the articles below alludes to the possible psychological effects, but couches the notion of "harm" with qualifiers like "it depends on the individual." You always read me so well, so You get how big a deal the psychological side of sex is to me. For me not cumming from having my penis stimulated is not an aversion to having an orgasm, but a question of how my Top relates to and perceives me. There seems a natural, and largely unconscious, inclination for us to transfer our individual notions andfeelings onto others. E.g., a Top may feel/think that because He loves having His cock stimulated and cumming that that is a universal thing, that all guys have cocks and all guys love cumming that way. For me? Psychosexually i do not perceive myself as having a "cock," but then to me a "cock" is something a Top has, or a Man Who wants/needs to penetrate, fuck, breed, etc., has. i don't have one of those, so if a Man treats me like Himself, we are not connecting (and You know what a big deal that is to me lol). On the other hand, there are some Men Who not only get how i am, but they are looking for and want/need guys like me. They don't see me as having a "cock" either. It's not pretend or role play, They really both get me and are particularly looking for guys like me. Those Men have found ways to use my penis and make me cum without seeing it or treating it like a "cock." i won't take up a lot of space here going into detail, but it has a huge mind fuck side to it for both of us and because there is compatibility, a huge bonding side to it as well. So, for me at least, it's not a matter of not cumming, but how it happens, when, why and how often can also factor in. Really, if i'm not cumming from having my penis stimulated for awhile because i am getting bred often, i'll end up cumming from getting bred. Meanwhile, here's some medical info on the topic: "People who choose not to ejaculate are unlikely to experience harmful side effects. The body breaks down unused sperm, which does not build up to trigger further problems. It may not be harmful for a person to not ejaculate, but it depends on the cause. Ejaculation refers to the expulsion of semen from the body. Typically, sexual stimulation causes the central nervous system to build arousal to the point of orgasm. During this process, sperm from the testicles travel through the epididymis and into the vas deferens. From here, it enters the urethra through the prostate’s ejaculatory ducts, mixing with seminal fluid, which comes from the seminal vesicles, and prostate secretions. The contraction of the pelvic muscles expels this fluid, now called semen, from the tip of the penis. Several factors can prevent stimulation leading to ejaculation. Ejaculation usually occurs with an orgasm, but not always. The causes of preventing ejaculation can be intentional or unintentional. " Intentionally preventing ejaculation Some people choose to delay ejaculation, such as during edging. Edging is when a person builds sexual stimulation almost to the point of orgasm but stops just before it occurs. Edging is unlikely to cause health problems. In rare cases, preventing ejaculation can cause epididymal hypertension, or “blue balls.” Other people intentionally prevent ejaculation entirely, such asTrusted Source those practicing Taoism."" [think before following links] https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/side-effects-of-not-releasing-sperm#side-effects "There isn’t conclusive evidence regarding how ejaculation frequency is tied to health. Here’s where the research currently stands. A 2018 surveyTrusted Source of research papers on this subject found that limiting the time between ejaculations may improve sperm quality. However, the study authors caution there’s not enough evidence to say for sure. A well-known 2016 study of almost 32,000 males that lasted from 1992 to 2010 suggests that ejaculating often (about 21 times a month) might lower the risk of prostate cancer. But this study used self-reported data. It’s hard to know for sure whether people’s answers are truly accurate, since they weren’t observed in a controlled lab setting. People don’t always remember things with 100 percent accuracy. A 2004 studyTrusted Source with this same group of males didn’t find any significant link between ejaculation and risk of prostate cancer. So, even though the 2016 study gained more than 12 years of extra data, the study didn’t change at all. Don’t take these kinds of results at face value. And a 2003 studyTrusted Source of more than 1,000 males with a diagnosis of prostate cancer also used self-report methods. Researchers asked a few questions that most people probably don’t know the exact answers to, like when they first ejaculated and how many partners they’d had up to that point." [think before following links] https://www.healthline.com/health/how-long-can-a-man-go-without-coming#risks

Of course, we're all individuals, so there is no one type of Top, bottom, versatile, etc., guy. For me, it's not "selfish" for a Top to not touch my penis or make me cum. That said, reading replies and just my general experience, i don't think it's unusual for a total bottom to not be concerned about coming? i'm one of the total bottoms at the far end of the spectrum and in my ideal world, i don't cum from having my penis stimulated. i don't perceive myself as having a "cock," Sure, i have an organ between my legs, but even though i'm not fem, to me what i have is wired more like a clit than a cock. It feels good physically to have it touched, and i can orgasm that way, but it's not wired for penetrating and fucking with. If i cum from being penetrated and fucked, that's awesome, but not something i expect. The only orgasm i want or need is the one a Top has inside of me. For me, that is my orgasm. As long as i am getting regularly fucked and bred and a Man is having His orgasm inside of me, to me that is me having an orgasm. It's not fanciful or altruistic for me, like i am somehow serving or inferior, i love that. i don't see it as 'selfish' when a Man doesn't want me to orgasm from stimulating my penis, for me, that's understanding. That means my Top understands that i'm a total bottom, that i'm not like Him and He is not transferring His desires and needs onto Himself thinking i need to cum like He does... i don't . The orgasm i want and need is the one He fucks inside of me.

Here's some info about Vance, Trumps chosen running mate, thinks and feels about project 2025. "...Vance’s authoring of the foreword to an upcoming book by Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation who has advocated for a “second American revolution” he hopes will remain “bloodless.” Roberts is the head of Project 2025 — a far-right policy blueprint from which Trump has fought to distance himself. In a review of the book, Vance wrote: “We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets. In the fights that lie ahead, these ideas are an essential weapon.” “I’m a little surprised they didn’t vet him as thoroughly as they should have, or if they did, did they not know he was writing the foreword to Kevin Roberts’ book,” said a Republican strategist and veteran of multiple presidential campaigns, granted anonymity to speak freely. “So, you’ve got Trump trashing this Project 2025, and Vance writing the foreword.”" [think before following links] https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/26/republicans-jd-vance-attacks-00171473

Yes. Most of the Tops i have been with are like You in this respect, or at least claim to be. i can either take them at face value or impose my own ideas on them of who i think they are or perceive them to be. It gets back to my opening statement that i do not think there is one standard definition and that we may have general ideas for the sake of crude identification, the "Top" is in the details that may or may not mesh with the receivers desires/needs for a "Top." i have encountered guys who start out Top and evolve into versatile or even total bottom... lots of stories on BZ from guys who have changed that way, and vice versa, guys who tried bottoming and found out they don't want/need that. To me, neither sets a "standard definition" that i feel all should aspire to fit into. i think it's the other way around, words are there to help us convey the individual using them, not as a standard they have to conform to. The FB i relate in my OP is a good example... he seems to be finding need/want beyond the Top needs/desires that bonded to my bottom needs/desires for several years. i've even tried to fuck him because i really love him and want him to get what he wants/needs, but despite trying, i only get hard when a Top wants to breed me and i could not do it. And even if i could physically pull it off, i (personally) still do not believe that's a good idea, because even if he gets the physical part of a top in him, he would not be getting the psychological part of a top in him... and to me, that's as important, if not more so, when it comes to good, whole and sustainable sexual relationship with another. i think it's incorrect reasoning to say that because i have a functional penis i should Top, and worse, i think it's sort of obnoxious to imply or say that one is being selfish or is somehow inferior because they don't have the same desire or need that "I" have. There's all sorts of examples. i've encountered guys who wanted to suck on my hole and eat scat from it. They could posit that since everyone has a functional mouth that everyone should eat shit. Sure, everyone with a mouth has that capability, but not everyone has the need or desire. i do not think it makes one or the other any better or worse, superior or inferior, selfish or unselfish. It means they have a particular need/desire and instead of imposing that on everyone with a mouth, they need to find a compatible match, someone who needs/desires them as they are. And, those people exist. What it comes down to, as i see it, is compatibility. i only want to be with someone who wants/needs me as much as i want/need them. If another guy is a bottom or versatile who needs/wants a top, i'll give a hug and a kiss, but won't pretend to want/need something i don't because they want/need it. If i really like a guy and have a connection with him, i may try to help him get what he wants/needs, but i won't pretend to be that person. But that's me, and i have always found enough compatible Tops to sustain that i'm not delusional lol.

This is how i see it too. It makes me cringe when someone implies, or outright says, i cannot be the way i am. It triggers old religious feelings when i was shamed for being gay. It was an awakening for me when i realized the gay community is just like any other, with all the same biases and attitudes to go along with being attracted to the same gender lol.

Where i see the divide runs deeper into ones psychology. It may be this is burned into me pretty deep because of my background. Processed out of a religious mindset where i (truly) believed there was no such thing as being gay. And many still think that way, including my ex wife and sons. That being gay is a life style choice. They have a similar view, that obviously i can top and can also do so with a woman... so in thier minds and "attitude," i'm both straight and top because clearly, i can do both (i was married to a woman and produced kids). i don't think it's hard to understand that there are Tops, bottoms, versatile, Bi, straight, ad infinitum, variations of human sexuality, but i think some find it hard to accept that not everyone is like them.