valldelxeno

5 hours ago, INcumdump said:

I will only have bareback sex so if a top insisted on a condom, I would have to turn them down.

I've met tops that said on their Grindr profile that they only practiced safe sex, but I went ahead and met them anyway.

Interestingly enough, in person, those same tops ended up willingly fucking me without a condom... and giving me their load.

 

Tbh it seems like very few gays are actually pro condom. Is it all just an attempt to appease the straights?

On 8/4/2023 at 8:26 AM, jcklvrga said:

Are there others here like me? As a sub bottom on the one hand I don't like to turn down an interested top. But, when a top insists on condom use honestly I lose all interest in sex with them and turn them down. Do you let tops that require condoms fuck you? And the whole time someone with a condom is fucking me I cannot stop thinking the condom will come off and get stuck up my ass...have had that happen where I have to pull a condom out of my ass..hate that.

The one time that happened I was the fool insisting on it. Long story short, he didn't vocalise an orgasm but sent me to the bathroom to find the mysterious disappearing condom. It was split along most of it (and this guy had an average sized dick and wasn't rough either) and there was a lot of thick creamy fluid. I commented this to him because the lube was one of those awful thin clear water based ones.

In the past i have had a couple of neg tops insist but i think in the future I'd just challenge them to fuck me bare and if they are truly neg nothing will happen, due to me still being neg and other STIs generally being symptomatic if they are likely to spread bottom to top. If they are poz then neither of us requires protection anyway

Can anyone ID the guy in this video? There used to be another one on ThisVid too, iirc with him pushing loads out, but it seems to have vanished 😞 

Cute guy with biohazard tattoo around his arsehole

Mine was about 7 inches, maybe 7 and a half, and also very thick. I seem to get pretty lucky with the cocks I get shoved into me - I'm usualy not overly fussy about size, yet about 75% of the ones I've had were *significantly* above what I assume to be the population average (and about half of that 75% I would classify as porno dicks). What's more is that very early on in my sex life I had a year-long period of getting regular porno dick (two of them between them covering the year) and a 3rd one (chronologically before the two frequently reoccurring ones though) was the thickest I have ever seen, in real life or in porn. 

I adapted remarkably quickly - although I had already ben shoving cucumbers and God knows what else up there - but yeah, if I were't an atheist I would have taken it as a sign that my destiny was to take massive dicks like a champ. And to be honest, with one of these three - the one I got closest to actualy dating - he fucked pretty aggresively, was a very compulsive popper user which just made him speed up even more, and what I think basicaly ended up happening was that with other guys he would speed up and speed up but be asked to fuck a bit less roughly before he quite managed to get to where he wanted to. But with me I think he would reach that point but due to inertia keep getting faster and rougher and everything until he would kinda collapse and stick a fist in. He didn't even like fisting but would end up fisting me on about 50% of occasions (without me even asking for it) so he probably felt like he needed to make my arse sore and worn out (which I approve of - there's nothing lik feeling where you've been railed two days afterwards)

I basically want to be able to quantify my sexuality as this would allow me to compare different people's sexual worlds in mixed company without having to even hint at "my idea of a good time is getting multiple guys' HVL loads punch-fisted into me until my arsehole turns inside out and still feels weird for at least 2 days afterwards" because cishet young ladies will not experience that as an explanation but as an emetic agent most likely 

But all the quizzes I come across are either way too narrow in scope (e.g. focusing on traditional BDSM), are not anywhere near kinky enough (one had as a question if you find masturbation acceptable) and then there's the ones that go waaaaay too deep on the involvement of romantic love in sex (lol what even is that!? I thought it was just something Hollywood invented) 

Oh, and also, so much bizarre focus on role play. I really dislike role play basicaly because it isn't real, but actually getting raped was a mixed experience with a very important unnamable but positively-valanced factor. Like I wouldn't have been amused if it was repeated soon after but if he took me by surprise like 3 months later I would probably end up having to focus hard on some aspect of it I really did not like in order to make me try and fail to escape. If I didn't do that it would just end up being surprise sex with retroactive consent     

(hopefully this is the right subforum, as the point isn't to actually discus the harder stuff in any amount of detail)

My faves that are more to the taste of the guys that frequent this forum would be Drew Sebastian, Rafael Carreras, and Lito Cruz. But there's also some which are maybe not even typical of my taste but that I find insanely attractive: Fostter Riviera, Koldo Goran, and Tommy Dreams. Honestly I think these three are somehow winning extra point by fucking in a way that is essentially mechanical but doesn't feel mechanical (to observe - I wish I was referring to feeling in my arse though) 

Also honourable mentions for Tyler Roberts (RIP 😞), Harold Lopez, Rodolfo, Peto Coast and Gino Zanetti

On 1/28/2023 at 12:22 AM, BootmanLA said:

Sadly, some health care workers are still, 40+ years into the HIV/AIDS epidemic, uncomfortable talking about HIV or asking questions about it. That might have been understandable (if still unacceptable) in 1993, but not in 2023.

About all you can do is point out to her that she made an assumption she shouldn't have, even if she was correct, and that she needs to ASK the questions. Might have been a learning experience for her.

I know this nurse pretty well and I'm fairly certain it wasn't a comfort issue. I am kind of wondering where the assumption came from though. 

Basically I'm going to rehab which entails tests for stuff like tuberculosis. When filling the forms out, my nurse put that I was HIV negative and then just checked with me afterwards. I find this disappointing to say the least. On the other hand I once had a hookup assume I was poz and react to me saying I was neg with total disbelief - that was much more flattering...

33 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

Yes and no. There's a difference between the virus being inserted into your system, and the virus being able to actively reproduce within your system, and the virus can continue to exist (it's not "living") within your system for a period before it breaks down and can no longer infect. The point of PrEP is to prime your body's cells with the ability to prevent HIV from replicating in your system until it naturally breaks down and is no longer a threat.

So both the amount of time the drug has to build up in your system before infection AND how long it remains in your system after infection are both relevant. If the penile/vaginal tissues have sufficient drug levels at the time of sex, they may be able to prevent the virus from ever entering your bloodstream to find other cells through which to replicate. But if it does reach the bloodstream, it's also important to keep priming the pump, so to speak, with additional drug levels (the day after and day after that doses, at a minimum) that continue to block replication by the virus.

I'm not expert by any means so maybe I'm just misunderstanding your explanation, but based on what you're saying I would be under the impression that PrEP was a vaccine - albeit one that has to be taken repeatedly - if I didn't know otherwise. 

My understanding was that PrEP hangs out in your bloodstream and in other tissues such as the rectum, where it is ready to prevent virus replication, while the immune system deals with it somehow. But I wasn't aware of any interaction as such between PrEP and cells, as it just consists of reverse transcriptase inhibitors 

According to the GEVI, he's only done the one scene with Enrique Sparks for Slut Machine, but I would really like to see more...

11 minutes ago, fskn said:

The real issue, for which there is some empirical evidence, is that it takes different amounts of time for drugs to concentrate in different body tissues.

For example, we know that it takes many extra days of daily Truvada use for peak tenofovir levels to be reached in the vagina than in the rectum. (We still have incomplete data about concentration in penile tissues.)

But despite knowing how long it takes to achieve peak concentration in a given part of the body, we still don't know exactly what minimum concentration is needed for protection, in humans. A minimum therapeutic concentration is a best guess.

It's probably less than peak concentration. Otherwise, when experiments with intermittent or "2-1-1" Truvada PrEP were conducted in large groups of gay men, a 2-pill loading dose taken as late as 2 hours before sex would not have prevented HIV infections.

This is why research is done on large groups of people, under more-or-less realistic conditions in the field, and why final-phase trials focus on calculating rates of infection/illness in a group, not solely on measuring drug concentrations in body parts.

Wouldn't this be more to do with how long *before* sex you need to be on it though? If we're talking about 7 to 28 days after sex, presumably the virus has found its way through the rectal/penile tissues and is in the bloodstream by that point 

On 5/1/2022 at 6:13 AM, BootmanLA said:

While I agree that the original medical advice was overkill, there's some common sense behind the notion of longer PrEP duration for bottoms. It's well documented that bottoms face higher risk from an HIV+ top than tops face from an HIV+ bottom.

I don't think PrEP for more or less time is to do with likelihood of catching it or not, but to do with effective viral load. 

As I understand it, viral load in acute infection is proportional to the viral load of the person who gave it to them. Following this logic, more copies of the virus get into a bottom's bloodstream than into a top's bloodstream (which would explain why tops are more likely to clear the system of the virus entirely) and so generally speaking a top will need less of the medication to ensure a system clear of HIV compared to a bottom 

I wouldn't say I'm 100% past it but I'm most of the way there. It's my penis size. The girth is fine, but it's only like 4.75''. But I feel better about it because I balance it out with my loose hole. So in a club I might be a bit embarrassed about my dick if I'm just standing around, if I'm already in the sling and I've got a fist up there, I'm happy to have the attention of others

3 hours ago, bbinbpark said:

Camera angle baby! Plus I'm sure the smart phone engineers have workshopped their cameras, unofficially, to make dicks look bigger when used certain ways. Long and short, if you see only dick and nothing to reference, ie fingers or that dreaded can of beer, it probably is smaller than it seems. 

You've misunderstood, I'm talking about the opposite problem 😛 when I get with a really well hung top I want photos to help me remember just how big it was! But they always seem to take pictures that make it look smaller than it is 

1 hour ago, ErosWired said:

Triple penetration - I’ve never actually seen it done successfully. It may be possible, but I have a hard time envisioning it.

There's a video where John Thomas takes three up the arse. Needless to say you must need to be as much of a power bottom as he is for this to even have a chance of working. And it's definitely more something that one might do just to say they have done it rather than for any enjoyment. 

I imagine that for DP to be enjoyable - I know a top who really likes it so he must be able to get it to work fairly reliably - you probably want both dicks to be long but potentially not too thick (although his is thick too) and it probably helps if the bottom is quite skinny, with not a lot in the way of buttcheeks? Again, this would be this guy's type, which might explain it 

I wish they wouldn't do this. Sometimes I want to just have a wank while thinking of past hookups and my memory gets a bit hazy...I check out the pictures I've been sent by X and his dick pics make him look just slightly larger than average when I know that when I saw it in person I thought someone was using photoshop inside my eyes. 

Promise that if you take photos that make it look as big as it actually is, they won't replace you! You'll still get laid plenty! This is just for when I can't be bothered to have sex with an actual person anyway xD

25 minutes ago, evilalex said:

Take 2 in the ass and 1 in the mouth instead 😉 

Might as well just go for 3 in the arse tbh

58 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

I’ve always thought any effort involving getting two cocks into one hole effectively faces unfortunate anatomical challenges,

I've never tried it, what's the difficulty in getting fucked by two cocks? If it's an issue of the cocks not being rigid enough I would give the hole a few punches first to get it opened up

On 3/5/2022 at 3:39 PM, evilqueerpig said:

Don't slutshame me for being poz...slutshame me for being a slut!

Sorry, that wasn't the intention (although I think you know this) 

But I don't even slutshame for being a slut 😛 I've never known it as the walk of shame, always the stride of pride 

Man, I struggle to suck one cock unless it's small (fuck TMJ) so I really can't imagine two, let alone two big ones.

I feel like for me, regularly hooking up was a coping mechanism - some would argue an unhealthy one, although I would say out of the ones I have available to me it's probably the healthiest - for the mental health problems I already had. When at the start of 2020 (shortly before the pandemic hit us here in Spain) I had something bad enough happen to make me lose my sex drive, it led to me spiralling down: 

Loss of sex drive = loss of sex life = loss of coping mechanism = further mental deterioration, including an even more inhibited sex drive. 

On top of that singular vicious cycle, I also gained weight, and so in the brief periods where I have felt better and wanted to have sex, I have felt unable to as my body image is considerably worse than it was (because my body in itself is worse) and like I know there are plenty of guys who are into bigger guys, but...I would just feel much more comfortable having sex if my body was how it was before - which was nothing special at all, just better than what I've got at the moment. 

While I don't think my use of hookups as a coping mechanism is necessarily unhealthy, my dependence on it as my only functional coping mechanism definitely was. It's best to diversify these things, so maybe you could take this opportunity to reflect upon if maybe what you are finding is that you don't have the desire to do stuff or interest in doing things, other than sex, and since you can't fill all your time with sex, you're running into issues. So like, try and maintain a healthy sex life, but at the same time, try and maintain a healthy non-sex life as well

31 minutes ago, WelshBBCigarFuck said:

Does having a lot of sexual partners put you at higher risk, most likely, but then I must be really pushing the law of averages as I am still negative, always barebacked and have never been on PrEP.

I would suggest that's less of a statistical anomaly and more an indication that you're likely genetically immune. About 10% of Europeans are.

I'm bored and figured I'd bring up a topic that has always confused me. And I mean always - since I was in high school I was just like, wait a minute, shit don't add up, but never said anything to anyone because people are too sensitive. 

I'm going to preface this by saying of course this line the straights say a lot is technically true. People can get HIV from blood transfusions, sharing needles, needlestick, or vertical transmission. And even within sexual transmission, having sex with 1 person i.e. the person you caught it from isn't exactly slutty behaviour. 

BUT...

Given how hard it is to catch HIV, especially for the top, doesn't someone who isn't even vaguely promiscuous (let's say 1 partner per year, idk I don't talk to my straight friends about this stuff so I don't know how much sex they have) have an infinitesimally small chance of catching HIV? Especially if they are straight, so sex is probably vaginal (less risk) and the partner probably isn't a gay or bi man (so less prevalence). 

Just using my example (my little black book is coming in handy), I've had taken 2 loads from unmedicated guys and I've topped 1 guy who was unmedicated. I've also bottomed for 11 guys of unknown status and topped for 1 guy of unknown status. (Yeah my sex life has been pretty slow, although my true body count is considerably higher, it's just that in Barcelona basically everyone over 35 is undetectable) And I don't have HIV, and as far as I can tell my case is not atypical in this regard. It's something like a 2% chance of transmission top to bottom, assuming the top has a fairly robust viral load, no? Now I can't remember my sixth form statistics class, but my gut says that even if we were talking about 13 unmedicated guys, the chances of remaining negative would not be minuscule. (Some better at maths than me please help!)

There's also my personal observation that poz men tend to be a bit more attractive (and not just in attitude to sex) and I wouldn't be surprised if the average dick size is bigger as well. Because being hot and having a big dick = more sex = more chance of catching HIV. It just seems kind of logical, then, that given that a high proportion of sluts (and I use the term endearingly) catch HIV, there's going to be a surplus of sluts in the HIV-positive population, no?

Have I explained what I mean?

Now obviously I realise that the point of the message is to get people to not slut-shame people with HIV. And people shouldn't slut-shame people with HIV, but not because of anything to do with the HIV itself, which given the main transmission method is somewhat ironic - but because slut-shaming is the most ridiculous thing on the planet to begin with. 

And with that I think it's time I arranged for my next shot of vitamina.

As long as it's actually suckable, so not a micropenis, it's big enough for me to suck. I get terrible lockjaw so for most guys I can't give head, but a couple of guys with smaller dicks have told me that I do actually have quite a talent for oral - as long as it fits in my mouth in the first place...

It's unfortunate because my arse is a cavern so if he's good for me to suck, he's not really equipped to fuck me good, and if he is equipped to fuck me good, I can't even try and suck it. 

Hey all, got a strange request here. I want to see some non-fisting (professional) porn where the bottom presents a rosebud. I realise there aren't going to be many videos where this happens, but I've heard the rosebud-haters complaining about it on Reddit, so apparently it does. I love fisting, but getting a rosebud to come out when fisting is easy - it takes a talented bottom to present a rosebud when being fucked by a mere penis. One of the names I remember hearing complaints about was Devin Franco, so maybe that will jog someone's memory. 

Thanks in advance 🙂