ErosWired

Follow the money. There’s no such thing as a ‘free’ HIV kit. Someone has to manufacture them, someone has to ship them, someone has to collect them, and someone has to run the lab that tests them, none of those people do their work for free, so someone, somewhere down the line, pays. Because it’s a public health initiative, the one who pays may be the government…which means the taxpayer. Americans pay taxes in order to receive the benefits their government provides for them as citizens. From time to time, their tax dollars also are spent in the aid of other nations, but this is always because the government has determined that the taxpayer will significantly benefit the outcome of that expenditure. As a general rule, Americans, while on the whole generous, are not wild about the idea of paying for things they get nothing out of. Lawmakers in particular like to make a political points off of claims that public money is being spent wastefully helping non-Americans. As a result, those administering the programs must be especially conscious about the way funds are disbursed. If Grindr is operating as a conduit for distribution of HIV kits provided by government agencies or NGOs using federal funding, I guarantee you there are restrictions on sending those kits outside US borders. It has nothing to do with race, ethnicity, nationalism or xenophobia - it has to do with laws that ensure that tax dollars get spent on taxpayers. This analysis is, of course, based on the assumption that Grindr is indeed drawing upon such a governmental program. If so, however, then if Canadians and Mexicans want Grindr to offer equal service to them, it would seem that their first call should be not ti Grindr, but to their government representatives to determine whether those national governments are providing free kits for distribution…and if not, why the hell not.

According to the CDC, an antibody test for HIV (such as those using oral samples) can first accurately detect HIV infection 23-90 days after exposure. Anything earlier requires blood sampling. Onset of seroconversion symptoms occurs 2-6 weeks after exposure. Seven days would be a bit early, but if you had your first indication at day 15, that would fit the profile. I would recommend getting tested as soon as feasible.

There are multiple reasons why that “saying” (which I have never heard said, ever, until now) cannot be true, but let’s start with plain statistics. The average length of the erect human penis is 5.1 - 5.5 inches. That’s not small-to-average, that’s the average. Polling and anecdotal accounts on this site consistently place the population of bottoms as approximately 66% of this community, with exclusive Tops only making up about 10%, so men who take it up the ass at least part of the time constitute 90% of penis owners across the range of potential sizes. Cocks of 7” or greater are in the 90th percentile of cocks out there, so there can be no meaningful statistical correlation between sexual role preference and penis length. Anecdotally, this forum provides ample accounts of bottoms reporting average to above-average cock size, and even if we assume that a fraction of these accounts are in fact accurate (ahem) the premise is drawn seriously into question. There is no functional reason why there would be any correlation between penis length and receptive role, especially as the male has no actual evolved receptive reproductive function. There is no cause for biological adaptation to occur. Rather, what we see here, I think, is the syllogistic conflation of two psychological constructs: The notion that A) a shorter penis makes a male less of a man, and B) receptive sexual role makes a male less of a man, therefore C) a short cock makes a male a bottom. A) Nellie is an elephant. B) Nellie is pink. Therefore C) Elephants are pink. Horseshit. Elephants aren’t pink, and a short cock doesn’t make a guy a bottom.

WARNING - This necro topic was started long before the current site regulations governing discussion of gifter/chaser culture. Answering questions 9 and 10 in this part of the forum may now subject you to an infraction from the Moderators. Such questions have no place in the sexual health board, and must be directed to the backroom.

No. His cock is not going to get “locked” in your rectum. If a human rectum can stretch to accommodate a fist - or a forearm - no one’s cockhead is going to get hung in it. On top of that, even on the “hardest” cock, the glans is relatively pliable. You may distinctly feel it moving in and out, but it’s going to move out.

Maybe the scene isn’t really in his apartment. Maybe it’s made up to look like an apartment, but they actually had to film it in a laundromat. Which, really, if you think about it - some pretty hot scenarios could come up in a laundromat… Why don’t we see more of this?

This. In an age where our personal data, browsing history and search history are used to custom-target advertising to us left, right and center, you’d think that some genius would figure out that there’s no fucking point in putting tits and vaginas in the shop window on a gay porn channel. The latest, most egregious form of this is an ad with naked older women that warns you that you “must fuck ugly grannies” and that your account will be banned if you refuse. That’s some fucking niche kink right there. Related: JerkMate. Please, please stop. It always gets me when they say, in the same breath, “Totally confidential. Meet hundreds - no, thousands of men online” - how confidential are you expecting to be if you’re sharing your intimacy with hundreds, no, thousands of people?

Tangentially to the topic, one might note that walruses, which have one of the largest penis bones in the animal kingdom, display homosexual behavior, and have likely been boning each other much longer than we have.

This is an important point. You have to make your horniness work for you and not against you. Realize that that very horny mindset in which there’s no doubt in your mind that you want and would take that cock is a fragile state. If you are feeling it, don’t start masturbating, edging, gooning, whatever. Don’t start drinking or using substances that either provide alternate stimulus or change your mental state. In short, don’t spoil your appetite. Keep yourself in that special state of cock-hunger. I can’t tell you how many times a Top has told me he’s coming to fuck me but he’s going to take a shower first - as soon as I get that I instantly know I’m never going to see him. Why? Because Mr. Horny Top is going to get naked, get warm and wet, and start touching himself in private places all slicked up with soap. He’s pretty much guaranteed to get something out of his system. If I put my body in service, I deny myself any access to my own orgasm until I’ve done my duty. My sexual hunger is a valuable asset, and I cultivate it so that a Top gets the most, hungry, most intense response from me that he can get. Stay hungry.

You say your fear is that you might disappoint the guy you’re going to suck - but you’re guaranteed to disappoint a guy you back out on, so what you’re saying makes no sense. Instead, it sounds like you’re afraid of something else, and you’re using “I’m afraid I’ll disappoint” as a (flimsy) screen for the real reason, which may or may not be clear to you. It’s your own fear you’re dealing with, not the other guys’, so it’s not their psychology that’s at the root of this. A fair number of men post here with questions in a similar vein, to wit: ‘How can I stop being afraid?’ No one can do that for you. It has to come from within. At its most basic, your mind has to make a judgment that you want the potential reward more than you don’t want the potential consequence. Nobody can tell you how to want one thing more than something else. Seriously, though - if you’re setting up hookups and then backing out on them, stop it. You’re cheating guys out of the time they could have used getting head from somebody with a willing mouth. You’re also ruining your own reputation. Don’t offer your mouth unless you’re determined to use it.

Ass is my strength. Always do what you’re best at. My best use is as a cunt for breeding. I very rarely service a cock with head only by arrangement. It may happen in the bathhouse or an ABS, but not with an arranged hookup.

Including whether they in fact honored your request to cancel your auto-subscription. Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #1: “Once you have their money, you never give it back.”

If I were asinine enough to ask a Top a question like that after he’d just pumped me, I would expect him to say, “Sure, why not?” or “Whatever floats your boat” and walk out. I would deserve no better answer.

“It’s not gay if we’re both gay.” I guess he figured your gay would cancel each other’s out. On the other hand, given that he always refused to reciprocate, the same phrase can equally mean “One of us is gay.” What I’ve never understood is how men who choose to perform homosexual acts rationalize that they’re not being homosexuals simply because they’re the ones doing the inseminating. He’s still fucking a dude. It’s not just the ones on the receiving end who are gay.

You thought about laughing about it, though. That’s still a trip to the confessional.

Sorry you found straightforward advice unpleasant. We get questions like your original post pretty regularly, to the effect of “I can’t stop thinking about fucking bare, I don’t know what to do, I’m obsessed, but can’t actually do it”. The most direct answer is, in truth, and in order: yes you can, yes you do, no you’re not, and nothing’s stopping you but yourself. You asked a question; we answered it. Now you say, rather, that the answer wasn’t pleasant (a purely subjective decision on your part) and that your fantasy is being judged - that tells us that your question wasn’t actually a serious question, but an expression of a fantasy. That’s fine. You posted, however, in the sexual health forum, where we treat all questions as legitimate inquiry, and attempt to respond accordingly, in real-world terms, emphasizing the often gritty reality of the risks of bareback sexual practice. We do so because many of us have experienced that reality first-hand, and would like to spare you having to find out how unbelievably more shitty life can be that having to get a needle stick at the doctor’s office. A lot of us have lived some shit here, so we don’t mince words about what happens when life gets raw. I also despise needles, as it happens, and dislike having blood taken, but once you get HIV, you get to do it often, whether you like it or not. If advice to take the limited number of voluntary jabs needed to avoid the unlimited number of involuntary ones is “blunt”, then so be it.

A: You question presumes it’s somehow okay to for a person to be a thief and take things he has to right to without payment. It’s why the practice is called piracy. Answering the question is therefore essentially facilitating an unlawful (not to say unethical) act. B: You’re asking what the consequences are for the thief. But there are potential consequences for the ones making it possible for the stealing to take place. Perhaps you’ve heard of the notorious Pirate Bay, the site that’s been making it possible to impoverish hardworking creative people for years by providing a conduit for assholes to rip them off. The Pirate Bay is still running, and the pirates are still stealing…but the site founders went to jail. I’ve been on many a site where questions like the one you asked here are forbidden because if the site entertains them it looks like the site is promoting copyright infringement. There is, but you won’t like it. Under U.S. Copyright Law, as of 1978, a work is protected by copyright for the life of the creator plus an additional 70 years. For works subject to the international Berne Convention copyright protections, the standard is life of the creator plus 50 years. So if we assume that the cumdump in the latest TIM clip just out is 25, and he lives to be 75, the “expiration date” when you’ll be able to do whatever you want with that video will be in 2143. That assumes that the company that holds the copyright doesn’t extend it. And don’t think you could reach back to the early 70s and have your way with the vintage porn, either - anything later than around 1930 is probably still covered. There’s a dead simple way around all the copyright restrictions on porn, though - make your own.

HIV testing by oral fluid is for antibody only and is the least reliable method. Antibody/Antigen may be possible with a needle stick. Hepatitis panels are a blood test. Don’t be a weenie. Go get the damn test.

I’m not sure I follow the logic. You’re quite right that if a guy is ass-up, his Undetectable status is only relevant to the health of the Top until after he takes his first raw load - then he can guarantee no safety from HIV any more than he can guarantee safety from gono. But at the same time - at that point, his Undetectable status is no longer relevant to the health of the Top. The Top is going to be exposed to risk no matter what he does if he penetrated, so what is served by revealing status at that point, and why is the Top even bothering to ask? Personally, I always try to broadcast my status in advance of hooking up, so I seldom get faced with the question in the moment. I’m a big advocate for revealing status, if for no other reason than the more routine it gets, the less stigma we’re going to have to deal with. But from a practical perspective, revealing your status does little more than tell the Top you’re looking after yourself. He’s still taking a chance, and telling him you’re Undetectable - i.e. safe - may actually be giving him a false sense of security.

This isn’t complicated. You want something that has a risk attached, but you want it with no risk. Your distress comes from the fact that you can’t have what you want, and you’re too afraid to get it any other way. No amount of fretting is going to change it. If you want bare, you accept some risk. Period. If you absolutely cannot tolerate the thought of coping with what would happen if you got HIV, then put going bare out of your mind. Make the decision and quit worrying about it. There are lots of things in life we have to choose not to do, and we live with the choices. On the other hand, there are ways to approach it by drastically reducing the risk - PrEP - being the biggest factor. Ignore these people telling you to find friends who are givers/chasers. If you don’t want to become positive, they’re going to give you lousy advice, and conceivably try to harm you - avoid like plague. Even if you mitigate your risk of HIV to the max, the more you fuck bare, the more certain it is that you’ll ultimately pick up an STD. Again, if you can’t deal with it, no bare for you. It’s something you have to accept. There’s nothing anyone here can do to get you over your fear of the water. We can give you information. We can tell you what we’ve done. But making the decision to swim is all you. We can’t push you into the pool.

If it’s a solution that will just take the shackles off responsible sexual expression, all to the good. If the infrastructure can also be used to build safe havens that would support white-supremacist, neo-Nazi, Q-Anon, anti-vaxxer, antisemitic, flat-earther, homophobic, and generally misinformation, disinformation, hatespeech and troll- friendly platforms, that does not sound like forward progress to me. It sounds alarming.

Those are not “Terms” that I would accept, particularly not if I were going to post any content. The site owners seem to overlook the fact that without the content posted by its members, its site consists of blank screens. So its “terms” are essentially “We get to profit from your content and have no obligation to you whatsoever, kay? Any questions? No? Didn’t think so.” The whole notion of being arbitrarily and capriciously unaccountable for the way account holders are treated is not unique to NewTumblr (looking at you, BBRTS), and I hope that when @rawTOP gets his services ready for action we can look forward to having some alternatives with common-sense management.

I’m not sure a ‘subtle anal tattoo’ is a thing, but that’s a nice design. 🙂 If I were 20 years younger, I would probably get an anal tattoo. I know exactly what it would look like. I just don’t think my ass could do it justice the way it once could have.

I believe you are correct. If I have encountered an unusually high proportion of them, it’s likely because they have tended to concentrate in circles in which I have found myself. Either that, or there’s something about me that attracts them. I’m sure most haven’t really stopped to think it through, either. Part of the reason for the question was to possibly generate some self-examination in such persons to reveal some motivations they might not have fully grasped. As to who wants to admit it, you wouldn’t think anyone would - but they do. Read around here, and there are men Tops who talk openly about how it isn’t sex unless they’re hurting the bottom, or how they want to make him bleed, or how hot it is to see a bottom in tears, how they would put their forearm up an unconscious bottom’s ass, etc., etc. Granted, the bulk of it is just talk (thank God) but I’m just as interested in the psychological impetus that makes a man desire to do that to another man, whether he actually does it or not. @JimInWisc is right that the bona fide Sadist is rare (having been owned and trained by one I definitely know the difference), but there are quite a few men out there who are hovering over the line, unready or unwilling to actually act on their sadistic impulses…unless you give them a tiny little nudge. And if they’re in a group, they may do it as a group. I’ll never forget a BDSM demonstration I was part of a number of years ago, in which a Dom was showing how to use a Violet Wand. It wasn’t one of these modern-day namby-pamby neon wands, either, it was one of the old-skool lightning zappers. I was bound spreadeagled naked to a table as the test subject, and the men assembled got to try using the wand on me themselves. I couldn’t help noticing how fascinated they were watching arcs of electricity pass from the wand into my cockhead. They did it over and over, completely forgetting that I was attached to it, lighting up my shaft and balls, passing the wand between them, until finally the Dom ended the presentation. A good time was had by all. (Well…) But it took so little to turn every one of them into a sadist for that space of time, because I think that for some men who cause sexual pain, the excitement is in the power to cause it; but for others the psychology is more of an indifference to whether he feels it.

You may support the laws’ (stated) intent, but do you also 100% support their consequences, even if those consequences are unintended? Even if those consequences infringe on other rights? Even if those consequences prove unconstitutional? Even if the laws aren’t actually effective in solving the problem of children seeing pornography? Do you imagine teenagers only get their first look at porn from visits to porn sites? The web is riddled with the stuff, and flows like water. Back before there was an internet, how did boys get their first look at a porn magazine? They didn’t all find their way into adult bookstores where someone could stop them by checking their age - they saw it because some buddy of theirs got hold of it and passed it around. The principle has not changed. The principle will not change. These laws will do bupkis to change it. They will only create barriers to adult access that put personal information at risk. There is no way to lock all pornography behind an impervious paywall, and even if you could, that would mean that the right to view porn would be restricted to those who could afford it. The poor don’t have the same right to sexy as the rich? Fuck that noise. But pornographic video is simply a data stream like any other, and on a free and open internet, it’s going to continue to flow just like water. These laws are basically trying to plug holes in a sieve. If the framers of these laws in LA and VA intended to shut down a site like BreedingZone in a state, they might be celebrating their success - but what’s the very, very first thing we did on hearing the news? Started talking about the easiest way for people in LA and VA to circumvent the law and carry on as usual. These religious types who foist these anti-pornography laws are also the types that teach their children to be ashamed of their own sexuality and their own bodies, and block attempts to ensure public education about sexual health and reproductive practice. They make these porn laws because they’re afraid their children will get wet - because they refuse to teach them how to swim.