BootmanLA

Just to be clear: none of that stuff was actually "free" or "what we did for each other"; someone had to pay the thousands of dollars a month for high-speed connections, servers, and so forth. You might not have paid for a membership but someone - lots of someones - had to fork out the money to keep it going. Those someones included the people who DID pay for memberships, as well as the advertisers who funded the sites. Let's not kid ourselves into believing that before "big bidness" got involved, xtube and the like were hippie communes of sharing funded out of the goodness of all the participants' hearts. They were always businesses; the business model just changed, because it had to.

FWIW, most guys I know in relationships don't let the top/bottom part spill over out of the bedroom into the rest of their lives. There's no reason the bottom should do all the chores, particularly if (as is the case with me) I substantially out earn my partner and work longer hours. What you're describing is less top/bottom and more dom/sub, and in particular a dom/sub relationship that is not bedroom/playroom limited.

I gather that the poster is the one paying for the room, since he's the visitor to the area, and he'll just be away from the room while the bottom guy shows up and gets himself ready. His identity is going to be known to the staff, obviously.

I'll add, to DrScorpio's official response: this isn't, primarily, a hook-up site. It's a discussion forum, and being both (a) international in its reach and (b) fairly esoteric in its subject matter, the odds of finding someone near enough, and willing, to carry out that purpose aren't that promising. It's not out of the question, but I suspect no more than a handful of guys have gotten pozzed from contacts made on this site.

It ordinarily is. But HIV acts differently in different people, whose immune systems may be in different conditions due to other factors; and the fact that there are lots of mutated strains out there means you can't really be sure of anything with out actual testing.

It's not impossible for this to have been an HIV infection incident, but it sounds more like (to me) that you picked up some other bug - flu, or whatever - from him.

No Democrat I know said he was not "duly elected" - including his opponent, Hillary Clinton, who conceded to him late that night after the results were clear. We said - correctly - that adversary foreign governments worked to get him elected, a fact confirmed by both the Mueller investigation AND the GOP-Senate Intelligence Committee report. We did trash him, but that's because he's trash. And unlike Clinton, Trump has STILL never conceded that he lost. Like Trump, Bush 43 became president despite losing the popular vote - and the slimmest of margins in the electoral college, winning by one electoral vote from a state he carried by fewer than 550 votes, in an election ALL sides agreed was marred by bad ballots and bad counting equipment. Yes, I do. Trump gets lots of morons to show up at his rallies, but that's not an indication of anything except how fervently his core believers worship his ass. There are many, many millions of sensible voters in this country who don't feel the need to get out, especially in a pandemic (that the incumbent was ignoring), to make themselves feel important by cheering on a moron like Trump. Of course people should be able to ask questions. But they were asked, and answered, and Trump didn't like the answers. They recounted and retallied and checked machines for accuracy and the bottom line is, he still lost. Trump can't believe it because sociopaths like him can't believe there are that many people who hate his guts - but there are. I think any number of other Republicans could have beaten Biden last year, just like any number of other Democrats could have beaten Trump in 2016 (he got lucky that his Democratic opponent was the woman the GOP despises the most). As for trying to overthrow the government: Biden was duly elected. The electoral college voted for him, 306-232, over Trump. The counting of those ballots was a foregone conclusion and is supposed to be ministerial unless there are actually competing slates of votes both duly authorized by a state (no state submitted more than one slate). Pence correctly understood he had to duly count those votes, and for that act of conscience Trump urged his supporters to swarm the capitol and "stop the steal" - ie force Congress to award him the presidency instead. Where I come from, overriding the voters to keep the outgoing loser in office is precisely overthrowing the duly elected government in favor of, well, a dictatorship. And he was only stopped at the cost of several lives.

I already had minor issues with A1C before switching to Biktarvy, which my HIVdoctor did due to elevated creatinine levels. On my nephrologist's recommendation my HIV specialist switched my diabetes treatment to Glymiperide, which, like Biktarvy, is also kidney friendly. Even after dropping to every other day dosing for the Glymiperide, my A1C has been below 5.5 since. So while the Biktarvy may be slightly boosting your blood sugar level, it may also be easy to bring under control.

I think it might be a little confusing in that the site is organized inconsistently with regard to when subforums are used and when they aren't. Not that it's an invalid way to organize, but.... For example, General has one sub forum - politics - and then lots of individual topics. Sex Health has four sub forums, but lots of other individual topics. But the Backroom area has sub forums, and every topic has to fit within a sub forum. I've often wondered whether a similar structure wouldn't be better for Sex Health, requiring all topics to fit in one or another sub forum, including a Miscellaneous Sexual Health section. I don't think the General Discussion area really lends itself to that kind of organization, since the topics are all over the board. But by the same token, Politics is much more focused; perhaps it almost merits a forum level boost? It's not necessarily as important as, say, General or Sex Health. But it *IS* as distinct a focus.

You can view anything as anything you choose, including viewing yourself as some sort of victim for shitposting. Doesn't make it actually true.

Skim through this particular thread, reading any post by the owner (RawTop) or one of the moderators (usually, DrScorpio). But read them all - sometimes, rules change, and it's a subsequent post that clarifys/explains/changes what's allowed. For instance, bestiality was, at one time, a permitted topic, but it's not prohibited throughout this site. A post noting it was allowed was later updated to reflect that the topic is now prohibited.

I would say apparently yes - there are references throughout. While chem sex belongs elsewhere, I think any STD would be at least allowed, if not relevant, for this forum.

As I tell everyone else: Engage in the discussions. Find something that's posted recently that hasn't been talked to death, and express an opinion. Ask questions (in the right places). The more posts you make, the more engaged you are, the sooner you'll reach that status. There are any number of threads on this site that, even if old, people keep going. Some are asking for stuff like the last time you had sex, or who likes X or Y or Z. Express an opinion, even if it's not something you feel incredibly strongly about. There are many topics in the Bareback porn section that ask for members' favorite <fill in the blank: film, Top porn actor, Bottom porn actor, breeding scene, felching scene, whatever). Answer the question. The formula of how many posts, in how many areas, how many likes/dislikes your posts get, etc - as well as how long, in total, you have to be a member to advance from one status to the next - is not public. But aside from any time limits (say, if you can't move up more than one level every two weeks), there's no reason you couldn't rapidly advance to get most, if not all, of the privileges that go with advanced membership levels.

I'm not sure what you mean here. In almost every forum, there is a folder/thread near the top or at the top that tells you what you can and can't post there. There are also descriptions of each forum alongside the names of the forum. While I can understand there are some nuances that are not picked up there - for instance, the rule that you can't go into detail about chems and sex *except* in the backroom areas set aside for that - the site is pretty organized. The #1 misplaced posting thing I see, day in and day out (as a user, I'm not staff) is people who think every forum is an opportunity for a personal ad. There ARE, in fact, personal ad sections, down on the list - you have to scroll a bit to get to them - but they're there, AND guess what - they ARE organized geographically, with breakouts for parts of countries or countries themselves. So unless you think there's a reason to have, say, a UK Sexual Health forum and a US Sexual Health forum and a Germany Sexual Health forum, etc. etc. ad infinitum, I can't see what parts of the system should be "specific countries".

Telling other members to "give it a reprieve" is not respectful. It's trying to tell other people what they should and shouldn't post, IN A FORUM SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED FOR POSTS ON THAT VERY TOPIC. If you call that "flaming", well,... snowflakes do have a tendency to melt in the slightest heat.

I'm wondering if the sweatiness isn't what's causing the dreams - your skin feels the sweat and the tshirt moving on it, and translates that into skin being removed.

This. Is. A. Political. Forum. JFC, how hard is it to NOT enter a forum about politics if you don't want to read about politics? Are you so incapable of self-control that if you see the word "Politics" in the title, you are drawn inescapably to read whatever is posted there? There are things I don't want to read about here, like, say, chem sex. Guess what? I don't go into those forums! Amazing how that works - somehow, magically, if you don't open up a forum in which you're not interested, YOU DON'T SEE POSTS ON THAT TOPIC! It's almost magical how it works! Talk about "give it a reprieve".

That is the death grip that Trumpism has, on the testicles of the Republican Party. Several senators have commented that if the vote to convict or acquit could be done by secret ballot, there wouldn't be ten votes for acquittal in the Senate. They KNOW how dangerous he is. But it's been demonstrated, over and over, that if you're a GOP senator in a state that's solidly Republican, opposing Trump means you will be primaried out by a challenger within your own party, if you're not forced to drop out because you don't think you stand a chance. That's one reason most of the rational Republicans - not necessarily even moderates, just those who are conscientious about their role in our republic - have been retiring rather than face the choice of supporting Trump or getting beaten. They were warned, after the previous impeachment: if you allow him to get away with this, trying to rig the election in his favor, he will be back, doing it again, only worse. And so here we are. And yet they still refuse to act. There is no saving the GOP at this point.

Playing devil's advocate here: it may be that asking if you want it is his cue for you to beg for it... or even to pretend you don't, so he can tell you "tough shit, you're getting it anyway". Hard to judge what he's going for out of context.

Some people are completely uninterested in complex topics and science because they interfere with innate bigotry and prejudices.

Eros, I think in reading over your post it struck me: to answer the "What does it mean to be a Man?" question with another question, the response is "As opposed to what?" How you define a man, as opposed to a woman, focuses on different traits than defining a man as opposed to a boy. As does defining a man as opposed to an animal. Without specifying the axis along which one is locating "man", no single meaning is going to capture the entirety of "man".

In the incontinence products aisles for most drug and grocery stores, you can find "booster" inserts for adult diaper type products - basically, an absorbent pad you can use inside the diaper to increase its holding capacity, typically for overnight use. Just keep a few in your car, slip one between your cheeks before you get in to drive home, and that should keep most everything from reaching your pants. Then you can toss it (or whatever else you may choose) when you get home.

I don't see what the problem is. It sounds to me like people who are pro-cheating want a "safe space" so that they don't have to deal with anyone questioning the wisdom of that practice. In spaces where stealthing is discussed, people are allowed to be anti-stealthing and to cast aspersions on that activity. In spaces where people talk about wanting to take loads but don't want to be on meds, people who are pro-PrEP are free to express an opinion about that. On this very forum, there has been a lot of discussion about the wisdom/appropriateness of hooking up during Covid lockdowns. I don't see any "own space" for people who are determined to have sex with strangers despite the pandemic. What makes pro-cheating so special that we have to treat those people like precious snowflakes who will wilt if they're called out on their behavior? FYI: Nobody's saying stealing is a sexual practice. We're saying that you can draw analogies from the non-sexual world into the sexual one, because sex is not some special, magical, disconnected from the entire remainder of the universe where only sexual rules apply. Sex occurs between PEOPLE, and people create "established social norms" precisely so that people can interact without having to constantly be on alert as to whether or not someone's out to screw you over (that being a sexual term imported into general parlance). Yes, of course, cheaters are going to cheat. I'm still asking: why should pro-cheaters be entitled to a safe space so their little snowflake feelings won't get hurt? Sounds kinda sad for people who are edgily trying to "contradict established social norms" to me.

Another suggestion - not sure if it's possible with the existing software. The red "dot" or "star" next to each thread in a forum indicates new content (stars on the ones you've participated in, dots otherwise). It would be nice if there was a separate designation for a completely new thread (as opposed to just "new comments"). It would be especially useful in, say, the fiction areas, but in any forum where a user routinely looks for all-new content - say, new questions in the health area - it would be easier to find truly "new" things as opposed to the forty-seventh person swearing they've never touched a condom.

This is true. That said, one of the things about cheating is that it was (ordinarily) kept very discreet, in part so that the facade of the "norm" being fidelity was upheld. It was also because it was considered rude and distasteful to involve other people in your deceptions, so that if the cheated-on party found out, she (it was almost always a she) didn't have the additional humiliation of knowing that everyone in their social orbit was aware and keeping his secret. And while cheating men were cut a lot more slack than cheating women, if they abused that privilege, they could be deemed socially unacceptable and effectively banished from polite society. It's also important to note that cheating, to the extent that it was discreetly accepted, was only so treated because there was a broad social rejection of the idea of open relationships period. We don't have that restriction so much any more; for better or worse, we recognize that less-conventional arrangements like polygamous relationships, like open marriages, like having both a husband and a boyfriend, are acceptable options for people. That's because we've come to value open and honest discussions of, and explorations of, our sexuality over lying and cheating and sneaking around. In some ways, it's an extension of the idea that it's okay to be openly gay, instead of being a "lifelong bachelor" or worse, a gay man married for social purposes who slinks off to the baths or sex clubs late at night. And that, in my opinion, is a good thing. Suggesting that we should be helpful to people trying to deliberately deceive others, to destroy their trust, is shitty. What advice would you give to someone who, say, is turned on by stealing from his partner in order to feather his own nest? "Here's some helpful tips to conceal your embezzlement"? Encourage him to get as much as he can early on, so that if things turn south, he's got a head start on his ill-gotten gains? How is this, really, any different? I get it - some people are turned on by cheating, and some people get off on reading about other people's cheating. That doesn't mean every place online needs to become a refuge for the pro-cheating crowd, just as not every place online needs to become welcoming to pro-breeding.