Hotload84

One might argue if there isn't one or more who got away, one has never truly lived.

A complicated, multi-layered relationship, TheBreeder. What a mess!

Yuck. Having just cleaned-up after my diarrhetic dog, I'm sympathetic, Pulzer. Your description "visually [...]similar to a melted Snickers bar" is perfect. Oh course the aromatic qualities are of a different sort. Yuck.

Very well written, Felch_u-now. Thanks for posting!

Thank you, Gymguy8. I've been hoping someone would post the second part of the Photographing Jason story.

Not wishing to squash any Lincoln fantasies but historically, same sex bed partners were a fairly frequent occurrence in cold regions for reasons of warmth. There is much that I dislike about Clinton, but he could fuck me in a heart beat!

You're right, Belfast-Bottom. In addition, given the very real possibility of a short-fall in beds, same-sex bed partners was also common. For what it's worth, here's the Wikipedia discussion about Lincoln and his same-sex bed partners.

"...in 19th century America men commonly bunked with other men. For example, when lawyers and judges traveled 'the circuit' with Lincoln, the lawyers often slept 'two in a bed and eight in a room'. William H. Herndon recalled, 'I have slept with 20 men in the same room'. A tabulation of historical sources shows that Lincoln slept with at least 11 boys and men during his youth and adulthood. There are no known instances in which Lincoln tried to suppress knowledge or discussion of such arrangements, and in some conversations, raised the subject himself. [Author] Tripp discusses three of them at length: Joshua Speed, William Greene, and Charles Derickson.

Relationship with Joshua Speed

Lincoln met Joshua Fry Speed in Springfield, Illinois, in 1837. They lived together for four years, during which time they occupied the same bed during the night (some sources specify a large double bed) and developed a friendship that would last until their deaths. According to some sources, William Herndon and a fourth man also slept in the same room. Historians such as Donald point out it was not unusual at that time for two men to share even a small bed due to financial or other circumstances, without anything sexual being implied. Putting the issue in historical perspective, Jonathan Ned Katz wrote of the bed sharing:

At the start of the twenty-first century it may even be difficult to imagine a man, especially a bachelor,

offering another a place in his bed without some conscious fear or desire that the proposition will be

understood as a come-on. In the nineteenth century, Speed was probably not conscious of any such

erotic possibility. His immediate, casual offer, and his later report of it, suggests that men's bed sharing

was not then often explicitly understood as conducive to forbidden sexual experiments.

[Author] Katz does indicate that such sleeping arrangements 'did provide an important site (probably the major site) of erotic opportunity'. Katz notes that referring to present day concepts of "homo, hetero, and bi distort our present understanding of Lincoln and Speed's experiences" and that rather than there being 'an unchanging essence of homosexuality and heterosexuality' people throughout history 'continually reconfigure their affectionate and erotic feelings and acts'. He suggests that the Lincoln-Speed relationship fell within the 19th century category of 'intense, even romantic man to man friendships' with erotic overtones that may have been 'a world apart in that era's consciousness from the sensual universe of mutual masturbation and the legal universe of 'sodomy,' 'buggery,' and 'the crime against nature'. Possibly, correspondence of the period, such as that between Thomas Jefferson Withers and James Henry Hammond, provides clear evidence of a sexual dimension to some same-sex bed sharing. The fact that Lincoln was open about the fact that they had shared a bed is seen by some historians as an indication that their relationship was not romantic. None of Lincoln's enemies hinted at any homosexual implication.

Joshua Speed married Fanny Hennings on February 15, 1842, and the two men seem to have consulted each other about married life. Despite having some political differences over slavery, they corresponded for the rest of their lives and Lincoln appointed Joshua's brother, James Speed, to his cabinet as Attorney General.

My original post was edited by the moderator. I'm not going argue over the reason, but the edit removed an element that really formed the heart of the message.

For that reason, I would recommend eliminating my original post completely. Thanks.

Hi, RawPozLust.

I'm the only moderator (of which I know) on the site, and I don't seem to have edited your posting about sex with priests. And when I do edit postings, it's usually to correct syntax, spelling and to address ambiguities with the wording. But as remarked, I don't see any indication I edited your posting.

I'm curious - what was edited out? For that matter, can't you edit your own posting and re-insert the deleted language?

You're right, A6uldeve84u. There is a great deal of speculation with Lincoln. Apparently, in addition to his bed partner back when Lincoln was in his twenties, as president Lincoln took a great interest in one of his body guards as well as a certain Union soldier. For what it's worth, however, unlike Buchanan, Lincoln's friendships with males didn't raise any eyebrows.

At the very least, historians seem agreed that Lincoln preferred the company of men to that of women. To paraphrased one source I recently read, '...there are ample records of Lincoln's interest in men, but there is record of his involvement with only one woman, Mary Todd Lincoln....'

Almost never, if only because most of the time the priests are not physically enticing. Occasionally, however, I'll see a seminarian who strikes my fancy. More often I'll see fellow parishioners who really get my juices flowing - not exactly a time or place conducive to prurience.

However I did have sex once with an Episcopalian priest - he was a the Adonis in Philly ministering to the guys. I learned he was a priest when, at his invitation, I arrived at his house. We had a fun time.

I have to say that "Franklin Pierce" is really good looking! One never thinks of him when recalling presidents...I didn't know that Buchanan was Gay!...and I never heard of Rufus King! You learn something every day! LOL

We will probably never know for sure, Bobbie, but certainly some historians think he was queer. At very least the historical record is murky.

Curious, TheBreeder. Since we'll probably never know what was up with Neo, your supposition of his being a sexual Cylon is as good an explanation as any. [sigh]

For better or worse, I've never gotten that good at sex in darkrooms, whether we're talking as a top or bottom.

The of all our choices so far, is that no one has named James Buchanan, the only president from Pennsylvania, and that president who was, in the opinion of many historians, most-likely to have been queer.

I took a tour of his house in (very Republican) Lancaster, Penna., and the docent never once mentioned Buchanan's boy-toy, Rufus King. Of course being somewhat bitchy, I made it a point of pissing on her parade by bringing-up the question of the relationship between the two men. The docent was not pleased I dared to raise the question, but I think most of the other folks on the tour were amused.

It will be interesting to see if, at the trial, the DA plays-up the meth-for-queer-sex element. People love prurience, especially when someone else is targeted.

As an aside, I gotta say, Sean Moss, AKA Joshua Berlin, has (had?) a beautifully furry ass:

http://www.badpuppy.com/guest/models/Twinks/j/joshuaberlin/default.asp

No one is above temptation, I suppose. Guess that's why the Pater Noster concludes with the phrase "...lead us not into temptation...."

Like you, Truverspi, rimming and felching are probably my favorite sexual activity. While unfortunately I seldom get to felch a cum-laden hole, to my pleasure, most guys seem to be happy to get rimmed.

Assuming the bath house about which Dan is talking was CBC, I was there on Wednesday, the 1/2 price day. I'm sorry to say I didn't have nearly as good a time as Dan. The place was virtually deserted. I did, however, get to suck a beautiful uncut cock in the dark room - no cum, but great tasting pre-cum!

I think I'd be happy with either Rutherford B. Hayes or his successor, James A. Garfield. Those full beards do it for me, every time.

Published: Saturday, December 03, 2011, 12:01 AM

By NICK MALAWSKEY, The Patriot-News

The Milton Hershey School is standing behind a decision to refuse admission to a 13-year-old because he has HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, on the grounds that admitting the teen would pose a direct threat to the school’s 1,800 other students. The stance, which is the subject of a federal civil lawsuit filed Wednesday by the AIDS Law Project in Philadelphia, quickly drew national attention to the private residential school in Derry Township as both sides prepared for a court fight. Specifically, school officials say that while it is not condoned, there is no way to stop their students from having sex with each other. And because students do have sex, admitting a child with HIV would constitute a “direct threat” to other students.

CHRIS KNIGHT, The Patriot-News, 2011

Spartan Commons on the campus of the Milton Hershey School in Derry Township

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the school could be allowed to reject the student’s admission on that basis. However HIV and AIDS attorneys reject that argument, pointing to court decisions regarding other institutional settings, like foster care or youth detention facilities — where the possibility of sexual contact also exists — that have determined that merely carrying HIV does not make a person a direct threat to others. “I think case law all points to a direction that this is not a ‘direct threat,’ ” said Scott Schoettes of Lambda Legal, a national civil rights organization.

The school’s attorney, Robert Duston, a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Saul Ewing, however said that while courts have looked at the direct threat standard to HIV and have discussed sexual conduct in other settings, such as a prison or in foster care, they have not addressed it as it applies to a residential child care facility. “We believe that this is a case of first impression and presents a novel issue on how the ADA applies in this unique setting,” he said, later adding that neither he nor the school are “aware of any court that has addressed the risks of consensual sexual activity between minors in a residential elementary and secondary school setting such as the Milton Hershey School.”

“I want to be very clear about this. We made this decision because we believed it’s the right one,” said Connie McNamara, school spokeswoman. “It’s a difficult decision.”

School officials said they decided to reject the student’s application after reviewing his case on an individual basis, but it is a decision they would make again. “If a student comes to us with an active, chronic communicable disease that we believe under the ADA laws rises to the level that it is a direct threat to the health and safety of the students — if that disease rises to that level, then we will not admit that student,” McNamara said. HIV/AIDS attorneys disagree with that stance.

Bill McColl of AIDS United in Washington, D.C., said he found the situation quite perplexing. “I think it’s quite unusual, actually,” he said, after reviewing the school’s legal documents. “I have to admit, I have never heard of this situation before.” But, he added, that doesn’t mean he believes the school’s arguments hold water. “Most people in the field believe this question has been asked and answered,” he said. Still, cases of this nature do occasionally arise, he said. Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice fined a Puerto Rican cosmetology school that denied admission to a woman with HIV $5,000. The justice department also forced the school to make an offer of enrollment to the complainant and cease requesting applicants’ HIV/AIDS status.

McColl said most cases are driven by a basic misunderstanding of the virus. Transmission is rare. ... It’s not like you ‘just get’ HIV,” he said, adding that even in the highest-transmission risk scenario, there is still only a 1-in-50 chance someone will be infected with HIV. Modern drug therapies are showing evidence of allowing people with HIV to have sex with noninfected individuals without transmitting the virus.

“I suspect this is a combination of fear of a lawsuit and not knowing the facts on HIV,” he said. “It’s a fascinating case ... that I suppose goes to how comfortable we are living with the disease.”

For others, the case doesn’t hold fascination as much as it prods them toward anger.

Phil Goropoulos, president of Alder Health Services in Harrisburg, described the school’s decision as “insane, illegal and inappropriate.” “Discrimination happens all the time ... but usually it’s subtle,” he said. “You would think 31 years later we would be beyond this.” Goropoulos said one of his biggest concerns was the message being sent by the school to the community, which could discourage people from getting tested for HIV/AIDS for fear of discrimination or other consequences. “That’s not what they’re trying to do, but it’s a consequence of their actions,” he said.

TheBreeder, you encountered that rara avis: a genuinely stupid homosexual.

The ratio of those under care to those without satisfactory care is amazing. Only 28%! This came true for a neighbor of mine who, after resisting his mother's urges for several weeks, finally went to see a doctor, only to discover the guy, (who has known for years he was poz), had a severe case of pneumonia. It took three weeks in the hospital to address the pneumonia. Turns-out the guy had been ignoring the HIV infection, and had not been taking his meds. Very sad. Hope he (and his family) have learned the lesson.

I would imagine an individual who mentions elsewhere he was hit-up 653 times in a two week span might have this dilemma. My apology if the number I've cited is amiss, TheBreeder.

You're right, Andydeck. The videos are exceptional.

"I'm in the 'why are you even discussing this' camp. I can be as political as anyone, but these discussions do not belong in the context of sex."

Well put, MascMountainMan. This would be my take. I don't think I've ever been targeted with political analysis in post (or pre-) coital engagement, but were I, I think I'd abruptly remove myself from the scene.

Naw - my family was the very personification of modesty so, while growing up, nudity was unknown. Aside from the near-nudity of bath houses, I still am very reticent to expose my body to the public, whether at a pool or working outside in the garden. I don't even wear shorts - I joke with friends that no one has seen my legs in decades.