kinkyfucker

I love ass to mouth. As someone who takes care to be sure I'm squeaky clean before a fuck, I have no problem sucking a cock after its been in my hole. In fact, after a guy has fucked me and cum, I feel bad if the guy tries to clean up using a towel or something. I always offer to clean up the mess myself with my mouth. On the occasions I play with a rubber, after the guy takes it off I like to suck the cum off his cock too!

For me, its kinda a mixed bag. Sometimes I like the almost completely anonymous one time only meet and fuck and never see you again type deal, but I find that can leave me feeling empty inside. So what works for me is to find fuck buds that I can develop an emotional connection with, even if it is just on a casual friendship/chatting online and fucking level, which makes me feel less empty. Of course, when I do have a boyfriend, which I've only had one in my life, I have sex with them too. But most of the guys I've had sex with in my life have been NSA types.

For cleaning out for a regular fuck I would just use a bulb syringe, however I've recently wanted to get into the realm of fisting, so I purchased a Streem Master when Adam Male was having a fifty percent off sale. Its like a shower shot only a lot better. I recommend everyone check out their site and see if it would be of interest. And no, I don't work for them or get a commission or anything, I just think its way better than a shower shot, and its totally portable.

Totally not cool. Stealthing is never cool. He should have never lied about not having any diseases, or if he wasn't sure, he should have told you so you could have made an informed decision. Honestly though, considering what happened with him, I think you should seriously consider the possibility that he might of had something more serious than gonorrhea or chlamydia. He might have HIV and have given it to you. Make sure to get tested within the appropriate testing windows. And sorry to hear this happened to you!

read the prologue to the vid on efukt:

"It seems our friend here wants to career out of using his cornhole as meat grinder. It's kinda like those people at the circus who eat glass, except in this case his browneye does all the crunching."

Was it an illusion?? was the glass on that pickle jar very thin? Is every magic trick real?

Good lord man, are you some kind of paranoid person? Seriously, why on earth would it be an illusion. I've seen this video maybe 10 or more times, and there is nothing in it to indicate it is not authentic. The only part of it that is not real is the scream at the end, which was edited in. And why would the glass of the jar be any thinner than a regular jar? Do you seriously think they specially make thin jars just for guys to break with their asses? This is not a magic trick, this is a guy filming himself jerking off and then getting into a really bad situation. Stop with the conspiracy theories already!

Ive seen it on several websites. He's a pain pig; also, it's odd that he got the glass jar in his hole and then was able to break it --- so I'm a bit suspicious about the physics involved and wonder if he staged the whole vid

Okay, a couple questions for you as you seem to know this man very well.

1) How do you know he's a pain pig and that this wasn't just an accident?

2) How on earth would someone stage a glass jar breaking in their ass?

As for the physics involved, he was leaning to much on the edge of the jar, and it shattered. Hit any jar on the edge and that'll happen. Try putting your whole body weight on it, and you'll get the same results I imagine. Not rocket science.

Some how I thought I was doing it wrong

Don't feel bad, sexuality can be confusing and take awhile, even a long time to figure out. In my own case, as a transguy, prior to transitioning, I was attracted to women. However, once I transitioned and started feeling more comfortable with my identity as a man and okay with my body as a man's body, I realized I was a gay man. Talk about confusing! I guess my point is, worrying about not doing it right as the reason you didn't figure it out isn't the end of the world, we all have our own reasons for our journey leading us where it has.

kinkyfucker

hah hah. I guess he was really horny. Nothing feels better than a hard cock in the ass. (or two sometimes.) =)

Must have been on some bad drugs then, because who seriously confuses a hard glass jar for a hard cock (or two)?

Hmm... Darwin Award nomination in order perhaps? Seriously, who the fuck sticks a glass jar up their ass? That's just crazy and asking for something to go wrong!

This thread is (supposed to be) about PrEP...

To me the biggest argument against PrEP is that they want you to take pills for the rest of your life so you can avoid taking pills for the rest of your life. The logic of it just doesn't make sense.

Excellent point rawTOP! Not to mention, if there isn't funding for meds for people already infected with the virus, why do people think there will be funding for PrEP?

Not exactly. I'm saying that a life with zero risk isn't one many of us would ever want to live. Stop telling us to live it.

I'm not telling anyone what to do or not do. I'm just wanting to be sure everyone has the correct scientific information on which to base their choices. It'd be like handing someone a gun and telling them it wasn't loaded. Not a very responsible choice. I'd rather make sure people knew the risks so they could make informed decisions about their sexual behaviors. If people want to risk HIV transmission anyway, then that is their prerogative.

KinkyFucker - The problem is that those studies only say that 1) people are more comfortable barebacking with people who are undetectable, 2) that undetectable in blood doesn't mean undetectable in other areas and 2) that mathematical models say that HIV transmission should be possible with people who are undetectable.

To which I say "so what"? The biggest fallacy is your conclusions are based on the notion that no risk is acceptable. People just don't live their lives that way. We take risks all the time. Crossing the street is a risk. I could trip and fall and get run over by a bus, but I still cross the street. The Swiss Statement was within that context. They acknowledged that HIV transmission risk wasn't zero but basically said it was low enough that it shouldn't be a concern.

It's an issue of priorities. Smoking is killing 5 times more gay men yet there isn't nearly the stigma around that, why? Poz guys on meds need to understand that they're not the source of the rise in HIV infection rates (they're shooting blanks). The stigma of sero-discordant sex with undetectable guys needs to be lifted. The problem today is that people are finding out too late that they're poz - after damage as been done. But people aren't getting tested because of the stigma and fear. When you focus on studies like the ones you cite you perpetuate that stigma and fear and make the real problem worse. If you want to bring down the HIV infection rate get people tested - it's guys who think they're neg who are causing most of the infections. If you want to reduce AIDS related deaths get people tested before HIV does damage to their bodies. And deal with issues like substance abuse that are central to risk taking and guys not taking their meds...

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. You feel that encouraging people to do something that is proven to be unsafe is a good idea, whereas I am standing by the science which shows it is not. Fine. I respect your right to disagree.

Ehhh.

That is not what I was expecting, based on your commentary. The single author of the opinion you sent, Dr. Albrecht, is not part of the original Swiss study, so not sure where did you get the "original authors recanted" bit.

Ironically, he says:

"Although ART is a promising avenue for preventing the spread of HIV, we need data, not opinions, before we encourage serodiscordant couples to skip the condoms."

Despite he himself gives no data at all.

Sure, infections might happen, but the amount of risk reduction is huge and Rawtop is probably right, plus, the original study addressed the fact that people with other STDs might harbor the virus on their genital tract, despite being UD. However, you are right that the study was only about hetero couples.

This is a science and health debate, so pointing fingers, making up motives and being uncivil won't help anyone.

I cited that source because that was the one we've used on the HIV support website I belong to. I realize it was authored by only a single man, and that he wasn't one of the original authors of the Swiss Statement. He was however, not referring to his own research, but referencing a study conducted by others, many of whom were authors of the original statement. I believe this is the study he is referring to:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21034200

Another study which you might find interesting related to being undetectable and having unprotected sex is this one:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18657710

This article refers to semen being infectious despite an undetectable viral load in the blood:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20929678

This study refers to women with UD blood levels and the persistence of HIV in their genital tracts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20736815

Another study stating UD in blood does not equate to no virus in semen:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20485526

I could go on and on, but I don't feel like it. These are only some selected studies from the past few months of 2010. I have no other agenda other than to disseminate accurate scientific knowledge to everyone. I'm certainly not making up motives. Perhaps I misunderstood what I read in the follow-up to the Swiss Statement, but I think having read all of these other bits of research, it is pretty clear that most science does NOT support the outcome the Swiss Statement came to.

Best wishes everyone!

kinkyfucker

Kinkyfucker,

Can you please point me to that retraction? I am very interested.

Thanks

I hope I didn't imply that it was a full retraction, but rather a revision of their statement. Maybe it was a poor choice of words on my part. Well, here is the link to the latest study out of Switzerland. Hope it helps clarify things!

http://aids-clinical-care.jwatch.org/cgi/content/full/2010/1115/1

If the poz partner is on meds and undetectable that alone is more effective than using condoms (and not being on meds). I still wouldn't suggest it in that case - just too much risk in side effects to the neg guy. I'd recommend condoms actually... Condoms plus meds for the poz guy is pretty much bullet proof. I'd only really suggest it if they desperately want to bareback and the poz guy is the top in the relationship.

rawTOP-

You're wrong that barebacking with a poz top on meds is safer than having sex with a condom who isn't on meds. I believe what you are trying to do is take the Swiss Statement and distort it for your own purposes. Originally, the only thing the Swiss Statement was intended to do was to address whether a neg woman could safely be impregnated "naturally" by a poz top who had an undetectable viral load. Yet from there people have gone and extrapolated so far as to say it is safer to have sex with someone who is UD raw than someone who is NOT UD with a condom. This is simply not true. In fact, pretty much all other studies have shown otherwise. In fact, recently the authors of the Swiss Statement came out and recanted much of their original work after finding it did not apply much further than the laboratory and was leading people to do unsafe things. So, rawTOP, be careful what you post, people are relying on you for accurate information as the moderator of the board!

I'm big into the Dad/son fantasy too. I pretty much have only had sex with older men. I'm in my early twenties and most of the men I've been fucked by have been in their forties and fifties. A lot of times we don't even verbally get into the role play, but the whole age difference is hot for me because I can fantasize about it when I'm getting fucked. But I'd love to find a man who'd really like to make my fantasies come true!

You mentioned that "If status is important I shall make sure to discuss in advance. Once I have agreed to fuck I will continue to completion." I would suggest modifying that to say something like "If I have any STDs I will inform my partner and if it matters to me, ask if he has any. Once I have agreed to fuck I will continue to completion." I think it is the responsibility of a good bottom (and top IMHO) to inform their partner if they have anything the other person might catch through barebacking. Especially as a sub bottom, it shows respect for the top to inform them of any risk the top might be taking by putting their raw dick in my ass if I tell them I'm poz or whatever. Always, always, give them the choice to make informed consent!

I have but it was only because I wanted her husband's 10" cock up my ass and unless I fucked her it wasnt going to happen. I sucke dhim while I fucked her and then she watched him fuck me bare until he shot his load deep in me>>>> definitely worth it

I think I might be willing to have sex with a girl in order to fuck her husband if the guy was very very hot or had an amazing cock or something. Hmm..... something to think about!

Fucked with a girl for 6 months in college..... it was how i figured out i was gay

You fucked her for six months and it took you that long to figure out you were gay?

Maybe its because for some guys barebacking is a hot fantasy, but they might not actually do it in real life. So they like to read about it, talk about it, think about it, but when it comes time for actual sex, they decide to play it safe and wrap it up. Same thing goes for bug chasers. For many it is just a hot fantasy that they would never actually follow through on.