BootmanLA

1. The end of right-wing politics in the United States. 2. A workable cure for HIV. 3. A magic web plug-in that would correct the spelling and grammar in posts here and that would reject any that it just couldn't translate into understandable English.

For what it's worth, the oldest reference to a dad fucking his son on this site is in a Bareback fiction story posted in 2010. Oh, and guess who created that topic? Rawtop. The site owner.

That's certainly more helpful. I'd still like to advocate for testing for hardcore fetish (if not both hard/softcore) before poz fetish, on this reasoning: the point of segregating stories by focus is, in part, to keep people who don't want to see "X" from running across it. In a website about bareback sex in general with a significant portion dealing with HIV-related topics, compare two fiction stories: 1. A story that contains a scene of deliberate pozzing as one element within, say, a story about fisting; 2. A story that contains a scene of fisting and rosebuds as an element within a story about two HIV+ men having sex Which one, on a bareback/breeding/HIV-tolerant site, is more likely to bother a larger group of users? I'd argue it's the latter. Or consider those stories that get photos for illustration, which as has been discussed, is apparently OK here. Is a user more likely to get wigged out by stumbling onto a photo of cum dripping from an ass (ie an illustration of the "pozzing" aspect of the fisting story), or by stumbling onto a photo of a bright red rosebud prolapsed rectum in the middle of the poz fetish section? Again, I'd argue the latter. For that reason, I'd strongly recommend that hardcore fetish be segregated BEFORE testing for poz content. And yes, I recognize that's RawTop's call (in conjunction with his moderators' advice). Just food for thought.

To further address BareLover's question about getting a prescription for a condition/disease before confirming the diagnosis: in cases where lab backups are common, it's not unusual to go with the doctor's best instinct (to get treatment underway quickly), especially if we're talking about basic antibiotics. For instance, thanks to some internal plumbing that's not quite standard, I have a tendency towards UTIs, about once a year or so. I know my body well enough to know the symptoms and when I can tell I've got one, I usually visit urgent care if it's after hours, and they take a urine specimen. From that, they can tell I have an infection, but not what species of bacteria; that requires a culture, and it can be 3-4 days after giving that sample before they have the culture results back. From experience I know that my infections are usually treatable with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (the generic name for Bactrim DS), and the urgent care has notes in my file that's what usually works best. On occasion, however, the culture has come back with a different bacterium and instead, ciprofloxacin is indicated; usually I already know that because the Bactrim isn't working and it's been a few days. When the problem comes up during day hours, my HIV doctor will phone in orders for a urine test to the local lab while also calling in the Bactrim prescription, and we proceed the same way once the lab results come back. The alternative is letting an infection go unchecked at all until the complete lab results are available - and that's usually not a good idea.

Just to be sure: I assume you mean real-life experiences, and not either (a) fictional "stories" (which belong elsewhere) or (b) eroticized encounter retellings (which also belong elsewhere).

I think that highlights the problem with the current layout - either stories get broken up - and you have to jump over to another section entirely, find the story thread, read the post(s) there, and then return to the original thread. And I can see in a longer story things going back and forth, all over the place. I assume a final "hierarchy" of rules would have to come from RawTop, ultimately, but I'd envision it going something like this: 1. If it contains any significant amount of chem sex, other than a passing reference, it goes in there, because that forum can be "closed off" for members who don't want to read about that (e.g. people in recovery, or who've lost friends to substance abuse). 2. Otherwise, if it contains sex with women - either straight or bi - it goes in the Straight/Bi fiction forum, even if it contains fetish elements. 3. If it's neither chemsex or straightsex, then the test is for fetish: if a significant element of the story is based on a hardcore or softcore fetish, then it goes in the appropriate forum. That's with the understanding that other stories with lesser amounts of a fetish might not hit that "significant element" trigger. Hardcore trumps softcore, so if a story contains both, it goes in Hardcore. 4. Otherwise, if it contains chasing/pozzing/stealthing elements, it goes in the Bug Chasing/Pozzing forum. 5. If none of the above apply, then it goes in the General Bareback section. This is just a sample - for instance, an argument could be made the bug chasing/pozzing/stealth test should come before the hardcore/softcore test. I'd disagree, but it's an arguable point (my argument would be that pozzing is certainly closer related to the main focus of this site than, say, fisting or watersports).

I thanked you for that post because I think it's important that anyone who's chasing - or even considering chasing - understand that it's not a comfy feather bed life with chocolates on the pillow. Being part of some non-existent "brotherhood" doesn't do squat for you. And it's not, as you've noted, a relentless grind of bad things happening to you. For the most part, with enough resources and fortitude, it's all manageable, more or less, until it isn't any more. Triple-drug cocktails in a single (expensive) pill have been around for not quite 20 years. Thus far, broadly speaking, prognoses are good. But some of the earliest drugs have proven to have long-term toxic effects on the human body. The newest drugs, not so much, but then we have far shorter experience with them. And so far, it appears that the best of these drugs show no signs of becoming ineffective over the time they've been in use. There's no guarantee, though, that things will stay that way. What if we find out that these drugs work for, say, 30 years and then the virus manages to overcome them, after 30 years of hiding deep in the body where the drugs can't reach the virus? We assume that, of course, drugs will continue to advance, but for how long?

As far as I know, the "basement dweller" community you're describing (which I take to be "NoFap") started in 2012. The problem for the timeline is that Urban Dictionary has a listing for "No Nut November" created a year earlier, in 2011, suggesting that the term came into existence before its adoption by NoFap.

I'm not sure that the NNN fad came about out of any sense of sex being bad. From what I can tell, it was originally proposed as satire. Since then, I think there have been two threads supporting its existence. The first is the religious/conservative right, arguing that masturbation (and premarital sex) are harmful and/or sinful. They're taking it literally and trying to "play it straight". As far as I'm concerned, anyone dumb enough to fall for anything the religious right pushes probably doesn't deserve an orgasm. The second is the kink community's embracing of this for submissives, having them hold off from orgasm as a means of instilling self control. While that's not my kink, I can understand it, and don't see any problems with it (as with most kinks) as long as it's consensual.

Just for giggles, I googled "Club St. Louis". To my utter and unending amazement, they listed something called a "phone number," consisting of ten numerical digits that (as I'm led to understand) allow the use of a relatively newly invented device called the "telephone" as a means of communication. In this miraculous new age in which we live, one takes one's "telephone" and enters the supplied numeric digits, and - wonder of wonders - it provides a real-time form of communication, by transmitted audio signals, with the party in question. Truly, we live in a splendid age. I would imagine one could, with relatively little effort, repeat my online search, discover the number for oneself, and ask whomever accepts the communication on the opposite end a question, such as "When the fuck are you people open?"

Even so, though: not all tops like orgies, either. I know some who are self-conscious about "performing" in front of others, especially if they have hangups about not being as big as some other tops, or about finishing too quickly, or whatever. Some tops just prefer one-on-one to the exclusion of any other arrangement.

You might be surprised. I frequently encounter tops who are adamantly opposed to gangbangs; they want the center of attention to be on them, and not just for the (however many it is) number of minutes he's fucking the bottom. There are a lot of tops who don't like to share. (There are obviously quite a few that do, of course, or gangbangs and even sex parties wouldn't be a thing.)

@ErosWired, I agree 100% that bottoms vary dramatically in the amount of effort they put into getting fucked (and likewise, in the ability they have to seek it out, so as not to lay all the blame on them not working at it). What I meant to describe was averages, not how much sex any one bottom could reasonably expect. If anything, of course, gangbangs further exacerbate the problem for other bottoms; if tops only have so many loads to give over a given period of time, and several of them are teaming up to give them all to one bottom, then that's going to take away from the available pool, so to speak. I'd also note that while a lot of them might not admit it, one thing holding some bottoms back from getting as much as they might otherwise receive is a desire for something more than an anonymous fuck. Not saying they're wanting every guy who fucks them to marry them, but I've known a lot of guys out there who wanted each guy who fucked them to be at least a "potential" for something more. That's a very limiting factor. And I'm not saying it's wrong to look for that; it's just that anyone who does is limiting the amount of sex he's going to have. By a lot.

I don't think the shape itself changes. Rather, what I'm guessing he's seeing is that as your anal sphincter is becoming used to handling more... traffic, shall we say... the muscle may change the way it closes. After all, the anus isn't a pinpoint spot that stretches; it's a fairly large, more or less tubular opening that is clamped shut by the sphincter. My experience is that while erect cocks are rarely exactly perfectly round, they tend to be wider (side to side) than they are higher (that is, measuring from upper surface to underside, straight through). It's not strictly speaking an oval, but something like that. In any event, if prolonged exposure to a cock going in and out of the anus really did change the shape of your hole, it would almost certainly make it a horizontal slit, not a vertical one like a vagina.

Here's the thing. It's possible to have discussions about an illegal activity without becoming involved in illegal activity. Otherwise, it would be impossible for law enforcement, psychologists, journalists, and so forth to ever discuss the real world. I don't purport to speak for the site owner or moderator here. But here's my understanding of how it works. Underage: You can't be on here if you're underaged. Period. You can talk in general terms about experiences you may have had while underage, as long as they're not being eroticized. In other words, it's okay to say "My first time was at 14"; it's not okay to write up a porn-worthy paragraph about all the sex you were having at 14. You certainly can't post seeking underaged persons (for sex or otherwise). Rape: You can discuss your own experiences with being raped. You can debate whether particular behavior, clinically described, would count as rape. You can post erotic fiction that involves rape or pseudo-rape circumstances. You CANNOT advocate for actual rape. What to do about it: If you see posts that violate these rules, you should report them (the moderators will review and decide; they can remove posts, sanction the poster, or even if it's justified, remove them from the forum entirely. You also have the ability to "ignore" any member who posts material you don't like, so that you don't have to read his writing. And you don't have to open any topic you feel might upset you. But bottom line, if you keep "stumbling" onto stuff that offends you that seems to pass muster with the moderators, maybe this site isn't for you.

Not denying the existence of such toys, but I'm going by what anatomists say: it's not that there's a ring at the juncture of the colon and rectum, it's that there are muscles surrounding the colon walls, top to bottom. I suppose you could consider the first muscle encountered there as a "ring" but it's no different from the muscle tissue half an inch, an inch, two inches, etc. farther up the colon. It's just muscle vs non-muscle. The bigger reason there's a bit of a barrier to entry into the colon is that the juncture between the two is a 90 degree turn. The colon descends down one side of your lower torso, then makes a sharp turn towards the center of the torso where it makes another sharp turn and joins the rectum. That turn, coupled with the fact you're entering a muscle-lined corridor, is what makes things feel like a separate "ring". But it's completely unlike the kind of ring we have at the anus (keeping feces in the rectum) or the sphincter clamping the urethra (keeping urine inside the body).

Just luck of the timing 🙂 But yes, I do type relatively fast (I do it all day and I've been doing it on a semi-steady basis since I first took typing in high school, 40 years ago, so I've never really lost my speed.)

I think the topic description and the posts betray a disconnect. The TOPIC is supposed to be about how often (or seldom) tops like to have sex - ie fuck someone. But then the first post asks about fucking OR getting fucked, and most of the responses are bottoms who want it all the time. Well duh, Sherlock. I think we've established conclusively over the years that the supply of bottoms greatly exceeds the supply of tops, and the sexual appetite of many bottoms exceeds the capacity of any particular top man. So let's (just for fun) make up some realistic-seeming numbers and see how they work together. So in a given area, assume there's 100 gay men, of whom 70 are bottoms or at least versatile men who strongly prefer bottoming. Maybe 20 are versatile men who genuinely like both, or who may lean top, and MAYBE 10 who are essentially or completely tops. Most bottoms can, if they don't shoot while being fucked, take more than one fucking in a row (they may not get that chance often, but the point is, they CAN - and many would love the chance to do so regularly). Let's conservatively say half those 70 would gladly take two (complete to orgasm) fuckings in a row. And let's assume that on average, those bottoms would like to get their preferred level of fucking 3 times a week - again, conservatively speaking. That's 315 fuckings that, to satisfy the bottom population, would need to be delivered every week - by 10 "total" tops and 20 versi-tops. Some, no doubt, can fuck to completion twice or even three times in one day, others only once, but that's still (on average) 10 fuckings a week the tops would have to deliver to satisfy the bottoms. So yes, from a bottom's perspective, it's probably "shocking" how seldom tops seem to want to fuck. But in reality, the tops are probably getting >100% of the opportunities they want, even with a healthy, roaring sex drive. It's just that there are too many bottoms competing for those spots.

I would suggest that you check with a urologist. Not to belittle your "new friend" there, but it may be that (a) he was hitting something other than your prostate, and whatever that was, didn't like it, or (b) you might have prostatitis or some other inflammation of the prostate that made it sensitive or otherwise has inhibited its function. There's an off chance there's something going on in there that might be more serious than you'd think. A urologist (preferably a gay-friendly one) should be able to help you sort this out.

As I noted, there's no actual "ring" and what most of us think is the "ring" is not all that far inside. The average adult male rectum is about 12 cm (about 4 3/4") long, with another 3-4 cm (about an inch and a half) comprising the anal sphincter ring. Obviously, there's some variation among men (size queens, rejoice) but it's not like there's some magic ring 8 or 9 inches back that only the super-hung can reach. The muscles of the lowest portion of the colon - which are responsible for moving feces along into the rectum - just kind of peter out, and the last one is not some gripping tight thing like the anal sphincter. It presumably "feels" like that because the top's cock will only really feel the muscles of the colon once enough of the head makes it far enough inside the colon for it to get a grip. And conversely, the bottom's unlikely to feel anything until the top gets far enough inside (as in, probably, the whole head plus some), because then the muscles gripping the shaft behind the head will tighten down more than those gripping the head, and your body then senses an "object" as opposed to just being full from a more or less uniform shaft.

You're very welcome.

There are actually two things referred to as a "second hole". The more common, shared among all humans, is the connection spot between the end of the sigmoid colon and the beginning of the rectum. Ordinarily, in the standard layout of these two organs there's a sharp turn between them, so a cock long enough to extend into the bottom of the sigmoid colon will typically find a bit of resistance as it breaches that point. That said, the entire colon is lined with muscles (that's how it moves food waste along), and there's no special sphincter, as there is at the far end of the rectum, to "breach" with a big cock. It's just that there are muscles that are being stretched a bit by the cock's entry. In trans men, the vagina is something called the "second hole" (or "bonus hole"). But if that's what is meant, it should be clear from the context.

I don't know how many people here post from a cell vs. from a notebook or desktop computer (I use all of the above, depending on the circumstances). What I do not do is post random selfie shots with posts just because it's technologically feasible. It's a stupid waste of bandwidth and storage space to stick pictures of your dicklet into discussions just because you can. If you're trying to illustrate a specific point, fine. If you're posting to a personal gallery, fine. If you're just showing your dick because you're an exhibitionist there are sites for that elsewhere.

If you find an unconscious person and have sex with him, you're committing rape, which is a felony whether it's bareback or with a condom. Personally, I don't believe in committing felonies.

Cool. Are you okay with being robbed, beaten, maimed? Regardless, what you think is acceptable for you is pertinent and relevant to you alone. You thinking it's okay doesn't make it acceptable for anyone else to do it to anyone else. Period.