BootmanLA
-
Posts
4,001 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by BootmanLA
-
If you could possess a supernatural power, what would it be?
BootmanLA replied to Sharp-edge's topic in General Discussion
You could always shape-shift into an SR-71 Blackbird that can fly at 2,250 miles per hour, and thus be able to get to almost any destination within half a day or less, then shift back (and shift into other shapes as needed for fun). -
Fair point, if that were the case, but looking at the responses with multiple "There is nothing better thans", it's pretty clear that's NOT the case.
-
I concentrated in my initial responses on the legal issues involved since that was the primary concern expressed in the beginning. That said: I will add I think the leaving immediately was fine, but honestly, the name-calling was over-the-top. As others have noted, a person has the ability to withdraw consent at any point, and while he did so with no grace whatsoever - as you say, he was freaking out - as the more experienced "dom top" it really was kind of on you to stop, reassess, and end the scene with as little drama as possible. What that comment probably did, unfortunately, is cement in his mind his impression that you're dangerous - someone who gets angry when he can't get what he wants, and in his (no doubt poorly-informed and inexperienced) mind, he probably does feel like he just barely escaped being raped. A stern lecture before leaving wouldn't have been out of place - "Look, when you advertise you want a dominant top, you may end up with more than you expected. You need to do some serious thinking about what you really want before you try this again with someone else". The name-calling, though - that was just cruel; and I get it, your ego was bruised and you were cock-blocked in the moment, so emotional responses running high, but still: you're the experienced one, you have the responsibility of bowing out without making things worse. Too late now, but food for thought for the future.
-
Your memory is again faulty. "It used to be" that if a guy whistled at a girl and she wasn't interested, she was called a stuck-up cunt and other people demanded to know what she was wearing because, of course, anything less than a nun's habit or an abaya was tantamount to advertising that she "wanted it". THAT is how it "used to be." Women who told a man to "fuck off" were often then deemed "that kind of girl" and could be lucky to escape without being physically assaulted. Maybe, just maybe - bear with me now, expand your mind, think about this - MAYBE the fucking pigs should assume that calling attention to a woman's physical appearance and attractiveness in public with a wolf whistle is a shitty thing to do, instead of defending these guys because oh, poor little babies, they're getting sued by the mean nasty lady who got tired of their shit? Fuck this business of assuming that a man's public, macho, compensating-for-something sexual innuendos and overtures are just natural behavior we have to accept. As I point out, shitting on the ground wherever you happen to be is "natural behavior" but last I checked, we had evolved past that.
-
There can be scars. They're not guaranteed. And scarring, in general, can be treated to some degree. This is not to downplay monkeypox at all - merely to point out that scars are not inevitable, nor are they necessarily horrible to look at.
-
Well... not really. Women have, historically, been pressured into something sexual far more than men (and thus the new law is a boon to them, and given the predatory history of so many men over the decades, I'm not really bothered by that). Even if men sometimes feel pressured into doing something, sexually, that they end up wishing they hadn't, I don't think most are going to raise a ruckus. But again, that's why I think communication is so critical, though it needn't be formulaic and sterile. Asking someone online "What's on/off the table? Oral, anal, kissing, some rough play?" not only gives you a better idea of what he does or doesn't want - and maybe weed out someone who plays at too low or too high a level for you - but it provides documentation of what he said, so at least consent can be inferred if you didn't cross any stated boundaries. In the recent condom case, the Canadian supreme court was divided, but ultimately held that because the woman had specifically and unequivocally said "no condom, no fuck" (not those words, but...), it was the responsibility of the guy to clarify, when he penetrated her the second round without a condom, that this was OK. He didn't, and admitted he didn't (his excuse was "she should have felt for whether there was one and said something"). So I don't think it's as big a disaster as you think it might be. Even if someone files charges, they're not going to show up and arrest a person based on what the other person said unless there's physical evidence of an actual assault. They may question the other person intensively, of course, but I don't think cops are going to bring a case of sexual assault when the person set up the meeting online and all that happened was some rough kissing.
-
It's kind of late now, but deleting your account was probably overkill and possibly unwise. If anything were ever to come of it, having access to your messages (if they go back that far in your history) would be a good defense point. If I recall correctly, several years back, Canada rewrote its laws on sexual assault, removing the specific term "rape" from the law and instead broadening the definition of "sexual assault" to include all forms of non-consensual sex. (There was a case recently clarifying that sex without a condom, when one is requested, is sexual assault, for instance). Unfortunately, that broadening of the law also means that unwanted kissing - if he can prove it was unwanted (and, presumably, that you knew it was unwanted) can be considered sexual assault. That's one reason why the old-fashioned negotiation for BDSM scenes - what's okay, what's not okay, what depends on context - was so valuable, and if more people practiced that (despite its lack of "sexiness" when you're already horny and wanting to fuck), ESPECIALLY with online hookups where there can be a nice little electronic trail of what the person agreed to, there would be fewer false charges of sexual assault (and not just in Canada).
-
As some of you may know, since its colonial era Singapore has considered same-sex sexual acts criminal, punishable by up to two years in prison. Earlier this year, the Singapore Court of Appeal ruled that prosecutions under this section could not continue, and this week the Prime Minister of Singapore announced that his party would press legislation to repeal that law. On the downside, he also reiterated his country's opposition to same-sex marriage, noting that his party plans to push to put a ban on such into the Singapore constitution. So, one step forward, one step backward. In truth, Singapore is not that out of step with most of southeast Asia. Taiwan is (I believe) the only country in the region that recognizes same-sex marriages, while Thailand is at least granting more recognition to same-sex couples (adoption rights, joint asset holding, etc.) while not actually recognizing same-sex unions yet.
-
- 2
-
-
Suggestion on site restrictions
BootmanLA replied to BootmanLA's topic in Tips, Tricks, Rules & Help
and There is an extensive thread on the ability to react to posts elsewhere here in this very forum. Perhaps these comments would be better addressed there. -
I'll add in my experience just in case it's relevant for anyone. Here in Louisiana, the initial ration of doses was relatively small - about a thousand for the entire state, if I recall correctly. First batch of those went to people who were already reporting having had contact with someone who'd subsequently developed monkeypox (that was a small number, since our caseload was small at that point; still below 150 today). After that, they were portioned off primarily to clinics in the state that deal with HIV and other infectious diseases, based on caseloads and population counts. When I contacted my HIV doctor's office about whether they would be having the shots, they confirmed they not only had the vaccine but were already prepared to administer it. I'd called during lunch, and they told me if I could come in for 2:00 they would work me in. Showed up, the NP got the shot, and I was out the door in less than 5 minutes total, including a short wait while she was retrieving the vaccine from the cold storage in the pharmacy. Couldn't have gone smoother, honestly. They also booked me for my second dose for one month later while I was there, although we agreed that if there was a change in directive to limit doses to the first one for now (to extend the supply) that might change. The shot left a little hard welt on my arm that's still there today (a week later) and the skin there is a bit darker red than my normal skin tone - in a spot about as big as a dime. I'm going to check with them again Monday to see if that's enough out of the ordinary for me to swing by for them to look at, but I don't think it is. It's also a little bit tender, but not achy. It doesn't itch.
-
Worked up? Hardly. You'd know if I were worked up. Put another way: I've seen guys laid face down in a sling before, being fucked with all four limbs hanging over the sides/ends. Is that the same "position" as someone on his back, wrists grabbing or restrained to the chains from which the sling is hung? After all, it is "in a sling". If I were to say my favorite position was "in a soybean field" or "in my garage", would that convey any meaning about what the position actually looked like or how it worked? “When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things."
-
Going against the general wave of "I should be able to do more sooner!" posts here, I'd like to suggest one more way of tightening down, at least for RawTop to think about. I'd suggest that new members not be allowed to create entirely new topics/threads in any forum until they've posted at least X number of replies to existing topics/threads (assuming that's possible with the forum software). What number "X" should be, I can't say, but not excessive - something like 5 or 10. This should force anyone who's new to at least look for an existing topic that might cover their question/point/whatever, and hopefully keep discussions together rather than separated. As a side benefit, I think some familiarity with the system organization, and reading more posts and how this community operates, would help them when they do gain the ability to create a topic. I've noticed a spate lately of topics that are almost incoherent (possibly due to language issues, possibly not) and all seem to be from people who have posting histories in the single digits. I recognize this means one more thing people can't do "from the start" but I also think this has more upside than downside.
-
All of which may be true, but they don't address the question. Every time, without fail, that I've seen "positions for sex" illustrated for comparison, there's no reference to furniture, surface, or whatever. "Position" is always illustrated as the relationship between the two bodies fucking. Doggy style is still doggy style, even if you're resting your chest on a footstool or pile of pillows. Standing/bent over is still standing/bent over, whether or not you're bending over a deck railing or just supporting yourself. And I still contend, on your back with legs raised is on your back with legs raised, regardless of whether your back is in contact with the floor, a table, a sling, or a stack of National Geographic magazines with the pages stuck together from decades of spunk splattering on pictures of half-dressed natives of foreign lands. A sling may be more comfortable; it may (or may NOT) be "at the height that is actually calculated to be the best" for people - I've seen slings at varying heights in places across the country. Height is a matter of personal choice. Some slings don't have stirrups or ankle cuffs. None of that has to do with "sexual position". They're details - important details to some, but it's not a position.
-
How many guys are into satanic beliefs? Satanic religion? Why
BootmanLA replied to virginpig14's topic in General Discussion
My primary objection to this line of "thought" is your choice of the phrase "want to be", as though gender identity is a matter of desire. There is no difference between that and the idiotic notion among certain heterosexuals that being gay is just a matter of "choosing" to be attracted to the same sex. I knew, at a fairly young age, that it was other male in which I had an interest. Zero interest, really, in girls as potential dates or romantic partners or whatever. And why was that a problem? Because I knew - absolutely KNEW - that I was a boy, even without looking down at my genitals. Growing up in a household and extended family dominated by women, I had plenty of examples of different types of females, spanning the gamut from 1960's housewives to teenage Brady Bunch clones to old maid lesbian great-aunts who did exactly how they please - and never once had any inkling that I was one of them. If I as a boy could be so certain I was male, I could also see how a person born and identified as male at birth could nonetheless be absolutely certain she was female as well. That doesn't automatically dictate the policies we should adopt, but it does suggest rather strongly (to me, at least) that we need to take young people who question their assigned-at-birth sex seriously. -
Not to be too pedantic, but isn't that covered by "on back legs in air"? "In a sling" to me is a location option rather than a body configuration one. After all, you're in the same position whether you're in a sling, on a table, on a bed, on the ground, or whatever. Granted, the details are a little different - there's typically something to support your legs being up in the air, for instance - but is that really a "position"?
-
I think (some) gay men also idealize straight men, or men they *think* are straight but *might* be a bit flexible for them, thinking that such men are somehow better than the run-of-the-mill gay men they know.
-
From Pastor to Pozzed Hole
BootmanLA replied to Heir2012's topic in Bug Chasing & Gift Giving FICTION
I specifically gave the example of authors inviting readers to help direct the story as a case where that kind of "they should do this" feedback is acceptable. And when you write your stories, feel free to ask for that kind of feedback. More power to you. And yes, authors *can* ignore those suggestions if they didn't ask for them. My point is that the suggestions, when not solicited, are rude, whether or not the author acknowledges them or not. If I were to walk up to you on the street and tell you "Your haircut is awful. You should do X with it instead," or "what the fuck were you thinking when you put on that shirt today? You need something slimming, not something that accentuates how sallow your complexion is", you'd find that rude. Telling people what to do with their characters (when they didn't ask) is no different from telling them what to do with their clothes or grooming choices. -
Why can't I stop barebacking?
BootmanLA replied to Usedbottom's topic in Making The Decision To Bareback
I think the problem is (as is often the case) people use imprecise language because they don't know the difference between two words - they just assume they're synonyms. Compulsion and addiction are two such words. -
From Pastor to Pozzed Hole
BootmanLA replied to Heir2012's topic in Bug Chasing & Gift Giving FICTION
Why is the "most important thing" being confronting an author and advising him to change his story line? If a reader here wants to see a story with plotline X, why the fuck can't he write his own story about plotline X? I don't have a problem with people liking or disliking elements of a story - that is (in part) what literary criticism is about. That's not the same thing as trying to change the way the story is developing as it's being written. There are, in fact, stories that work that way - at each juncture, the reader can choose which path forward to take (or vote on which path forward the author should take as he continues to write). Most stories are not like that, and most authors know where they want things to go with their characters. If you don't like the story, write your own and see if it's better. -
The question being asked isn't "List all the things you like (and it's in the PORN forum, people, so this isn't about what kind of fucking sex you like, it's about what ONE thing is better than all others, in PORN. If this is the reading comprehension level of our community we're doomed.
-
Again, as noted above... it's categorically impossible for each of these things to be the object of "nothing better than", simultaneously.
-
That's a relief to hear. Re-reading what you posted, I suspect it's just a case of a missing comma: "Had it treated, naturally" (as in "Had it treated, of course").
-
If he waits, he will be waiting forever. If the married guy is interested, he's almost certainly waiting on a signal that it's okay to seek sex from his buddy. If he's not interested, but he's a good friend, he won't be upset about the interest IF it's handled delicately. Of course he shouldn't just try to jump the guy's bones, but there's nothing wrong with saying "I feel like I'm getting mixed signals from you and our friendship, and I don't want to do anything that would mess that up. Are you signaling that you want something a little more than just a buddy? If you just need a closer friend, I'm fine with that, but I don't want to miss something you're trying to convey because you don't know how to put it into words."
-
I have no idea what you mean by "naturally" but there is no known effective treatment for either syphilis or chlamydia other than antibiotics. If you were treated with something else - and by "naturally" I assume you mean something herbal or crystals or something else woo-woo - then you almost certainly still have both, circulating in your system. Syphilis is especially dangerous in that respect because the damage it can do to your nervous system can be fatal, eventually. I strongly advise you to have a complete STI screening ASAP, and this time, anything found, get treated with actual medication and not incense or feathers or dietary supplements.
-
Word of advice, Galanya: There are already a couple of monkeypox-specific topics here in the Health Forum. You don't need to create a new topic just to post a picture of, well, whatever it is you posted (because you don't give any context for the picture: is that a photo of where you got your vaccination shot, where you plan to get it, or what?).
