11bi11guy

Why not buy a bigger toy and practice solo? That’s what I did, and I have no problem taking big dicks. It might take some time to work up to a really big size, but it’s worth it. And a real penis will almost always be squishier than a dildo, even the dual-density silicone ones. If you can fit a dildo inside you, you should have no problem fitting a real cock that’s slightly bigger than that.

At the end of many very long paragraphs 🤦🏼‍♂️ Sorry, I guess it’s not *that* simple. Just my experience of course, I’m sure there are other guys married to women with vastly different experiences.

@hntnhole similar to @aj99, I didn’t know I liked sex with men until I got married to a woman. That’s one answer, which can explain things for both gay and bisexual men who marry women before they discover their sexuality. There are also bisexual men who knew about their sexuality, but still choose to be with/married to a woman. Maybe they lean more toward women. Or maybe they’re evenly split sexually and/or romantically, but find it’s easier to get their needs met by being in a relationship with a woman. I have had both experiences. As I mentioned, I only learned I’m attracted to men after I got married. But I also love having sex with women. So I’m bisexual. After my ex-wife and I got divorced, I had the new experience of trying to date and explore my sexuality for the first time. I discovered that sex with men is so easy to get, whereas casual sex with women basically does not exist. You need to invest way more time and effort into getting pussy than you need to invest to get cock. But what if you need both? I knew at that time that I definitely need pussy, but I eventually discovered that I need dick as well, that it wasn’t just something I could get out of my system (as my ex-wife suggested). I was open with girls I was dating that I’m bisexual. That scared many of them off—most women, regardless of how liberal or open or tolerant they claim to be, are not cool with dating a bi guy. When I started dating my current girlfriend, I told her about my bisexuality, and that I wasn’t sure I’d be able to give up having sex with men. She stuck around. About 7-8 months later, after a few strong bi-cycles, I knew I needed cock and cum again. I told her, and thankfully she was up for opening the relationship so I could get my needs met. That was three years (and many cocks) ago. I get my emotional needs met by being in a relationship. By being in relationship with a woman who is willing to give me a hall pass occasionally, I get all the pussy I need, and although I don’t get enough dick, I get enough to satisfy my craving for a little while. Generally, I’m not romantically attracted to men (although I’m open to it). But if I found myself in a relationship with a guy (meeting my emotional needs and my sexual need for dick), I wouldn’t be able to satisfy my need for pussy. Women just don’t put out as much as guys do, but that doesn’t change the fact that many guys need pussy. So bisexual guys will go to greater lengths to get pussy than they will to get cock. It’s that simple.

Most guys think it’s really hot when I tell them I have her permission to take as much cock and cum in my holes as I can get.

This just happened to me too. First time ever getting semen in my eye. Not fun.

Guy’s condo. He agreed to host a gangbang for me. Showed up at his place, a nice condo in an upscale part of town. It’s filthy. Definitely dog food and maybe dog shit on the floor. Bathroom was covered in his hair. No sheets on the bed. Worst part about it was there was no Wi-Fi and I got horrible signal there with TMobile. His complex was gated, so a lot of the guys who were trying to show up and fuck me couldn't get through. A few were able to—probably just following cars through the gate—and I was able to collect five loads. But still, never doing that again.

Looking for a good spot around the city to jack off in my car. Looking for free, private, good sight lines to see people coming, can leave my car running so it’s not freezing. Any recommendations would be much appreciated.

Unfortunately there’s not much research on this subject, so I suspect we’re both generalizing from our own anecdotal experiences. Might be an interesting study. All of the bisexual men I know personally are attracted to trans women. (In addition to self-identified bisexual men, I am also including in that group several men who identify as “straight” or “bi-curious,” but claim they’re simply attracted to penises.) I understand language and abstract thought are different across cultures, and that both are constantly changing. But I also think that language is political, and individual (and ultimately collective) decisions about what language to use have political consequences. I am a leftist. But I am also a political pragmatist. From a pragmatic perspective, I think the attempt to introduce unnecessary distinctions related to sexuality and gender—along with the attempt to force larger populations to accept those distinctions and any new definitions—does more harm than good. What good is achieved by introducing the concept of pansexuality? The concept did not exist in mainstream popular culture 30 years ago. A broad and inclusive concept of bisexuality did exist (see Ochs’s definition). So I still fail to see the reason for the introduction of pansexuality as a concept. And that’s coming from a leftist bisexual man with a background in political science, philosophy, psychology, and gender studies! Imagine what the concept of pansexuality sounds like to your average everyday American, who may have just recently started to come around to the idea that, “You know, LGBTQ people aren’t so bad. That couple down the street seem nice enough. So what if they want to get married? It doesn’t affect me at all.” Trying to force change for the sake of change is bound to create backlash, and the concept of pansexuality is not a hill worth dying on. Especially when there is a whole battalion of far-right religious fundamentalists waiting in the wings with plans to dismantle hard-earned LGBTQ civil rights. All they need to achieve their goals is anti-LGBTQ momentum in the cultural center mass of America. And all that requires is a spark that makes the LGBTQ community seem unreasonable. Here’s a funny clip I saw making its way around Instagram recently that helps illustrate my point. Although lighthearted, it underscores a more serious cultural idea: that the LGBTQ community is unreasonable, demanding, whiny, silly, and yes, obnoxious and narcissistic. (Maybe “unserious and self-absorbed” might be a better way of putting it.) That each of us must be seen and heard and understood by everyone in the wider population. That we are all unique snowflakes who deserve to be recognized and celebrated for our uniqueness. From personal experience, I deeply understand why recognition and acceptance of one’s sexual identity is important. But when trying to gain and hold political ground in a diverse, heterogeneous democratic society, I’m much more concerned about the effect of pushing those ideals on your average dullard who listens to Joe Rogan and Tulsi Gabbard. When deciding what label to use to describe my sexual identity—either (a) a relatively recent niche term that is poorly defined even within its own community, let alone the larger public; or (b) an accepted, inclusive term in long usage that is generally understood within the larger public—I think it’s important to realize that language has political consequences, and anti-wokeness wins elections.

I believe there is significant overlap of bisexuality and pansexuality. In our popular culture, the concept of bisexuality has a longer history than the concept of pansexuality. Unfortunately, the concept of pansexuality and its alleged distinction from bisexuality have been pushed recently by culture warriors who want to draw divisions rather than accept existing definitions that are inclusive and already well-understood in popular culture. Historically, non-hetero sexuality and transgender identity were mostly hidden from public view and discussion. Because heterosexuality was the only culturally acceptable sexual identity in much of the world for the last two millennia, all non-heterosexual identities were initially lumped with its opposite—homosexuality. This made sense in a Western Christian world steeped in duality. As people with non-heterosexual identities began fighting for (and winning) cultural recognition and civil rights over the past century, the concept of bisexuality began to gain recognition in popular culture. The Kinsey scale recognized sexuality as a spectrum with heterosexuality at one end and homosexuality at the other—the scale recognized gradations in between the two extremes, but everything in between was lumped under the bisexual label. There was no separate recognition of attraction to transgender individuals, or distinction between attraction to cisgender and transgender individuals. Labels are simply a way to communicate—with oneself and with others. Historically, by adopting the label “bisexual,” people communicated to themselves and to others that their sexuality was not strictly heterosexual and not strictly homosexual. Thus, “bisexual” became the way to identify people who were attracted to more than one gender. It is still the easiest way to identify people who are attracted to more than one gender. Since the 1990s, bisexual activist Robyn Ochs provided an inclusive definition of bisexuality: “the potential to be attracted—romantically and/or sexually—to people of more than one gender, not necessarily at the same time, not necessarily in the same way, and not necessarily to the same degree.” I agree with Ochs’s definition of bisexuality. I’m sure those of us who are terminally online can understand the capacity for nuance here, and that there are likely some people for whom the distinction between bisexual and pansexual means a great deal. I honestly cannot think of a specific example where that might matter, because all I can see is the potential for divisiveness for its own sake. What is the benefit of drawing a distinction between bisexuality and pansexuality? Assuming a limited definition of bisexuality as being attracted to only two genders, where pansexuality fills the space of the expansive definition of bisexuality, is there really a benefit in being able to communicate that distinction? I honestly think it’s really a useless distinction. I believe the vast majority of people who identify as bisexual are in fact attracted in some way to transgender individuals as well as cisgender individuals. I am bisexual under the expansive Ochs definition. There are nuances to my sexuality (I am heteroromantic; I have a high libido; I am attracted to feminine male-to-female transwomen, and feminine female-to-male transmen; I am generally a bottom with men, and I am attracted to masculine men; I have not yet had the opportunity, but I think I am attracted to feminine men and I’m interested in topping them). But most people don’t need to know all of that nuance; I can simply say I’m bisexual. Saying that I’m pansexual—in my mind a useless and needlessly complicated term—is less well understood, and would often require unnecessarily obnoxious and narcissistic follow-up conversation.

That's a fair point. But (and I'm splitting hairs here) the rationale behind those results is political, not legal. Chief Justice Roberts is a political animal, and his job is almost as political as a House whip. He's trying to chart as much of a path toward moderate conservatism as he can, trying to avoid the legacy of a Chief Justice Taney (Dred Scott) or Stone (Korematsu). SCD makes authoritative declarations surrounding legal theory, but that's a load of bollocks. Conservative justices who for decades beat a steady drum of originalism and strict constructionism just blew that up for political gain in multiple cases (e.g., Dobbs, West Virginia), tossing stare decisis out the window. Upcoming Senate and presidential elections and the health of Clarence Thomas (74) and Samuel Alito (72) will have significantly greater impact--by orders of magnitude--than whatever legal theories the justices pick and choose between (or create out of thin air) to rationalize their preferred political outcomes. It's easy to wax poetic about legal theory and ignore hypocrisy when your side has the votes. I'm just saying the philosophizing in this case comes with a large whiff of horseshit.

As a constitutional lawyer, my general advice would be to not put too much trust in what SouthernCumdump has to say regarding legal interpretation.

To OP: in your original post it was unclear whether you asked for evidence the other guy was on PrEP, or for evidence of recent test results. Either way, if I'm the guy you're asking, I would not be offended per se (truly, this hypersensitivity nonsense has really gone way too far...). If you were asking for evidence I was on PrEP, I probably would not provide you with that information. Here are some facts that support that decision: Your reason for asking me about my PrEP would appear to be concern about contracting HIV. You can take your own precautions against protecting yourself from HIV, i.e., get on PrEP (which it sounds like you plan to do; good for you!). You have a responsibility to protect yourself as much as reasonably possible, and you cannot rely on others to protect you. After my first year of taking PrEP, my doctor no longer tests for the presence of the drug in my system when I do my regular STI panel every 3+ months. Thus, the only "evidence" of me taking PrEP would be a photo of my pill bottle, pills, or the prescription itself. That information seems somewhat intrusive, and could impact my safety and discretion. Considering the fact listed above, I would be worried about hooking up with someone who expected me to provide that level of detail about my life without taking responsibility for their own safety. There are some guys out there who might lie about their status, and might lie about taking PrEP, so I would be confused about why you didn't just ask for my test results. Test results provide direct evidence of HIV status, at least for a snapshot in time. Test results are more difficult to fake than a verbal response, and I would guess faking test results is a rare occurrence considering the effort and malice required. If you were asking for evidence of test results, that's a different story for me. I think asking a potential partner about their STI status is normal and part of being a sexually responsible adult for many people. Asking STI status is different than asking for proof of STI test results, of course. But for me, that's along the same lines as asking STI status, and way less intrusive than asking for proof of my prescriptions. I would probably provide test results if asked. Many people would not provide test results if asked, and that's fine too. Because I'm on PrEP, because I get tested regularly after every hookup, and because I understand that STIs come with the territory of being a cumdump slut, I don't ask for STI status or test results. I inspect cocks and ask about any open sores or rashes--there's nothing that takes me out of the moment more than starting to suck a guy off and seeing an open sore on his dick--but other than that I understand that I'm taking a calculated risk by having sex with relative strangers. However, I do understand the impulse to want to be sure. I am concerned about catching STIs, mostly because I don't want to bring them home to my girlfriend. We have an open relationship. She allows me to hook up with guys once every few months. I get tested 2-3 weeks after every hookup. She had initiated sex with me after my hall passes within the 2-3 weeks before testing, but since I contracted chlamydia in March 2022 and passed it on to her (we both got treated), we now can't have sex during that pre-testing window. That sucks, but we all make trade-offs in life. For me, having a potential male partner ask me about my STI testing regimen or offer to provide his own puts my mind at ease and allows me to really get out of my head and into the fuck. There are other situations where guys have rational reasons for wanting to be sure about a potential partner's STI status. There are gay and bisexual guys like me in open relationships who don't want to bring things home to their partner. A lot of guys aren't as lucky as me in that regard. Many are in relatively sexless marriages where there is a significant discrepancy in sexual desire, and they're cheating on their partners. I don't judge them. Many other guys are new to sex with men or simply new to sex period. Many haven't learned about taking responsibility for their sexual health, or that STIs aren't the big bad bogeyman the United States' puritan culture would have you believe. Establishing and maintaining reasonable boundaries about your sexual health is important. Even if you may have gone too far in asking for proof of PrEP or test results, it doesn't make you an asshole. Unless you're leaving something out of your story--e.g., after you asked, the other guy said he wasn't interested and you pestered him about it--the other guy was kind of a douchebag for blocking you. He could have simply been an adult and told you he wasn't interested anymore. We need to normalize communicating like adults with others, including those with whom we disagree. And we need to stop being so offended by every possible slight that we either shut down conversation or claim the moral superiority of some false and unearned victimhood.

It’s discrimination to ask if someone is negative for STIs? Wow, what a soft world we live in these days.

Five guys fucked me, and four came in my ass (the fifth gave me a facial while one of the other four busted in my hole). This was at a bathhouse in Phoenix. I was there for about 4 hours. I’ve had similar experiences at the same and other bathhouses in Phoenix and Chicago. Most of the time I’ll have a load or two inside me when I go to the bathhouse, but I’m not counting those as part of my stats for the purpose of this poll. During my other visits, I’ll usually get fucked by three or four guys and take two or three loads in my hole.

Just recently, yeah. Just posted video of me taking cock. @enjoy_chi

I’m a total bottom with guys. I don’t like to kiss, but I do like and have enjoyed sex with dominant bareback tops. What part of “dom bareback top” means hard kissing will be involved? Nothing about “dom bareback top” seems like it necessarily involves any kissing, let alone hard kissing. “Tops” put their cocks in my ass. “Bareback tops” put their cocks in my ass without a condom, and shoot their loads in my hole. Do you think by saying you’re “dom,” that means you get to kiss guys without discussing it beforehand, and to do so without any reaction or protest from the “submissive bareback bottom”? Even if he’s not into hard kissing, or not into kissing at all? None of us were there, so we don’t know if his reaction was way over the top. We also don’t know other details of the interaction, such as how big each of you are, which might affect how threatened he felt. I agree with you that #metoo culture has gone way too far, and based on what you’ve told us, there’s certainly no need for any accusations of rape or criminal sexual assault on his part. We shouldn’t require sex to be sterile and transactional for all parties to feel safe. But when a submissive person communicates his or her limits—regardless of how or how well they are communicated—any dominant person worth respect would show enough care and maturity to accept those limits, to pull it back with grace and dignity, and to either offer to communicate better about hard and soft limits (it still interested), or end the encounter politely (if no longer interested). Even if he was way over the top in his reaction, sounds like you acted like a child in response. Take the high road next time. Self-identified “dominants” who don’t handle rejection well are an enormous red fucking flag with a capital “F,” hiding insecurity behind over-the-top machismo, and definitely not worthy of respect as true dominants.

It was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I grew up Catholic—hence my subversive use of the term “confess,” because fuck organized religion and fuck the idea of a creator who gives a damn what or who I do with my genitals as long as consenting adults are involved. But there are also many versions of what it means to confess. I had to get over a lot of that Catholic guilt to accept and love myself for who I am. As a bi man with a religious conservative family married to a woman from a judgmental conservative family, living in a conservative state with conservative friends, I didn’t feel like I had anyone in my life I could tell. That eventually changed, partly because of this site. I was able to slowly tell my family and friends, even to the point where I lost family and friends to different degrees. I’m not looking for forgiveness from anyone else. But telling my story to someone, anyone, was freeing.

All of my posts are true. I didn’t join this site because I wanted to write fiction or be an author; I joined this site because I wanted to confess.

Chicago is mostly doing the same thing. No online appointment system, either be an existing patient of one of the few providers that have had the vaccine distributed to them, or take days off of work to wait in line outside for hours. I think this is a result of the COVID vax rollout. Public health officials found that online sign-up systems wound up excluding certain populations, i.e., older people not familiar with computers. Now MPX is teaching them a different lesson: forcing people to wait in line for hours excludes a different population, i.e., the younger working poor who can’t afford to take entire days off work. GIVE US A FUCKING ONLINE APPOINTMENT SYSTEM ALREADY!

After researching more about Monkeypox, I’m going to wait until after I’ve had the vaccine. Still interested in weekday traffic at Steamworks though.

Anybody have any experience at Steamworks in the week before Market Days? I’m planning on posting up at Steamworks all day on one of the weekdays before Market Days, trying to get as much cock and cum as possible. But I’m not sure which day I should go: Weds 8/3, Thurs 8/4, or Fri 8/5. Any idea which day will be the busiest?

I’ve been with my girlfriend for a little over three years. She knew I was bi when we started dating—that was one of the primary reasons for my divorce—and I told her I wasn’t sure whether I would need to have sex with men again. About eight months in, I told her I would need to fuck guys again. She agreed to open the relationship, and we started setting boundaries with the help of a couples counselor. So now I get to take cock and cum in my holes once every few months. 😈

Hot idea. Glad to hear I helped release some of your semen. I’d love to take those hot loads in my hole some time… you’ve got a great looking cock 🥵

My cumdump hole.

18 and 20 because they both have the right shape for me to deepthroat with ease but they’re big enough to fill me up and get me wild. 10 and 22 because they’re thick and pretty. All of them turn me on though. Gonna need to go find one (or more) of each.