hungry_hole

It's a good point. Are erectile issues in tops present in one-to-one or also in group sex? I ask because many times I see in bathhouses even bottoms topping some sloppy holes or share it with another top. So I imagine tops can also get some stimulation from the other tops apart from a Viagra pill. A top can suck some cock and that would make him hard. I'm assuming erectile issues are more common in one-to-one encounters. I may be wrong.

You're right, it is an incredible experience. Although for many shooting a load in a hole is also an incredible experience, which many bottoms can attest to from the experiences of getting bred. But I guess having a load in my hole, a part of another man, makes it hotter I guess. The top gets up and leaves but the load stays inside.

PrEP is not accessible to everyone. Accepting the possibility of pozing for someone who lives a "perfectly good heterosexual sex life" is not easy because the consequences of your actions fall on many other people like spouse and children and having to face the heterosexual world as an HIV+ individual. I would suggest you evaluate how important it is for you to stay HIV-negative and how devastating would it be if you became poz. If you don't care about HIV then just go for it and become a slut to horny guys in darkrooms. If you need to remain HIV-negative because pozing would complicate your personal life, you need some protection from HIV. One solution is PrEP but the problem is that you are still exposed to other infections not protected by PrEP. You need now to evaluate whether or not being exposed to other infections like Syphilis has to be avoided at all cost or you can afford being the risk of infection. If you can handle the curable infections and accept a low risk of Herpes and Hepc-C, PrEP is a good solution, at least for a few years. If you need to avoid all STDs your best solution is a membership with safestsex.org because the information you would get from other members is relevant to making a decision to have or not to have sex with someone when trying to protect from STDs. The problem with the strategy offered by safestsex.org is that new member cannot expect to be protected from STDs in extremely anonymous situations, like a darkroom. What I've heard is that in some large cities (not sure if the US or Canada) they have organized SafestSex.org Parties, sort of like CumUnion but much smaller I imagine. I don't have the details of how that works but I can imagine that if everyone is tested it should be fun to get all in a bathhouse or some club. Something I've learned throughout the years is that I always thought I needed to have the experience because it was my last chance. Unless you are getting close to 50 you don't need to rush and instead make sure to make the best decision.

In another thread where poptronic discussed "performance issues" as a top and I suggested that he bottom, he answers: Why are there so many bottoms when in the straight world men do anything to fuck a pussy. It should be full of horny tops looking for a hole to fuck. But that's not the way it is. Every sauna, every sex club, packed with bottoms.

I think that 50 is too soon to be receiving so many rejections. At 50 I felt old and less desirable but the experiences I was having told me a different story because I was having lots of sex and getting good feedback from guys. I would say that 60's is definitely a turning point in the arena of sex with men and is when you go from a "daddy" to a "grandpa" category. Most young guys who are into "older" they usually mean men somewhere between 40-55. Of course there are exceptions and I even know a guy in his 30's who likes men 55 and up. Older than 55 and 60 tops don't seem to have any problem getting young bottoms even in their 20's. Most older tops prefer younger bottoms which is what makes it harder for older bottoms. I'm sure some older guys chose being a top because it gets them more action. Any older top in this situation?

When I started barebacking I felt "exhibitionist" by being outspoken about wanting raw sex, something very common now but very rare then. I also feel an "exhibitionist" when at the bathhouse I put signs in my room that say exactly what I'm looking for, such as "Cream my Hole". Posting those signs in my room made me horny and I felt exhibitionist.

I find that for a gang-bang to be fun there must be a bottom that excites a group of tops, all eager waiting for their turn to fuck. It usually happens with a young bottom on the sling.

This brings up the issue of abuse of insurance, the elephant in the room. Drug plans are great when all of a sudden you need to take an expensive medication because you're sick. Is it fair for insurance companies to cover PrEP, which means that every other premium has to pay a little more to cover those on PrEP, many who just want to be the cumhole for the weekend at the local bathhouse?

Every day I see on BarebackRT more and more guys on PrEP. Not sure if all are really on PrEP. If PrEP makes you bareback without worrying about HIV, what do you do about the other STDs? I know that a few shots will fix it but still, no infections are good. When on PrEP, do you feel you have to have sex more often to justify taking the medications? Otherwise, why take PrEP sex is you are not having sex very often? What happens after PrEP? Or are you planning to be on PrEP for life? It must be tough to be fucking freely on PrEP and then for some reason you have to stop, and you forget you stopped PrEP. You have to re-adjust to not being on PrEP. Still trying to understand the furor that PrEP is causing.

jtonic, I see what you mean but I still think that poz guys should not have to take so much responsibility for the other guys' health. Anyone playing around in BarebackRT should know that barebacking is high-risk when it's done with people you don't know well. If

I always wonder why someone who is HIV+ would want sex only with other HIV+ guy? Why not someone who is HIV- or on PrEP?

I believe that a crucial part of being a good bottom is to have a clean hole.

You mention that you are fully versatile and that you can take and also give loads. If that's the case, what's the problem if you can't get a hard-on? Why not be more of a bottom? (I hate promoting the bottom role given it's abundance!) Next time you get like that in a group just become the slutty bottom...Plus I think you're pretty hot or at least young.

The title "From Top to Bottom Cumslut" reminds me of the times when I was a young hot bottom with a gym body and a nice six pack, I would accept hook-ups with bottoms and enjoy the challenge of leaving with the bottom's load in my hole. I would first get them horned up touching my body and finger my hole pre-lubed. I never felt bad because they would have a lot of fun too shooting inside a hot bottom.

In my experience, other than in darkrooms a lot has to do with the way the bottom looks like and how young he is. I've seen the change with me as I age as a bottom and how easy getting sex was in my 20's and 30's. Also, at Steamworks in Toronto I've seen older guys laying on the public sling for a long time while guys walk by and no action. The same evening I saw a young bottom in his 20's on the sling getting fucked and others waiting for their turn. What I'm trying to say is that many times tops look for a cumdump with specific characteristics. Of course, sometimes when some horny guy breeds the bottom's hole laying on the sling it adds a special value to the creamed hole and other characteristics like age may be irrelevant. And the older bottom gets another load for one of the spectators.

In my case, I had a hemorrhoid operation when I was in my early 20's and had to deal with my hole so I llearned how to clean myself before getting fucked. But it seems like most bottoms had to have an "accident" as a wake-up call of how important having a clean hole is. Most of us don't want to make the connection between sex and shit, and being secretive about the cleaning breaks that connection. That's probably one of the reasons why I prefer anon sex to intimate and loving sex. Like most bottoms I would clean myself before going to the bathhouse so I could offer a "cumhole" as in a more intimate setting it becomes more difficult to disassociate sex from shit. Probably very similar to what happens with STDs. We should all be talking about STDs before having sex but who wants to connect Sex with STDs, unless you're a chaser? I had several long-term fuck-buddies that kept coming back for years and I think one reason was that they new a clean hole w waiting for them. That's why it baffles me that bathhouses don't have better facilities specifically for bottoms. Steamworks in Toronto was the first place where I saw good douching pipes next to the toilets. But most places don't offer much and they expect bottoms clean themselves at home. Experienced Bottoms may get some of the attention from tops because of the assumption they are also experienced at cleaning.

It makes sense what you are saying and don't find it strange that you like to toy around with the idea of pain as long as you are not the one feeling the pain. I can compare this "pain fetish" with the experience of my "HIV fetish". I don't want HIV so I would never be a chaser but I get off of negative bottoms getting bred by a poz top as long as I'm not that bottom. Same as with pain, fun but not you feeling the pain. In terms of screaming or moaning bottoms, anything but a screaming bottom who sounds like a girl.

For me it would be "Deep in my ass, but carries on fucking" with my hole mostly wide open while the top keeps pumping his load without needing to pull-out overwhelmed by the pressure that some bottoms use to supposedly "milk the cock". I like it when after shooting the top spends a couple of minutes enjoying my sloppy hole and letting go of the last drops of cum.

I totally agree that men should fuck raw. But the problem is that barebacking is perceived as something evil and forbidden. I've tried using barebacking in profiles, including Grindr, and my profile was rejected. The problem with barebacking exists only if barebackers don't get tested and are not committed to staying free of STDs. But there is no intrinsic problem with fucking raw and society should be able to accept it. The problem with barebacking has to do with the "don't care" attitude barebackers have with respect to STDs. I'm Pro-RAW but not Pro-POZ.

I've been as slutty as one can get but not anymore. At one point in my sex life I would have sex with as many guys as possible, 15 my max count of loads in one evening at the bathhouse. Taken thousands of loads using gloryholes including my own private gloryhole. I would allow to get fucked just by anyone with a hard-on, never picky although I had a nice muscular body. Maybe not the sluttiest, but at some point as slutty as one can get.

The guy you are describing is someone who is not committed to staying away from STIs. The people who benefit from a safestsex.org membership are people like me, someone who is committed to not catching anything. I don't want Syphilis, or Gonorrhea, and even less HIV. Their video in YouTube says it all https://www.youtube.com/embed/ayeaVIOhfes If one night, for some reason I end up in a bathouse and expose myself to STI risk, as a responsible member I should wait for the window period before I test myself and then enter into the system the new test results. Safestsex.org is not for everyone but at least their strategy is based on testing and providing more accurate information between fuck-buddies without having to talk about STIs.

Some bottoms are so greedy. I'm renting an apartment with a portable sling so I've been able to organize many orgies/gangbangs which usually starts with finding the slutty bottom. Bottoms start asking "How many tops?" or "Are they endowed?" "How old are the tops?" as if I could have a whole catalogue of men of their taste. Maybe if they paid for the service! Sometimes 2 tops show up sometimes more, up to 6 once. But it's impossible to predict how may guys would be turned on by a walk-in scene.

This reminded me about something I read in the FAQ in the safestsex.org site (http://safestsex.org/FAQnon-en.php) There's a discussion about the whole "lying" issue, which I found right on. How can self-reported information be trusted? Don’t people lie? Most people don't lie if the facts are clear. Regarding the disclosure of STIs the assumption is that people will always lie. In part some people may lie because of the feelings of shame regarding STDs or to hide their sexual lifestyle. But we cannot forget that there are also people who don't lie and who genuinely want to enjoy sexual experiences knowing that the risk of STI is as low as possible. This is a typical dialogue between two people negotiating sexual contact at a bathhouse: “Are you clean?”, “I tested a couple of months ago, how about you?” Isn’t it unreasonable to expect the truth from such ambiguous dialogue? To expect truth one should first demand clear facts. The STD test results provided by SafestSex.org members may be self-reported, but the data is clear and complete, including a list of tests with exact dates. Additionally, members can add more information to their STD Profile such as name, address of clinic, copy of certificate of HIV test, and frequency of testing. All this combined will increase the credibility of each STD profile. Collecting information with clear and unambiguous facts, the way SafestSex.org does, is the first step towards getting at the truth. SafestSex.org provides the online tool to facilitate the exchange of information that potential sexual partners need to make an informed decision about their level of STI/STD risks. An STD Profile reflects a higher level of commitment with the truth than an oral exchange which will be incomplete and motivated by passion more than reason. I like the concept they promote, test for ALL STI and share results. It's exactly what so many horny guys need when choosing a fuck-buddy. My safestsex.org membership works for me as a "serosorting" tool but for all STI. If someone cannot take 10 minutes of his life to register as a member and enter his last test results so I can see them on my screen when he allows me to, it means that that guy is not committed to avoiding STIs.

It's inaccurate to call bare sex unsafe because if all involved are tested and not contagious then there is nothing unsafe about bareback sex. "Get tested" is the philosophy of SafestSex.org which I strongly recommend. Get tested and be able to show you have been tested. Some like to push PrEP, but I find safestsex.org by far the best alternative. The problem is that the site is new and not many know about it. I joined 3 months ago and I'm starting to find other members.

Reading some of the posts in this site I sometimes start believing that everyone lies about their status and that if you bareback, you will eventually poz. I think both are wrong assumptions. Regarding lying: SafestSex.org claims that it's not that people lie about their status but that the dialogue about STI is always ambiguous. SafestSex.org claims that just having clear facts in your STI Screening Profile will already reduce the risk. A typical dialogue: "Are you clean?" , “I’m clean, tested couple of months ago.” Instead of an ambiguous dialogue SafestSex.org members can exchange their STI test information online and break the ambiguity, list of tests, exact dates, validation information, etc. When someone has to complete an online form in the process of becoming a member the commitment to truth is higher than just a causal "I'm clean." type dialogue. It's hard to argue against this claim. Will all barebackers eventually poz? Not if you have sex with others who are not infected and test regularly. Uber connects drivers with passengers so I can't see why can't an application like SafestSex.org can't connect horny guys and reduce the risk? Where is this sense of gloom and doom coming from? The belief that there is no solution possible to avoid STI other than pharmaceutical solutions (PrEP) which are not really sustainable. This negativity towards STI prevention solutions is probably the result of a huge frustration we all experience that sexual activities have their limits, if health is an issue. It would be great there were no STI at all, and we call all do whatever we want with bodies and fluids, but we can't, if health is an issue. We need a more positive attitude that can replace this gloom and doom https://www.youtube.com/embed/ayeaVIOhfes