hungry_hole

I'm usually cautious with feelings of love for guys I meet in casual settings.

I can fall "in-love" with a stranger I'm having sex with at a bathhouse and I choose to enjoy the experience without making a big deal about the future of the relationship. In many of the anonymous fuck videos you can see how the top after he breeds the hole he starts kissing the bottom's body displaying tremendous love. I remember a long-term fuck buddy who used to call out-loud my name as he would pump his load in my hole.  On my side, as the bottom, I would feel in-love when I heard him calling out my name as he pumped my hole full of cum. He would then collapse and lay on top caressing my body until he would get up and leave, and meet again a few weeks later. I felt in-love but far from a long-term kind of love.

On 2017-05-03 at 0:57 PM, tallslenderguy said:

...for instance, to my way of thinking, "top" or "bottom" is two sides of the same coin...

I agree with this, especially in anon scenes where there is more room for free imagination. Some bottom may enjoy fucking and breeding some anon sloppy hole imagining the bottom is him.

6 hours ago, torcub said:

As I've begun to have bareback sex, I've been thinking seriously about why I've been doing it.

As a top or as a bottom? I ask because I think most guys who like topping bareback do it because it feels much better. Some bottoms report not to mind being fucked with a condom. But although bottoming bareback feels better there is also a psychological component of having someone else inside and then being left with the cum inside.

8 hours ago, Leather69 said:

There is a case in Australia that has gone all the way to the High Court (equal to the US Supreme Court)...

I want to mention that this is not a case of anonymous-stealing because I think in this case we all agree that stealthing is not acceptable. I remember a case of a male in Canada who knew he was HIV+ but would purposely look to infect women.  Not a very nice behavior.

10 hours ago, Leather69 said:

B contracted hiv and also a slew of other medical complications, following his infection.

Any damage that stealthing may cause is only speculative which is why I object comparing stealthing with rape or other forms of sexual assault where the damage is obvious and immediate.

I was stealthed for the first time by a hook-up at my place. It was not at a bathhouse but it was still an anon hook-up. In the middle of the fuck he pulled out and then re-entered. I remember that it felt different but wasn't sure why. He pulled out, got dressed and before leaving he whispers in my ear "I left you a present". When I touched my hole I could feel the cum leaking out of my hole. I enjoyed it and I was never infected.  How can I compare this stealthing incident with rape?

I'm sure that most stealthing incidents are initiated by horny guys who don't like condoms and not by poz guys who purposely want to infect other guys, as many try portraying stealthers.

Let's imagine a typical anon scene. A poz guy who is walking around in a bathhouse looking for a hole to dump his load. I will call him the poz top but it doesn't matter whether he is a "top" or a bottom who just wants to unload and go home after a night of taking loads. What's important is that he's horny and breeding a hole (not making love to a man) is all he wants. There is a hot young guy getting fucked on one of the public slings which catches his attention but when he gets closer he notices the top is wearing a condom. He wants to fuck him next but he wants to fuck him bareback so he can dump his load. He bottom on the sling says he's HIV-negative and requests a condom but after a few seconds of teasing the bottom agrees to go bare as long as he's HIV-negative. The poz guy is horny so he manages to convince the bottom to go bare with vague answers such as "I'm OK" which really means nothing about STDs.

I know that many of you who are against all forms of stealthing, including anon-stealthing, believe that all wishes have to be respected and consent is required, no matter what. The problem I have with that is that we are relying on very ambiguous information to make decisions that we think are rational. Starting with the bottom guy on the sling.

How accurate is the HIV-negative status of the bottom on the sling? If our poz top could convince the bottom to go bare, how many other anon tops have been able to convince him to take their loads? How seriously can our poz top take the bottom's self-assessment of being HIV-negative? "He will go bare with me so he must have gone bare with others." Our poz top may easily assume that the bottom is already poz or that he will eventually poz, all based on the bottom's behaviour. 

If everyone had to get tested for HIV on entry to the bathhouse I would feel different about not telling the truth. At least in this case the question and the answer are both clear and unambiguous, unlike what's happening now that someone who tested 2 years ago considers himself to be HIV-negative.

On 2017-05-08 at 8:35 AM, Homo60 said:

... is very disappointing when a guy fucks me at the bathouse and doesn't unload, ...

It's usually because guys are "saving" their loads and don't want to cum yet. But I don't really mind because I do enjoy the pounding too. Plus I do enjoy the challenge to actually get that guy to dump his load in my hole every time he show up to fuck me. Those guys who keep coming back usually end up giving me their loads.

45 minutes ago, GoodExercise said:

Any presumption that there is a universal moral code for anonymous sex is empirically false, particularly in bathhouse, ABS or other venue where the men gather with a wide range of interests and agendas in pursuit of a broad array of experiences. 

The interests, agendas and experiences are different from one man to another, and that includes the evaluation of the moral code within the context of anonymous sex environment.

46 minutes ago, GoodExercise said:

Of course, to mutually agree to a moral code would require an intimate trust and accountability relationship, which is the exact opposite of anonymous sex.

So well said. I favor initiatives like safestsex.org that allows members to enter their STD test results and then exchange those results with other members. The fact that you have entered the results online adds some accountability. Better than coming up with an answer on the spare of the moment, when horny.

19 hours ago, zyx11 said:

...don't other parties [HIV-negative guys] have a right to places where they don't need to fear being stealthed or deceived by their partner?

I totally agree with this concept, having like a Cumunion of all HIV-negative guys, at least tested on entrance.

I heard that safestsex.org organizes private events with members who fall under certain conditions of seniority, testing pattern, etc, which is why they don't advertise the events. These parties could be a way for HIV-negative guys to have anon sex but also reducing the risk.

For me it's

2 hours ago, zyx11 said:

I know it's not necessarily the hottest to think about, but those faceless partners are real people, and there are consequences to behavior in bathhouses that can extend far beyond entering and leaving the place. Someone who contracts HIV from a stealther has to live with that long outside of their fantasy fuck in a bathhouse.

Someone who is careless at a bathhouse can contract HIV from a stealther or a guy who does not know that he's poz. The solution for HIV-negative is to stop being so careless, which would be the same advice you would get at any STD clinic. Getting rid of stealthers does not guarantee staying HIV-negative.

Let's assume that a poz detectable horny guy is hunting for holes late at night at a bathhouse and he comes across a bottom who is serosorting his tops, basically playing Russian roulette. Somehow the horny poz guy convinces the bottom to go bareback by either lying or somehow letting the bottom believe he's also HIV-. After the poz guy breeds the bottom's hole he leaves and they never see each other again.

It would be safe to assume that by the end of the evening, if the bottom is young and hot, he would have  taken a few more loads, supposedly all HIV-. And because taking anon loads at a bathhouse is so much fun, there will probably be a repeat of this experience. In other words, trying to view the bottom as a victim of a stealther makes no sense. I would accept the concept of being victim of stealthing but only when there was supposed to be trust between the partners.

3 hours ago, zyx11 said:

Why should this burden be placed solely on the negative partner?

Because apparently he is the one with the most to loose.

3 hours ago, zyx11 said:

Ugh. I really just want to push back against the idea of either sex or bathhouses as areas of suspended morality. I swear, I am not normally this preachy, but with the two of you out here spreading views that justify rape, I feel the need to do so. First, the idea that sex is a time of suspended morality can be used to justify straight up sexual assault, as well as all kinds of other abusive, non-consensual behaviors.

You sound like one of those women who despise the objectification of the body and who reacts in disgust. And I'm one of those men who gets lots of pleasure and excitement from anonymous sex where I get the freedom to objectify bodies to fulfill my needs. Anonymous sex always works for me, it never disappointments me.

I think that by censoring my need to completely objectify other men in bathhouses and instead "feel for them as people" is equivalent of having to feel sorry for some UFC fight who gets beaten up bad at a fight. No matter how bad they get beaten up they are no victims, first because they chose to fight.

For several years I've been seeing a few types of fake cum lube being advertised. A current search shows me "Jizz" and "Spunk". It may look and feel like cum but once the rimming starts the secret is revealed. Does anybody have anything to say about fake cum lubes?

6 hours ago, bbinbpark said:

 I think the vast majority of men that want the condom off, is not due to them wanting to spread an STI, but because it feels better.

I would go further and say that all stealthers either lie or remove condoms because fucking a raw hole feels good and seems to be the perfect place to drop a load.

Maybe there are some stealthers who are turned-on by the idea of pozing HIV-negative guys. How could he ever know that some random guy he bred at a bathhouse will poz? And if he finds out the guy in fact is now poz, how could he know that it was him who pozed him. I'm not sure how this works for guys who get off on pozing others.

On 2017-04-28 at 7:03 AM, GoodExercise said:

Sex is a state of suspended morality.

...and bathhouse sex is a perfect example of a suspended morality. Therefore, it makes no sense to label anonymous-stealthing as immoral because it takes place in this suspended morality spaces. I prefer to protect these anonymous spaces from morality which is why I reject the idea of anonymous-stealthing being immoral. As I mentioned before, most poz guys stealth because barebacking feels better and if they need to lie they will in order to get some ass. 

Although I'm not poz, I like to protect the right of a poz guy to have spaces where he can go and forget about having to discuss his HIV+ status. I like to keep bathhouses as places where he can go to realize sexual fantasies and fetishes. Just because someone was courageous and took the HIV test to learn his HIV+ status does not justify putting all the burden on HIV+ guys all the time. There has to be sexual spaces for poz guys (detectable or undetectable) to go and basically ignore their HIV+ status, and if asked they could lie because it's the shortest way to end the conversation about HIV.

I don't have a problem protecting the right to anon-stealth because it is preventable for anyone who is serious about staying HIV-negative.

13 hours ago, RotzBBengel said:

We need that risk of catching something, the possibility of being lied at, of being stealthed, of being pozzed to get off, because it raises the intensity of sex to new, formerly unknown levels.

YES! That's part of sexual adventures that we can have in a bathhouse. And declaring stealthing as illegal removes an important part of the sexual thrill of some men.

Instead of becoming an anti-stealth activist it's best to follow a good advice I hear in this site for HIV-neg guys who wanna stay neg: "Guys lie and assume everyone is poz" (particularly true in anon scenes).

I sometimes have a hard time following some of the arguments brought forth here.  A while ago I mentioned an STD prevention site SafestSex.org  which I find is based on the best prevention technique, testing and isolation.

All I heard then was that it's impossible for a site like safestsex.org to work because guys lie about their HIV status, which sounds realistic to me if the system does not prevent you from lying. But now in this discussion about stealthing most of the comments try to present every horny guy at a bathhouse as morally pure individual, unlike those immoral stealthers.

18 hours ago, badpenny72 said:

I'm not gay, I'm not straight either.

I stay completely away from these polluted terminology.

I've read of guys who define themselves as Gay and go on to describe their sexual life and the times spent in the gloryholes of a nearby shopping mall sucking cock and sometime getting fucked by strangers. Never a lover. If he was ever asked about his sexuality he would say "I'm gay" because it's better that having to say "All I like doing is sucking anonymous cocks in  gloryhole near my place."

Whenever I'm referred to as gay I make it clear that I'm not gay because I don't like having sex with men. And it's true, because the only type of sex I enjoy is anonymous. Having sex with a man I know is not appealing at all to me. Maybe once when you still don't know each other very well, especially when I was young. But now all I like is anonymous sex and it happens that men are great at that activity. But do I now have to call myself gay?

I find that many men use "being gay" as a cop-out from having to really talk about what really enjoy in sex with other men, like "I addicted to cum!" So many men have watched  video of a cock shooting a load and because they were turned on by it, they decided "I'm gay!".

12 hours ago, drscorpio said:

A bottom who let's someone breed them because that top lied about their status after the bottom made it clear he was not willing to take poz loads has been victimized.

This is the first time I hear a bottom getting off a sling with a load in his hole described as a victim, especially in this site. I'm very surprised.

And if you consider HIV in this equation, infection may not even occur. Where the fuck is the victim?

12 hours ago, drscorpio said:

 I just want all of you who are banging the "personal responsibility" drum to accept that it goes both ways. 

Yes, you are right. Personal responsibility goes both ways because everyone has to be responsible for themselves and not blame someone else if something happens.

On 2017-04-28 at 3:00 PM, zyx11 said:

So what if that's why guys oppose anon stealthing for that reason? These people want to minimize their risk in having anonymous sex - they are actively taking steps to reduce that risk by using protection, attempting to serosort or both of these things - and then someone else decides to ignore their wishes and force risky behavior on them. 

You are confirming what I wrote earlier:

On 2017-04-28 at 2:40 PM, hungry_hole said:

I'm convinced that some guys who oppose anon stealthing do so out of the frustration that "safe anon sex" is virtually impossible. They would like to go to a bathhouse, get on a sling and have only HIV-negative guys fuck them and breed their hole. And if a horny poz guys shows up, they want the poz guy to say "I'm sorry, but I'm poz and I don't want to infect you". So naive!

Being able to safely have anon bareback sex ain't gonna happen because of many reasons. Demonizing stealthing and denouncing it as a horrible human trait is not going to stop HIV-negative guys from pozing.

I'm not poz but I think it's unfair to place the responsibility on poz guys when there are so many guys who don't want to test for HIV so that they can keep saying that they are HIV-negative.

On 2017-04-29 at 0:18 AM, drscorpio said:

What you are doing is blaming the victim, and that is never okay.

I know we live in an era where everyone wants to be a victim, but I'm sorry, a guy on a public sling who offers his ass to others but as long as they are "clean" is not a victim. Even if a HVL poz guy breds the bottom's hole it does not mean that the bottom will get infected. The only thing that is certain is that when that poz top pulls out the bottom will be in heaven when he touches his sloppy hole. Is that a victim?

On 2017-04-28 at 4:35 PM, pozpig said:

When it comes to anon scenes, respect anything your top/bottom wants.

We will more often hear about guys who condemn stealthing because I doubt poz guys who are occasionally into anon-stealthing would have the guts to comment on their experiences. Some poz guy who stops at the bathhouse after the bars are closed, he's horny and a bit tipsy, and wants to breed some hole. A hot bottom catches his attention, he walks into his room and the bottom hands him a condom. The top says "I only bareback" and the bottom asks for his status and the top lies and says he's HIV negative. He dumps his load and leaves.

A very hot scene and in my opinion a totally acceptable behavior because first, the bottom may not even infect with HIV. Second, if he lets this poz guy breed his hole, there is a big chance that the bottom is already poz. It shows already how irresponsible the bottom is, if he wants to stay HIV negative. This particular case, in one phrase "PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY" which could mean go on PrEP. But do something instead of assuming that all your slutty bottom fantasies will be realized because you will only take cum from HIV-negative guys.

On 2017-04-28 at 1:57 PM, zyx11 said:

When fulfilling your fetishes involves another person, consent comes into play.

The issue of  lack of consent keeps coming up. But the problem I see is that as soon as one enters a bathhouse one is implicitly giving consent but a consent that is not well defined in anyone's mind. Outside in the street we all agree and have rules, no one will approach me and grab my cock. In a bathhouse we give consent be be touched and some extend that consent in order to fulfill their fetishes and needs. I'm not going to spend money and walk into a place that resembles the outside world.

Anon-stealthing is totally avoidable by the HIV-negative guy. All it takes is for the HIV-negative guy to stay away from barebacking with strangers. And because anon-steathing is avoidable and preventable anon-stealthing situations are not as horrible as some here have said.

Anon-stealthing is also very important for those HIV-negative bottoms who are toying with the idea of chasing and taking risks turns them on. We read many of these stories here. Anon sex is such a powerful experience for so many men, and all the action in bathhouses and darkrooms is such a big turn-on, that I dislike the idea of censoring something preventable like anon-stealthing, and thus denying some who want to on occasion live the experience of stealthing.

44 minutes ago, zyx11 said:

These scenarios are not as far removed from each other as you think. The other partner in an anonymous scenario is just as much of a human being as a lover or person you know better.

I like anonymous sex precisely because the guys in the cruising area are not people but bodies for me to enjoy. If I want to suck cock and some guy want to suck mine, I move to the next guy. I don't do that when I'm having sex with another human being as you say and I would have to adapt my needs to my partner's needs. It's all fine when I'm in the mood to share my sexuality. But if I want to basically have sex with myself but with cocks and holes available for my pleasure instead of jerking off at home, I go to a cruising-for-sex place (bathhouse, darkroom, gloryholes).

For me anon sex is all about my needs, my fetishes and no one else's. I'm sure most guys into anon sex feel this way too. And both kinds of sex are so different that if I see someone I know at a bathhouse, it screws things up for me because now there is someone in the that I have to look at him as a person. I then no longer interested in sex.

Anon sex is it's own beast.

44 minutes ago, zyx11 said:

In fact, you are kind of tacitly admitting some level of guilt over these activities. It seems to me that you don't support stealthing people you know (at least partially) because you can be caught or may be forced to observe the consequences a stealther inflicts on the other party. 

I accept anon stealthing because infection is totally preventable and it's up to the HIV- guy. The way to avoid HIV infection is to get to know your sexual partners and discuss with them their STD tests results and both sexual behaviour.

There's no point in condemning anon stealthing because no matter how much it's demonized, it won't go away. The solution is for HIV- guys who wanna stay negative not to place themselves in a possible anon stealthing situation.

I'm convinced that some guys who oppose anon stealthing do so out of the frustration that "safe anon sex" is virtually impossible. They would like to go to a bathhouse, get on a sling and have only HIV-negative guys fuck them and breed their hole. And if a horny poz guys shows up, they want the poz guy to say "I'm sorry, but I'm poz and I don't want to infect you". So naive!

4 minutes ago, zyx11 said:

I personally find stealthing to be an incredibly hot fantasy, but genuine, actual stealthing is very unethical in my opinion.

You are not mentioning the situation in which the stealthing occurs so I must assume that you condemn all kinds of stealthing, including in anonymous situations.

6 minutes ago, zyx11 said:

Sex is a two-way exchange which requires the consent of both parties -

When I'm at a bathhouse or a darkroom I'm not concerned at ALL about the other guys around me, so it's not a two-way exchgange. I'm there to fulfill MY fetishes, whatever they are, including stealthing if it applied to me. Why would a horny poz guy who goes to a bathhouse after bars close be concerned about ethical issues like consent? He's drunk and horny and if he wants to fuck and breed some hot hole in one of the rooms of the bathhouse, he'll lie if he needs to.

Even in countries where it's illegal to lie about your HIV status it would be pretty difficult to bring charges against a guys who stealthed. How can one bring charges to an anonymous breeder?

I think we all agree that stealthing someone who is known, like a love or a date, is not right. So, can we restrict the discussion to anonymous stealthing where the guy being stealthed bares some responsibility?

At some point I thought I was only after the load but really, some guys fuck so nicely that I really enjoy the pounding. Obviously, getting the load gives it a good finale.

For me, whether or not stealthing is wrong depends on the situation. The more anonymous the situation, the more acceptable If find stealthing is.

If a slutty bottom is on a sling at a bathhouse and before each guy fucks him he asks them "Are you clean?", then I see nothing wrong if the top fucks him and dumps his toxic load in the bottom's hole. It would be like leaving your car with the keys in the ignition and running and then complain because someone stole it.  No, there is something to be said about personal responsibility.

In other circumstances, where guys chat, get together for coffee, and treat each other as human beings and not just cocks and holes, then I find stealthing to be inappropriate.

So, is stealthing morally OK? It all depends.

At least in my area, I now see in Craigslist many guys advertising their private gloryhole they have at home. Years ago my gloryhole was the only one and for about 10 years I had a constant stream of guys coming by, some ongoing visitors to my GH.

Are there now more Private Gloryholes being advertised in your area?

On 2017-04-17 at 9:08 AM, kinky_hot said:

But all this leaves me here. Where do I go next? Whats is going to be my next thrill or fetish?

What about stopping the Meds and getting into stealthing anon negative holes? Some poz guys get into this fetish...

While I'm getting fucked I let the top do it the way he wants it. Some tops like to pull out to avoid shooting to quickly while others like to pull out, stick the tip of their cock, etc, and that's OK with me. It's only once I realize the top is getting ready to shoot that I encourage him to go deep, usually by whispering "Go deep when you start shooting your load". It sometimes turns the top on and he cum quickly but saying that to the top makes it clear to him that I want his load deep in my hole.

On 2017-04-19 at 9:02 PM, TagBoy87 said:

Last month I got stealthed by this guy at the bath house. 

He removed the condom he insisted in using while I was not watching and than proceeded to cum in me.

We tend to assume that all stealthers are Poz but I think that guys stealth because bareback feels better that shooting inside a condom. I can't even remember when was the last time I came inside a condom but I used to hate it. So many times getting stealthed does not mean you will get pozed (apart from the fact thet HIV is not easy to transmit).

A bit outside the topic:

On 2017-04-19 at 9:02 PM, TagBoy87 said:

When I found out for some reason instead of being angry I decided to immediately suck he's cock and than let him breed me a second time raw.

When I read accounts like this I'm more convinced that stealthing in cruising-for-sex places should be a valid alternative not to be demonized.

I like

On 4/16/2017 at 5:46 PM, Bob123456 said:

Okay, where do I start?  Well, let me say I'm struggling at the moment as far as my sexuality is concerned.  I know I'm straight, but the thought of gay sex is really turning me on.

There is an issue of semantic because words like "gay" and "straight" have very ambiguous meanings. Many guys think of themselves as gay because they like to suck cock or they get turned on more by men's bodies. But the problem is that the need to suck cock or getting turned on by men's bodies can have other explanations.  I like the interpretation of sex that safestsex.org has on their website: http://safestsex.org/aboutmen-en.php

In  my opinion, the biggest problem for married men who wanna try sex with men  are STDs, all of them, not only HIV.

6 hours ago, Mamabicho said:

I think it's pretty obvious that some guys aren't really cumslut bottoms, but just think they are, or want to think they are.

These are mostly younger guys who are looking for specific type of guy to fuck them. I find guys like this in bathhouses, door open, on their stomach, but you hear the "No thanks" when you walk in and touch their lubed hole. I never find older slutty bottoms who are not picky, mostly the younger ones.

2 hours ago, TattPig said:

This has nothing to do with do with resistance.

I think the resistance may be related with skipping a dose if he is infected because of the missing dose and he continues to take Truvada. I'm not sure though.

I found this video with a collection of bottoms cumming while they get fucked. I didn't think I would enjoy it but I did!

"Buncha Bottoms Cumming"

http://www.xtube.com/video-watch/Buncha-Bottoms-Cumming-26390141