viking8x6

On 11/12/2023 at 9:31 AM, Gingerguy said:

Yesterday I told him that his shirt matches with his eyes and he went pepper red in a second and smiled.

I can't understand how a person who is a doctor and has babies delivered, he performs surgeries could be so shy.

From everything you say about his behavior, he's clearly interested in you. Whether in a sexual way or not, you'll find out in time. But he's asked you on a dinner date, and you accepted, and you had fun, so there's some kind of connection there.

As to how he can be so shy - trust me, I have firsthand experience: The most amazingly "eligible" people can be very shy when (in their perception) the stakes are high. In my 30s, I had brains, education, good job, good looks, athletic, interesting hobbies... the whole package. I would still get tongue-tied when trying to approach a guy I was truly interested in. In public life, I wasn't shy at all - I was friendly and helpful to colleagues (even some I didn't like), gave talks at conferences, all kinds of things.

So I'd say, stick with it and see where it goes - sounds like you may have caught a prize!

This sounds like a very bad idea.

FWIW, if he was fucking you in the ass and you were infected, the infection would be in your ass, so you'd be very unlikely to pass it to your wife (unless she's a lot kinkier than I think).

What @BootmanLA said. Testosterone level modifies the amount of facial and body hair, but genetics have an awful lot to do with it also. The genes for hair are inherited from both parents (they're  not on the X and Y chromosomes), so your body hair patterns can resemble either parent or be somewhere in between. There is definitely a correlation between body hair prevalence and ancestry - genetics from east asian, native american, and some other backgrounds are linked to little body hair, while european background is linked to more.

Agree, live venues are far better than apps.

I find I get best mileage from apps with a repeat "customer" strategy. Not quite at the FB level, but knowing which guys are real and not too damn flaky helps a lot. The trick is to get my brain to pay attention to that rather than the latest pretty face/dick/ass... Which is harder when one is thinking with the little head.

My endurance varies greatly depending on prior activity, mental state, situation, and partner. Almost always, I will put in quite a bit of effort to last longer, as I know that's what I'd enjoy if I were the bottom. On the other hand, there's a certain point where that switches and the goal (mine, his, or best of all both) is to get the load in the ass.

I've done this on a few rare occasions. I'd like to have done more. But hey, I'm still above ground, so it's not too late...

3 hours ago, BathhouseBottom said:

you giving me a warning for being sane

Actually, you received a warning because someone else complained about your post.

@ErosWired - As I said, I generally agree with you here and I think your expectations are reasonable. I certainly think it's appropriate to expect that people who are outside the generally accepted status quo in a bathhouse - or any situation in which personal interaction takes place without the usual layers of clothing, manners, structure [work, school, business] and so forth that normally moderate that interaction - should be the ones to tread carefully with respect to violating people's expectations.

Apropos of this, when the whole #MeToo thing blew up three or four years ago, at least one of the bathhouses in my current orbit instituted a policy that consent is required and put up signs explicitly stating that "unwanted touch" is off-limits. It's not clear exactly how this is supposed to work in the case of ass-up in a room...

Not sure about now, but I definitely remember a dark room in the upstairs of a bar in Amsterdam - sometime around 2001 - that was completely pitch black. Couldn't see your hand in front of your face. Very hot!

I have no idea whether I'm nicer than you, harry, but I'm quite certain that I'm nicer than Trump. Frankly, I wasn't attempting to address those questions, as they weren't what your post purported to be about.

That was whether left-wing people are "nice" and conservatives are "mean". IMO neither is a valid generalization, nor are the opposites accurate.

13 minutes ago, harrysmith26 said:

They just look like loathsome Scranton trailer trash who would do that, basically. 

Trump voiced his support for gay rights at the 2016 Republican convention, he had no plans to try and undo gay marriage... I'm sure we can come back to the topic of how someone can say they support something in public but be different in private. [Q.E.D.]

All I see on social media is lefties saying "i'm loving seeing Trump supporters crying" and "i love the taste of your tears" ... etc.

6 minutes ago, topblkmale said:

Seems you're new here.

Most in this forum, since its LGBT, are leftie liberal.

So is this a troll post?

1. Appearances can be deceiving.

2. The right wing does not have a corner on schadenfreude.

3. Please don't feed the trolls.

2 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

This layer of discussion on the role of bathhouses as sexually open spaces being available to all tastes and persuasions seems to me to overlook the salient point behind the OP’s question: He’s asking about men-only spaces, and whether you believe such women-excluding places should exist or not, they do. (See also: Bathrooms, everywhere)

Let’s assume that I have taken a bathhouse room and wish to lie on my bed with my ass up toward my open door as an invitation to men to use it. I feel fingers deep-probing my cunt, perhaps inserting my dildo, playing with me at length. At last I glance back, and discover that the person who has been doing this is a woman.

That would not be welcome... Therefore the only way to protect myself is to either put up a notice saying “no women”, or not put my ass up, which means that much of my incentive to go to the bathhouse is lost. It’s not just a question of me wanting to impose my personal preferences on others; it’s a question of knowing whether I have a safe space to be who and what I am. By and large, gay men do not seek, and may be repulsed by, sexual contact with women, just as many straight men might be repulsed by the thought of fucking a guy. These are visceral reactions, not a product of bigotry, and must be taken as valid considerations. We have all-male venues because we need them.

I agree with you about much of this. Hence my comment that if one isn't comfortable with the rules of a particular space on a particular occasion, one shouldn't go there.  Or in your hypothetical case, one should put up that notice or choose another activity. But I would argue that it's not a question of whether the space is safe to be who and what one is, but whether it's safe to engage in a particular activity (yes, I'm splitting hairs here).

In any case, the management of such establishments clearly should make their policies very clear, for the benefit of all their would-be patrons.

On 11/27/2023 at 11:17 AM, Iker80 said:

If you're really in to a guy and want him in you it's easier. I've been surprised by that a couple of times. I'm generally a bit tight at first and need to work up to anything big. These guys I really wanted were a lot easier though.

Absolutely true. I lost my anal virginity to a guy who was practically a virgin himself (and therefore inexperienced) and is hung about the same I am (8 inches and thick) - no pain whatsoever.

10 hours ago, brnbk said:

I still believe that gay men do have a right to a gay male bathhouse and the presence of trans men can introduce heterosexuality or perhaps to be accurate transsexuality into the space. To some gay men,  having sex with a FTM trans man  or their presence in a bathhouse might feel like straight sex

8 hours ago, topblkmale said:

What if the transman is straight and wants to bring his woman along for some fun? Why not be inclusive of straight men (and women)?

I'll just point out here that all of this is not dependent on the person in question being transsexual. What about non-binary people? What about eunuchs (of whom we have at least one on BZ)? What if a bi guy want to bring a woman?  In point of fact, some bathhouses are open to both male and female on particular occasions, and at least one that I used to go to occasionally in SF (no idea if it's still open) was always open to both.

If you aren't comfortable with the rules of a particular space on a particular occasion, that's on you. Choose a different one. But IMO bathhouses are generally not so small that you can't just go there and say "no" politely if a person who approaches you isn't your cup of tea. And "yes" if they are. Which is what I believe is the proper interpretation of @brnbk's comment:

Quote

...i think bathhouses are about sexual freedoms, live and let live. 

10 hours ago, ellentonboy said:

I would like to pose this question to BZ members - at what age is too old?  Now I am smart enough to realize that this topic has already been discussed but I would like the 2024 versions.   Should there be no more than a certain number of years between the two (or three) guys involved?  

It gets very dicey to me, when I meet someone who is obviously sexually interested.  If he asks my age, do I tell him the real number (I mean the REAL number).????

I just don't want to cross the line and sleep with someone who I could have fathered .

I obviously am not holding a gun to anyone's head and telling them to get naked, but at some point I just would like to know what is "appropriate" rather than "inappropriate"

My rule of thumb is "mature enough to make a rational adult decision". Sometimes that means 25 is too young. Other times 19 is just fine. The other rule is "there is mutual attraction" - it takes two to tango, and if one guy isn't into the other, nobody is going to have good fun. Personally, I'm not particularly attracted to the twinkish types (I like my men to be men, not boys), but no judgment on those who do. And yeah, I fucked a 19-year-old a few months ago, and he came back for seconds (and thirds), and I'm technically old enough to be his grandfather. Is that inappropriate? Not according to my moral compass. Societal rules are a bunch of hooey most of the time.

Clearly he isn't me... When I'm chatting with a bottom I may be going to meet soon, I mostly want to see his face, because that's what I'm most sexually aroused by. For a pic of the ass, I prefer one that shows a good bit of the torso as well, because a disembodied ass isn't really erotic to me. If it's going to be a pic of just the ass (or hole) I'd prefer a pic of it being penetrated (or just about to be).

8 hours ago, DallasPozzible said:

Can someone tell me what the capitalized A is for in words like thAt?

I'm pretty certain "thAt" is just a typo.

Open for me. If I respect someone enough to have a real relationship with them, I respect them enough to tell them that I'm not wired for monogamy and I won't promise it to them or anyone. If they're not willing to have a relationship with me on those terms, then they aren't for me no matter how much I may love them. Been there, made that mistake. Dude got jealous even though I wasn't  cheating on him (apparently wandering eyes were too much for him). Pissed me off, though that wasn't actually what ended the relationship (emotional blackmail got there first).

8 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

Bigot is defined as: 

a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. - especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group

It's notable here that the main definition and the "especially" definition here actually are different in a fundamentally important way. "strongly and unfairly dislikes" refers to an individual's emotions and internal dialogue. "hates or refuses to accept" refers to an individual's actions and public dialogue. The first principally harms only the individual having the thoughts. The second principally harms the members of the target group.

This is why it's important for people to work at making that distinction for their own prejudices (and we ALL have them, because that is part of human nature). The arc of the moral universe may tend toward justice, but it does so a lot more readily if we all pitch in.

11 hours ago, bareall77 said:

I can't say exactly what it was about, just that it is called "Medical Student Tales." There's nothing illegal about this.  It just contains some keywords that can no longer be used

***To prove that I am being as careful about this as I can, I don't condone or support the wording of this hot tale. However, IT is a hot story.  If anyone has a clue about where I can find it, please send me a message.***

Because you're being vague about it, the only thing anyone can do is to search on the title - which isn't anywhere in the forum. Rest assured that you are unlikely to be suspended for asking a legitimate question.

That said, I did a search of this forum and found a story that (on a quick skim) seems pretty likely to be the one you're thinking of:

This is truly excellent! The psychological journey is fascinating, and the sex is hot AF. Thank you!

3 hours ago, sotrue said:

I haven’t had gay sex in 3 years and during that time I’ve had negative tests...

My first and only BB experience was 3 years ago...

Now, these false positives are scaring me, making me feel that I screwed up. I certainly don’t want to infect anyone else (I haven’t). 

Given that it sounds like you have been in a monogamous (heterosexual, though it doesn't particularly matter) relationship for the last 3 years, of course you couldn't be poz (unless your partner gave it to you). In fact, given the probabilities involved, I'm rather surprised that you were even bothering to test.

So my suggestion would be that you think through the issue and maybe look at the real math involved. And ask yourself why you were (illogically) worried enough to test, and scared by the false positives (when it was fairly clear that that was the only realistic likelihood). If there's some unresolved psychological issue or fear going on, take care of that so that it doesn't make your life miserable. Because having a healthy respect for the risks of sexual activity is prudent and sensible, but having unreasonable and unrealistic fear of them is a recipe for unneeded unhappiness.

I understand the knee-jerk reaction of fear of a lethal disease (I've had it myself), but the scientific reality of HIV in the 2020's is a very long way from what it was in the 1980's.

On 12/2/2023 at 9:57 PM, ellentonboy said:

He did crystal, and plastic surgery?

That's diversification of income streams, son.  And beautifully dovetailed marketing - both products share a common audience. 😄

This has been an issue for nearly a year. @rawTOP is aware of it and will take care of it if and when he can. Because the chat is built on a completely different software platform than the rest of the site, and because he has a replacement based on different technology in the works, this is not a high priority.

45 minutes ago, Close2MyBro said:

No amount of hormone replacement therapy is going to change an XX chromosome set to an XY or vice versa. We're all entitled to our own opinions. I would consider it absurd to expect everyone else to adopt a false science simply because you and others may choose to. You can "identify" with whatever you choose to, but that choice will never change the truth. If I wanted to identify as a tree, that's my right, correct? But that will never make me a tree.

I'm hardly adopting false science. Quite the contrary, I'm agreeing with established science which clearly demonstrates that chromosomes are not 100% correlated with phenotype. This is hardly news, it's been known for nearly a century at this point.

Also, you miss the point I was making (perhaps I was too subtle) - that gay men in general can be (and are, by some people) construed as not being "real" men, because they don't fuck women, they do get fucked, and they don't procreate. So are we going to throw them out of the bathhouse, too?

Blanket generalizations don't work well in this sort of discussion.

To view the whole thing from a different angle, the question under discussion in this thread is trans men in bathhouses. Therefore, the relevant consideration is whether they are appropriate people for the activities the discussion participants prefer to engage in at a bathhouse. It's for each of us to decide how much bearing their chromosomes, their musculature, their body hair, and their genitalia (as well as all their other characteristics) have on that. But to decree that one particular characteristic or another is the only one that matters for all the people in the conversation is absurd. You may care about the dude's chromosomes when you're getting hot and heavy, but I assure you I don't give a flying fuck. And I say that with firsthand experience to back up my assertion for my own opinion in this case (although said experience was not in a bathhouse).

In other words, if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, who cares if it's really a coot, a grebe, or a loon? Apart from the game warden, of course.