hungry_hole

Some loss of intensity of the horniness is inevitable and there are a few seconds when the experience of getting fucked can be a bit uncomfortable. However, from my experiences bottoming after a few seconds in most cases I'm back horny as before and happy to keep taking cock. I agree with this attitude and approach

This makes no sense at the bathhouse. I think that a bottom has to be reasonable and accommodate to the needs of the guy fucking, but depending on the situation. IF the bottom starts shooting but realizes that the top is getting pretty close, the bottom has to let the top finish, and he'll be happy he did let the top finish.

A lot has to do with the meaning of being "verbal". When I'm at the sauna watching two guys putting up a sex show, what I want to hear are the sounds coming from the guy doing the fucking, I wanna hear the grunts, breathing rhythm, and the dirty talk as he plows the hole and then when he breeds it. The bottom could be silent and that would be OK with me, as long as I can hear the top's sounds. I find this particularly irritating in porn when I can't hear the top because of some loud bottom just screaming. Not my thing. Appropriate dirty talk is for me the only acceptable sounds, which are words encouraging the top without pushing him. At the sauna, one phrase that use when the guy fucking me has signalled that he's getting ready to cum is "Go deep when you breed my hole", but I say it only when I know it's happening. I recognize that there are guys who like to hear the bottom make noise while he gets fucked, but those are things a bottom can discover while getting fucked. If I notice a guys needs to hear something to get hard and then to shoot his load, I'll say it or do it.

Let's face it, there's a huge difference between fucking with a condom and fucking raw, especially when the guy is shooting his load. At that point the tip gets too sensitive and the condom rubbing on it makes it very uncomfortable. I can't blame a guy wanting to shoot inside a warm smooth hole. I was stealthed in the 90's by a guy at the sauna who took off his condom. Before leaving my room he whispered in my ear "I left you a present", I touched my leaking hole. I never went back to condoms.

I had a gay friend who liked getting fucked and would tell me about his adventures at the baths. I was very young then and I didn't really understand what the point of being fucked would be because I enjoyed shooting a load. He had lived in NYC for a couple of years and had lots of stories about places like the Mine-shaft. One day perusing his library I came across a book about masculinity and I found a poem in this book that made me want to get fucked. It's called "Rape": Soon after I took a bus to NYC and stayed at the YMCA for a few days. My gay friend had told me about his adventures at the YMCA and how he would leave the door of his room ajar so that guys would walk into his room. I was in my early 20's and had a great body so of course I took all kinds of loads during those days. My gay friend also told me all about cleaning your hole and being ready to get fucked, which is essential for any cumdump. I like to feel the cum inside my hole and not mixed with any shit.

I think that it's not really fair to compare sex with men and women, because I think that what most guys like about sex with men is the no-strings-attached type of sex. This is what I mean. I've been at the sauna in my room, door open, and some guy comes in. Without saying a word, we kiss, do so oral, and finish with anal. And he leaves the room, again without saying a word. What I like the most about sex with men is the easy access to anonymous no-strings-attached sex. If I had to always meet in person, and have a talk before I could suck a guy's cock, I don't think I would bother. One of the reasons I like sucking cock is that I know that I can walk into the local ABS and play with cocks in the gloryholes.

That's always the case, even in parks and bathhouses. Any old guy 65+, but who he can, get an erection, maintain the erection, and shoot a nice load, can find a hole. But if the same guy is the hole, there would be very little interest. I've noticed the effects of aging as a bottom. When I was a young bottom, and not so young, I knew that when I went to the sauna or at the park I would be taking loads. I enjoyed the challenge of meeting up with a versatile-bottom looking for a top and then walking out the door with his load. Once a guy said "You tricked me!" as I was leaving. We would start necking and then once he was really horny and really into my body, I would then make sure to find my lubed hole. It was hot!

On my last visit to Steamworks Toronto I was getting fucked in the darkroom and I knew that I had just taken a load because of the slap on my ass right I got before the guy was gone, just his load in my hole. The music was too loud so I didn't hear a thing.

Are there any guys who enjoy fucking a tight hole? I like my hole to be as loose as I can and once the cock is inside I tighten or loosen depending on the cock and the situation. Are there guys who enjoy fucking a tight hole?

I agree, sometime saunas are empty and not much going on. They used to be great places for sure sex before Apps. But what I meant is that at the sauna one can play the role you want and sometimes get lucky. My last time at Steamworks Toronto on the Thursday night I took 6 loads and then 5 on the Saturday night. On one of the nights a guy gave two loads in a 2-hour period and in part because I hang a sign that glows in the dark saying "CUMHOLE". At the sauna I can do what I want and hope to find guys.

This is absolutely true. When a bottom shoots his load, especially inadvertently, also stop being horny and many no longer want to continue bottom. When I used to go to saunas more often I knew that if I wanted to be able to use a public sling being monopolized by a bottom, the solution was to somehow make him cum. Most would jump off the sling and then I could use it. This is what makes the cumdumps and cumholes. It's difficult to come to a consensus about the ratio of tops and bottoms but there are some facts. A guy in his 70's or 80's who can hold a nice hard erection for long periods of time and who can then shoot a nice load, especially a raw hole, would have no problem finding sex partners. An older guy in the same age range who is looking to get fucked and bred won't be as lucky. To be lucky as a bottom it helps to be young.

It's not easy to find a large number of guys who would be willing to do everything because we all have different fetishes. SOme guys don't like getting fucked or required condoms. Others like to get rimmed, but would never rim a hole. Most bottoms like to get fucked but would never fuck a hole. I like what good saunas have to offer, private space of a room, cruising areas in hallways and other public space, cleaning areas and showers, and play areas with plenty of dark space and toys. And in this space everybody can try to enjoy whatever fetish they have.

It's a great way of describing a "shooting inside", but we have to make a distinction between, (1) two guys who know each other and who are having an intimate encounter which includes anal sex, or (2) two guys fucking in the darkroom at a sauna. When I was young I enjoyed anonymous action but I also enjoyed having sex with someone I felt I loved. But in the past few decades I've preferred to stick to anonymous sex. In an old book from the 80's "The Homosexual Matrix" the author Tripp describes how in saunas guys reported feeling in love with someone they had never met and will never again meet. I can identify with that feeling, of loving some guy while in my room he pumps my ass full of his cum. Then he leaves but I feel that his cum is still inside me. And also, for the top, the feeling of putting a part of himself inside the ass.

When barebacking was still an underground activity at the sauna, a very young black dude, with a big tool, chased me to my room and with a strong African accent keeps saying to me "I like your eyes", to what I kept responding "I like your cock", while I played with it. Because he enjoyed me playing with his big cock I didn't care much why would my eyes be important to him, until he started running his fingers on my lubed hole I then realized he had been meaning "I like your ass". We kept in touch and once in a while, when feeling really horny, he would call me saying he wanted to drop by. I enjoyed receiving his loads but I also liked the way he moaned while he unloaded.

I agree. My local sauna rented a room with a sling and I'm sure it was used a lot for ass play, fisting etc, which for most guys it requires a clean hole. But the bathroom is awful, with two falling apart cubicles with toilets. This Rectum looks good!

It's worked for me a few times. I once hooked up with a "bottom" from BBrt answer a quick connect where I advertised anon action only, at my private gloryhole. As the guy enters, the gloryhole is on their right, with the hole covered. I don't see them and they don't see me. Once they approach I remove the cover and begin with oral service. He asked to turn around, he fucked me for a minute or so, pumped his load, cleaned up and left. No talk, no chit-chat. I've also hooked up a few times with a fuck buddy from the times of the telephone systems. He was then a hot guy in his 20's, now, still hot, has been to my private gloryhole a few times.

The same is true for a guy wanting to fuck a hole. When wearing a condom was expected for anal sex, especially in anonymous sex at the sauna, guys were happy to know that they could fuck me raw, For many, putting on a condom is a hassle, but if the sex is raw they can manage to stick it in and eventually get hard and end up being a great fuck. In those day some guys would fuck raw but were expected to cum outside, so it was common to hear the question "Can I cum inside?" Make me horny.

The reality is that the so-called gay scene is mostly focused on sex, which is where different kinds of men come together, gay, bisexual, straight, fetish, etc. Because of this, anonymity becomes the best setup for men to congregate for sex, and small social groups cannot provide an anonymous setup. And they never will. A married guy living in a large city may enjoy the occasional visit to a gloryhole to get drained before going home, but if he lived in a small town he wouldn't for fear of bumping into somebody he knows. My first experiences with guys were at the YMCA in New York City, when they offered a cheap alternative to a hotel. There were young guys from all over the U.S., guys whom I've never seen and that I never saw again. There was at the time in my city a gay sauna, but I would have been afraid of meeting someone I knew and would have not enjoyed it the way I did at the Y. I travelled to NYC, a large city, a few times and stayed at the Y.

I'm not interested in having sex unless it's anonymous, either ABS, sauna or park.

I love to hear Spanish while I'm getting fucked. I know I'm getting the load when I hear "Que rico tu culo" and once the guy starts shooting his load I say "Dame tu leche".

I loved this video. Frozen cum that melts by the end of the fuck [think before following links] https://barebackbastards.com/61565/frozen/

First, why are you so angry with me when all I'm trying to say is that all men would benefit from same-sex intimacy being part of masculinity, the way same-sex intimacy is an important part of femininity. Men's bodies are different from women especially when it comes to erotic life because we have the cock that gets hard and it unconsciously interferes with intimacy. So obviously the way same-sex intimacy will take place will be different. Two girls can compare breast size without sex being part of the interaction, but two boys who want to compare cock size and shape, they both need to be horny to be able to make the comparison. I already asked, can then only "gay boys" compare cocks? Obviously all boys would like to compare cocks so they should have games that boys play with their cocks and hard-ons. But because society has decided to marginalize boys and men who demonstrate any interest in same-sex intimacy, boys are reluctant to experience same-sex intimacy for fear of being part of a special group of boys and men. Girls don't think of other girls as lesbians because they want to go together to the washroom or share some piece of clothing. "Gay" is an identity and as such is ambiguous. For some men, a man is gay when he bottoms anally. I once read that a man is gay only if he falls in-love with a man, but having sex with men doesn't "make" him gay. Sexual Orientation has no biological markers so it's a good candidate for a socially constructed concept. So-called "straight men" are very reassured by "being straight" because they never have to contemplate the idea that sex with men may be fun. But the same elements that "gay men" love in porn, hard cocks and cum, are present in straight porn, just with some women to calm down the straight men. Everybody here is probably familiar with the Kinsey Scale, and you probably have it wrong. The Kinsey Scale never intended to categorize identities, but instead the proportions of hetero and homo sex. Kinsey said it clearly, that "homosexual" and "heterosexual" should be used to refer to sexual encounters, and not for people. A sexual act can be heterosexual or homosexual, but not the people. It's a small detail that means a lot. Just look at the disappointment in a woman's face who is anxious to find a man but discovers that the cute guy next door lives with his lover. A boy watching the scene will get the message that the guy next door is not a regular man. I don't see the "stupid". I know what gay mean to most people and if I were saying the same thing that everybody says or thinks about gay men, I wouldn't have bother writing anything. I am sure that if men could comfortably suck their own cock, gloryholes and cock sucking would not be as popular among men as it is now. Gloryholes provide men with a "disembodied" cock that one can appropriate as your own, and pretend you are sucking your own. I've never said that boys can get it out of their system. What I'm saying is that most likely all the stuff we now attribute to "being gay" is actually something common to all boys and men.

Societies depend and have depended for ever on heterosexuality not because people have been "socialized" to favour it, but because children have been part of a male-female couples, so heterosexuality is here to stay. Children have grandparents, they meet the parents of other children, most in male-female couple. Again, I think that the mistake is to focus on identities, gay and straight in this case. First of all, if people want to talk about socially constructed concepts, instead of talking about gender, gay and straight are better examples. I say this because sexual orientation does not have any biological markers. If the body or blood of a person is found, it would be impossible to determine the sexual orientation of that person, because sexual orientation is a fictitious construct. I'm opposed to referring to same-sex marriage as "gay marriage" because then it would imply that only gay men and lesbians can marry each other. In my opinion the insistence in having to be gay in order to engage in same-sex marriage is pervasive. Nothing stops two men to marry each other without "being gay". I totally disagree with this "wired" reference because it would mean that some men have no interest in anything male and only focused on women. And we all know that it's not true, because we live in a male-dominated society where most men prefer men to women. Why do you think guys watch MMA fights? They enjoy watching masculine and muscular bodies, mind you fighting, because otherwise it would be gay. They even have these stupid silly women announcing the rounds that nobody cares about because the men are there to watch the men. Yes, the men who in the back of their minds sees the potential to get turned on by men, are opposed to "gay stuff" because it may ruffle their feathers. From observing girls and women same-sex intimacy I think there's a lesson to learn and that maybe men are frustrated by the censoring of same-sex intimacy and that the only way to achieve it is by "being gay". Why can't boys and men be allowed to share intimacy, physical and emotional, without being labelled "different"? The problem with the concept of "gay" is that it will always be of a lower social status simply because for women, a so-called "straight" male will always have more value that a gay one. Everybody's heard comments from women who say "the guy next door is so cute, but too bad, he's gay". And this will never change. Or do you think it will come a time when women won't care if the guy they are interested is gay or not. The solution is to get rid of the gay and straight identities because that will be the only way to get rid of discrimination. And focus instead of what are the needs that boys and men need from other boys and men. Here is one example. Wanting to suck cock is seen as an indication that a man is gay. But this need to suck cock would be interpreted as men wanting to suck it's own cock but because a man can't really suck it, he needs to suck another guy's cock. Boys should first have fun with each other, suck cock, fuck each other, play all kinds of sexual games, without any women. Then, as they grow older into manhood men can decide to relate sexually to women. That way men can resolve any fetishes they may have among each other, and then go to women.

I would like to take a step back and think of why a professional doing their job has to share with the clients, children in this case, details of their personal life. When I went to school I never knew anything about the personal life of my teachers, and looking back I wasn't interested. Teachers were there to teach subjects that were considered to help children in their future careers, like Math, Grammar, Science, public speaking, and many other useful subjects. Regarding the reference to sexual orientation: But heterosexuality is pervasive in all cultures, and it has been for millennia, therefore there must be something about the conditions and the dynamics of heterosexuality that it is favoured among all cultures. One reason I can think about why most men favour heterosexual intimacy over male intimacy is that most likely their experiences of intimacy have been with a woman, their mother, rarely with a father or any male friends. I disagree with presenting children with a concept that segregates them based on a need for intimacy. As BootmanLA says "[Heterosexuality] is baked into the environment; it's the air that people breathe" which creates a power imbalance with homosexuality at the bottom of the scale. Heterosexuality is so baked into the environment that there have been several cases of Canadian Junior players using some young woman in gang-bang, just to be able to say that they are straight. If I were the judge my sentence would be to repeat the scene but this time instead of the young woman being gang-rape, they all have to take turns being the slut. Instead of telling teenage boys about the gay identity, they should be told things that are real and concrete, like "Look boys, you have a cock, it gets hard, and it feels good touching it, but it would feel better if I sucked it, but I can't". You tell them that for some boys the next best thing to sucking your own cock is to suck a buddy's cock, and maybe later switch. If one keeps the "gay" out of the needs for intimacy with other boys, boys are more likely accept same-sex intimacy themselves. One of the most intimate things two boys can do, something they cannot do with girls, is compare their cocks, in size shape, etc. But for two boys to compare their cocks they have to feel aroused, which within sexual orientation perspective would mean that two straight boys cannot compare cocks, because doing it makes them gay.

Using a fake name for a law is not a proper way of debating the issue. I'm not American so I don't know what the name of the law is, but I know those opposing to the bill likes to call it that way to disqualify it. I'm against confusing children about any concept, and especially gender. Many concepts are ambiguous and that may include gender. I say "may" because it's never been confusing to me. Take the concepts of "door" and "window" which at first glance they seem simple. A door is to go in and out of a room, and a window is to let light and fresh air come into a room. That's what children learn by observation. But it turns out that a window can also be a door and a door can sometimes be a window, but not because of that we teach two-year old children the nuances of concepts like window and door. Children learn about the nuances of windows and doors with experience. Yes, sometimes for some gender is not as clear as it is for more than 99% of the population in the Western world, but that doesn't mean that you have to confuse every child with the nuances of gender. Because if you do, many children with emotional issues unrelated to gender will gravitate to the ideas of gender theory because they find emotional support among other young people.