BootmanLA

Here's my thing. UNLESS there's an expressed commitment that's monogamous, then it's not really relevant. You get to worry about whether someone else is "on the apps" when you've agreed with that person to be exclusive. Otherwise, it's MYOB. A better question would be "Why are you so wrapped up in what someone other than yourself is doing with his life?"

You can't, yet. After you've been a member long enough, and after you've participated sufficiently in *other* ways (making posts, replying to posts, etc.) you get the ability to react to a limited number of posts each day. As you continue to post, comment, and otherwise participate, that limit increases and eventually goes away. The same is true for being able to directly message another member - something you only gain with proven "good behavior" on the site across the forums. There are discussions elsewhere as to why, but in a nutshell: disruptive people were creating accounts and spamming other users with links to outside info (including some of which may have been non-cybersafe), and otherwise disrupting the forum here (certain reactions raise or lower the "score" of the poster being reacted to). The exact points at which you gain these abilities isn't posted publicly, precisely to prevent those same disruptive types from gaming the system to get to the appropriate level as fast as possible. At a minimum, your internal "score" (which determines what you can do on here) depends on length of membership, number of posts, number of replies to posts, number of topics created, and other peoples' reactions to what you post (so a thoughtful, well-reasoned reply may get you a boost if people upvote your answer). Be patient, and it will happen.

I've said before that I wouldn't wish this on anyone, so no. Mind you, I don't think being poz is anything to be ashamed of, and if someone is turned on by the thought of it, well, that's his business. But deliberately hoping/wishing that someone else has a lifetime of medication to take in order to stay alive, and all the crap that comes along with it? No, I don't even wish that on my worst enemies.

I think we'd need to clarify some terms. The study of viruses, especially retroviruses like HIV, undoubtedly increased dramatically once HIV was discovered. We forget that back in the early 80's, there was a lot more discussion of "superbugs" - ie bacteria that were antibiotic resistant - possibly developing, whereas we seemed to have a reasonable grasp on viruses - cold, flu, pneumonia. They still affected millions and some years thousands died but we had a good handle on vaccines and the bigger problem was just getting more people to take the damned shot. We'd largely eliminated smallpox, polio, and a host of other viral diseases with vaccinations and improved treatments. Then along comes HIV - a virus that nothing really worked on to treat, and against which we had no tools to prevent infection, either - and it was, for almost all patients, especially at the end, painful and fatal. And that's for a virus that is, for all its power, relatively hard to transmit. It dies very, very quickly once it leaves its host unless it immediately infects another in the process. Imagine a virus with the destructive power of HIV coupled with the ability to survive outside the human body for extended periods, the way some cold & flu viruses can, and that doesn't require contact with permeable tissues (vaginal/anal/oral linings) to infect. That fear prompted a lot of work that helped in the development of treatments for HIV (eventually); and even when treatments failed to "shake out" from particular research, the increased knowledge of how viruses work helped science across the viral study front. In fact, the Moderna mRNA vaccine for Covid is built on work that Moderna was already doing on HIV, which helped them get up to speed quickly. But to be clear - that's research for an HIV vaccine, not "HIV treatment", which isn't the same thing. There ARE some antiviral drugs coming on the market - oral ones - that also build on HIV treatment research. In some cases, avenues explored for retroviruses like HIV that were dead ends found new life - and better suitability - in treating coronaviruses like SARS-CoV-2 (the Covid-19 virus). So I'd say the short answer is "Kind of" but with the note that HIV vaccine research was more productive in facilitating Covid vaccines than HIV treatment research (specifically) has ben in facilitating Covid treatment. And broadly speaking, But specifically, HIV *TREATMENT* leading to a Covid *VACCINE*? Not really. The former is (ongoing) work to find ways to manage HIV in already infected people; the latter is a product that prevents (or dramatically limits) infection in the first place.

That would have earned him a report to Uber for me. He's free to believe what he wants but passengers - customers of his employer - shouldn't be forced to listen.

And admitting it's a pretense means there's a seed of doubt now planted in the finder's head, as to what else in his life might be a pretense.

Eww. Aside from the rumors that he's supposedly hung very well, it's like Beetlejuice before he was dead.

It's also occurred to me that some people post a lot of fap fap fap material posing as depraved trashy pigs as part of their "online persona" here, and then someone in real life connects the dots - and of course is then faced with either admitting it's all fantasy material or defending his alleged depravity.

That is precisely the point - you get hard, it hurts, you go soft. It's not just to keep you from fucking (a longer, broader tube section would keep you from that). The point is to get you to stop thinking with your dick.

And likewise, there have been many opposing reports (showing no connection between PrEP medication or HAART medication and increased resistance to Covid. Which is why the word used in the meta-study cited above was "discordant" results. Mind you, I'm not suggesting anyone should stop taking PrEP simply because it doesn't stop them from contracting Covid. But I am saying don't skip getting vaccinated or boostered because you don't think you need it if you're on PrEP.

It also may mean that the particular gallery is empty. On a whim, I created a gallery for my profile but did not upload any images. The gallery still shows existing, and is in my profile, but you wouldn't be able to see anything in it. Additionally, the owner of an album can restrict which users can see it. So it's possible you're looking at galleries that the member in question hasn't "opened" for you (because he doesn't know who you are).

Let's see... I can believe the person who posted the link to study of studies, showing "discordant results" (an indicator, usually, that there is no correlation between a problem and its proposed solution other than random luck), or I can believe the person who doesn't yet seem to grasp the fundamentals of punctuation. Truly a dilemma to resolve, I tell ya.

I'm with you if you mean the licky-licky foot fetish thing. But I will say, I've known a couple of guys with a foot fetish who were thrilled to just massage my feet for half an hour, after a long day of hiking, and it was heaven. And yeah, I realized he was subtly getting off on it, but that's a price I can pay if that's all I have to do.

Thank you. We need more actual citations to the literature and much fewer "Of course it must be!" posts from people who don't know what they're talking about. The problem is people who assume ONE antiviral drug works against two different viruses equally well. That is simply not the case. SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes Covid-19, is not even in the same group of viruses as HIV (a retrovirus), and the two attack cells to reproduce in very different ways. Which strongly suggests, by itself, that taking PrEP will have little to no effect on SARS-CoV-2.

I don't think you and Fskn are saying contradictory things. Rather, I think you're correctly noting that there are a lot more support mechanisms for most kids today. But not nearly so many in the Bible Belt or deep in Mormon country, for instance. And no matter how much support there is online, there are still significant numbers of parents who do everything in their power to block their kids from accessing those things - no smart phone, internet blocked at home, sending them to schools where those things aren't available, and so forth. Thankfully the number of kids in that situation is diminishing, but it's by no means approaching zero.

You may be a technophobe, but surely even you can tell what sort of mobile device you're using (since, for instance, Apple and Android devices share almost zero software code between them). And figuring out what browser you're using is as simple as reading the name on the icon you click on.

And again, while I agree it's your choice, it's good to acknowledge that one reason you CAN make that choice, and the amount of pushback you get is muted, is because of the thousands upon thousands of LGBT men and women who came before you who chose otherwise - or who had little choice but to be out because they simply couldn't "pass". Their work make it a lot less socially acceptable for men to rag on other men at work as to when they were going to settle down with a good woman and start a family. The pressure to do that, pre-"out" days, is one reason so many gay men took the route of marrying and cheating on the side, and why so many marriages imploded after a decade or two when the pressure got to be too much. Just as those early "out" folks made it possible for many of us to be "out" more easily today, they also made it possible to stay single and closeted if that's what you prefer, without being tagged as suspicious because you're past 25 and haven't gotten engaged. Acknowledging their help is the least closeted people can do, but sadly, too many of them look down on those pioneers for "rocking the boat".

Let me start by saying I support your choice whether or not to come out, 100%. I will note that straight people "proclaim their sexuality" all day, every day. Single guys talk about the girl they took out (or hooked up with) the previous weekend. Single women talk about the hot date (or the loser guy) that they went out with. When things get serious, the women gossip over whether he's going to propose. When he does, they're flashing the ring and talking about the wedding plans. The shower invites are posted on the departmental bulletin board. Everyone knows when they're out of the office for the wedding and/or honeymoon. If and when a baby is expected, they're all over discussing it (with a repeat of the shower deal). And almost always, throughout, there's the pictures. Family pics on desk surfaces, on screen savers, on phones. In other words, straight people make it clear that they're straight, day in and day out. Incessantly. We just are so inured to it that we don't notice - it's like the air we breathe. That's not to say, again, that you "need" to come out. It's just that you're choosing not to do the exact things they do all the time.

You're correct, that's a fantasy. While it may keep a cock from getting hard, and long-term use may make it difficult for a wearer to get turned on enough to get hard (while released), nothing about a chastity device is going to cause actual shrinkage.

There must be 20 million sites online where you can post and view random porn pics. Why should BZ users post "all" their photos in one folder at your request, especially when most or all of them have nothing to do with this site's purpose?

Display of images on the web can be complex, and can vary depending on how a particular platform implements images. I'd suggest that when reporting problems like this, always specify whether you're using a desktop or mobile device, the operating system, and which browser you're using. And if you find the experience is not consistent - that only certain users' pictures fail to load, for instance, or only if you click a link from a notification (but not if you navigate to the member's page directly), note that as well. It makes it much easier to track down problems that only seem to affect certain users.

If I were a "poz guy not on meds" I would. But since I have been on medication since my diagnosis I don't think my experience is responsive to your question.

You know, there still is this thing called PrEP, and it works for cumdump bottoms just as well as it works for monogamous boys who have a positive partner. Assuming "there's a good chance" when you have no idea whether he's on PrEP or not, is beyond silly. You can't calculate "good chance" without knowing more than just that "he takes loads".

If a guy doesn't go to saunas or sex clubs, and relies primarily on hookups, it's not difficult at all to keep track. And some guys are better than others at knowing whether a top has ejaculated inside or not. True, some guys can cum very quietly, and others can fake it convincingly, but those are, in the end, rounding errors.

As I've noted many times in other contexts, "the plural of anecdote is not 'data'." You're entirely right that sweeping pronouncements from people who navel-gaze and make generalizations from that navel-gazing can be summarily dismissed.