hntnhole

Hardly. Your posts are crucial to honest discourse. There is a place for fiction on this site, and places for actual honest exchange of information. I rather doubt there is one guy on BZ that doubts your sincerity, your honesty, and your intelligence in sharing the truth of how certain events are likely to unfold if certain behaviors are indulged in. If telling the truth is being a Bleeding-Heart (usually used with Liberal, but that part's your business), or a pollyanna, or a goody-two-shoes, then so be it. Telling the truth is far more important than nicknames, and given your self-identification with your calling, those monikers are nothing but laughable. Keep telling the truth, ErosWired. You may not have any idea how much impact your posts have.

Yes, there are a handful of "Families" left, particularly within the context of the LeatherLife. However, this tradition of Leathermen bonding together enough to form "families" has been fading for many years, as has the tradition of the "Old Guard" LeatherLife. I only have knowledge of this particular type of gay "families", having known several years ago. I have no information regarding what you're describing as "porn" families, but obviously there are Dominant men that "take" a sub they particularly enjoy into their homes in a submissive role. I wouldn't describe this as what you're alluding to though. The OG families were well-structured, including non-sexual responsibilities, etc.

hmmmmm .... where did I put that little button .... the one that relieves me of reading merde like this .... no more confusion ...

Ich verste etwas Deutsch, und weis die von Ihnen zitierte nachricht zu shatzen (no umlauts available ...) I hope he takes your advice to heart - and realizes that he's communicating with Friends.

Bottoms: KEEP THE HOLEHAIR !!! Otherwise, you may get arrested for despoiling one of the most beautiful, delicious, wonderful and hotttttt forms of Art in existence !!! It's all about Cock/Hole/Sperm

Posted 6 hours ago 20 hours ago, ErosWired said: I wonder about this, though - to a strongly Alpha type, almost every other male is subordinate to him, so he’s naturally going to assume, in his worldview, that the other men around him are targets for penetration to some degree. Add to this the general trend we see on these boards demonstrating a roughly 66% demographic of bottoms, and the Alpha’s impressions are strongly reinforced by his experience that he’s usually right - just not for the reasons he thinks. Looked at from the other direction, a bottom may be more quick to respond to the more confident, overt, aggressive advances of an Alpha type, and by ‘tipping his hand’ more easily, make it appear that the Alpha could see something about him, when in fact all he did was reveal himself to the Alpha voluntarily. Expand (Hotguy02): I think you are right about that I agree, in that self-perceived Alphas seem to feel entitled to take whatever catches their eye, regardless of any disinterest on others part. When a guy inclined to Top is too handsome, too "built", too this or too that, that guy can develop that sense of entitlement merely because he usually does get what he glances at. This characteristic often develops into aggression, which is self-focused and unseemly. It's all about what the men do for each others needs, not just what one guy wants. Yes, some bottoms "need" to feel humiliated, and while that's perhaps unfortunate, it's valid. That instinct is not shared by most men however, and aggressive behavior by self-perceived Alphas is often off-putting, even repellent.

BootmanLA is correct, That almost "right-angle" turn between the colon and the rectum is also sometimes called the "second ring", the first being the actual anus. I think the nomenclature may be basically regional, in that I very seldom heard the term "second hole" back in the Midwest. 99 times out of 100, it's called the "second ring" in that area.

That's for damn sure - and it seems to be growing.

I'd call it the next thing to Heaven !!!

Well, I guess we're all born with certain abilities ... that IS an amazing ability, but I simply don't possess it, dammittall. Not that I'm complaining - everybody gets certain inborn abilities, and I've made good use of those I do have. That said, I would have appreciated at least some small measure of recognizing my own kind at a glance. Maybe I've missed a lot of action through the years, and I don't even know it ....

LOL ... no one here would believe that for a second, but the phrase is roll-on-the-floor funny. But I surely understand the response. I think I must have been porking something in the john when they handed out the "gaydar". I have never been able to "sense" anything unless they're in heels and feathers - or Full Dress Leather. I often go to a grocery store in the heart of Wilton Manors (ground zero in this area), and I know the store is half-full of gay men at the very least. Yet, l cannot tell, short of some overtly gay shirt or something. I often overhear as I'm passing by what is clearly a pair of men asking each other stuff like "do we need milk?" - or "let's get the pork chops for supper tonight". Sure, I've caught guys checking out my Cock, but their appearance gives me no clue at all. Chances are pretty good I've missed out on chances, simply because I can't recognize them. Even if I go to a bar with a buddy for a beer or three, and my buddy says "that guy's cruising you", I can't pick up on which guy it is. Guys laugh at how dense I am about it. While occasionally some guy will just say something like "wanna fuck?", I guess I must have a "radio-mug" too. This is why I hit the fuckjoint regularly, where every guy is there to fuck.

This reminds me of my Aunt Bitch. Yours was not a bitch, but mine was, and that's putting it gently. But she was afraid of me, so she was always the very definition of insincerity to my face. I only wish she would have allowed her detestable "real self" to surface, since I would surely not have let that opportunity pass by to unleash how deeply I detested everything about her. Even my cousins (her kids) started calling her Aunt Bitch. When she died, they must have had to dig an even deeper ring ring in hell, just for her.

Given the phraseology in your question, I'd say the guy thinks you're way too hot for him to even hope to have sex with you. Great responses above, so if you like him, figure out a way to let him know that you'd like to Breed with him. Go get him, tiger !!!

1. Mouth 2. Both 3. Slowly. cupping my tongue into a U-shaped chute, resting on my lower lip. Mouth open, obviously. 4. Thick. Thicker cum won't drip where I don't want it like watery cum might. 5. All sperm tastes good. 6. As much as the Cock shoots. It's the connection to the cumming Cock that I'm after. 7. Hard and Raw. Drooling with precum. Uncut. All cum is perfect. I don't suck a lot of Cock, mostly because I'm usually rutting in a Hole. But, I'll suck off a Cock while I'm doing it, and gladly. Addition: 8. It's got to be clean or I won't suck it. No cheese at all. Fresh load on it from rutting in a full Hole: Perfect.

Wel-cum to the wonderful world of realizing your fantasies, bud !!! Lot's of us have managed to do it, and I'd hazard a guess that there's a new career-potential in your future ... Pornographer !!! When you hook up with the inter-generational Breeding session again (and you probably will), make a video - you'll have customers lined up everywhere ... It's all about Cock/Hole/Sperm

"Conservatively" educated as well, apparently. This post reminds me of what a plate of Alfredo - drowning in sour grapefruit juice - must be like. A lot starch, in long, stringy and disjointed perceptions, joined only by a bitter mish-mash of unrelated fragmentary thought-trainlets. But, there's room in the world for everyone, right?

Assuming an intended comma follows "deviant", I can agree with you completely. Thanks for the reply,

Saturday night at Slammer was a bit different because one of my fuckbuds wanted to go too - which is fine by me. Usually we hook up during the week to a) take the urge down a peg, b) one of us has run into something we know both of us will enjoy sharing, or just a cup of coffee and a talk (not usually though) 😉. So we went, and had a good time together - Chris' tastes are similar to mine, so we rutted in adjoining Holes, talked back and forth about how good, how full of Sperm, general Breedtalk. Swapped Holes, all of that. At some point he wandered off to suck off some Cocks (he's much better at it than I am), I just stayed in the darkroom eating/rutting in Holes. Later on though, he came back, kissed a mouth-full of Sperm to me, and said he'd been saving his load - for me !! Now. I know my ass isn't all that attractive anymore, and that doesn't bother me. I get fucked rather seldom, and his Cock has accounted for half of those fucks in the last few years, so I just said "it's yours", and kept fucking the Hole I was in. Felt good to give it up to a fuckbuddy over there. Usually we trade loads at either my house or his or when either of us has a particularly talented guest. Was fun - hot - to know other guys were a part of it, even in the dark ... It's all about Cock/Hole/Sperm

BareLover666 has stated it clearly and concisely: We fuck raw for any number of reasons (feels 1,000% better, it's feels "natural", closer/deeper connection, etc etc etc,), and we take steps to limit our liabilities, and just accept that there will be mostly non-lethal consequences that we'll deal with when they arise. "Chasing" reflects virtually none of those attributes.

More likely, they don't give a fuck about you because you don't give a fuck about yourself. "Just some queeny faggot" sounds like someone who has given in to despair, hopelessness, and more. There's a whole wide world of good stuff - if you can manage to take a look. I hope that's the case.

Well, ok. I accept your position and respect your arguments and reasoning. Purposely infecting others is simply not something any guy should do - and thanks for the interesting discourse. I very much enjoy it.

BareLover666 is right. Not every guy on BZ is after the same thing. Some want this, some want that, and each guy gets to decide (hopefully after some serious mental work). It's the behavior that counts. It's up to each of us to decide how deeply we need to exercise our Lusts, and act accordingly.

addendum: The bottom should ask/say a couple of things, such as "I'm not hiv positive, but I want to be. Can your Cock convert me?" Or - I'm positive, and I want more of it. Can you re-infect me? Or I'm hiv negative, and I want to stay that way; questions/statements to that effect. It the Top says yes, his Cock is potent in that regard, no lie has been told or even implied. Honest, upfront and truthful. If the Top says no, I cannot infect you, when he can indeed infect the bottom, then the operative lie becomes operatonal. That is when the stealthing, however despicable, would become an active action. Now. While I completely disagree with dishonesty in any situation, particularly so when the well-being of others is put in danger, I can think of all kinds of criticisms (my own, not speaking for others) to unleash upon the liar. Lying is antithetical to decency, despite it's ubiquitous-ness. Thus, bottoms who do not want to become hiv positive should take the steps appropriate to avoiding it, and not put much stock in receiving a reliable answer if they pose the question. They should assume that a stealth-fuck is in the works, whatever the circumstances. They'll come down with other issues - we all do - but at least they'll have the opportunity to take those appropriate actions before something more serious happens.

Of course it's intentional harm, and inexcusable. However, unless he (the Top) lies about being infectious, if asked by the bottom, or implies (actively misleads in response to the bottom's questions) he is not infectious, I don't see how it can be stealthing. The obvious solution would be that every bottom that cares, should ask, and then weigh the potential consequences of taking the guy's load. Whether the bottom believes the Top is up to the bottom to decide. The bottom should simply assume he may be about to be infected with something every time he takes a raw Cock up his gut. But, in the absence of any active misleading statement, I don't see how we can call it Stealthing. For this reason, it's important (in my view) for bottoms to protect themselves as best they can from whatever may cum their way; PReP is currently the most widely used way to lessen the chances of hiv infection. When men decide to fuck raw, only a genuine dullard would believe that he'll never contract anything, based on a mere conversation. Agreed. Irresponsible, certainly - but I wouldn't call the above a "stealthing" fuck either. Agreed. To my mind, inexcusable, but that's only my own view. However, it takes two to tango, and if neither guy asks any questions, then there is no opportunity to "stealth", since by not asking any questions, the bottom has not offered the Top the opportunity to lie in the first place. Without the questions being asked, there's no lying - no stealthing that can exist. No guy asked, so no subterfuge can happen without a dishonesty of some sort taking place prior to the lie (or stealth). In other words, an infected Top that wants to spread his infection to others (regrettably, they do exist) cannot "stealth" a Hole without a previously deceitful answer to the bottom's question. Stealthing can only exist when there is a previous, active falsehood. We're getting down in the semantic weeds here, but I happen to enjoy this .....

I don't think so. If you mean merely saying nothing (nondisclosure being the active act), no mention of any potential transmission being made by either party, I don't see how that could be called stealthing. The very word implies secrecy, and carries an aura of dishonesty (from either party). I rather doubt that there are many men in the world who need raw sex with other men, and have never heard of STD's. If no mention, no questions are asked (or even hinted) regarding health-related issues, and the men engage in raw fucking, there cannot be any violation, any "stealthing". Merely engaging without any mention, however vague, of transmission cannot be called (in my opinion) "stealthing". It may or may not make much sense, but absent any dishonesty, the chips fall where they may.