hntnhole

THAT was most interesting, Viking8x6 !!! Thank you.

Some time ago there was an extensive discussion of this topic, and quite a bit of useful information shared. Maybe you can find it here, somewhere. Maybe some kind of search?

Not all kids mature sexually at a certain age. I know and accept that there has to be some age-limit, but I think that the sexual maturity of the guy in question should somehow be accommodated too. In junior high swimming class (held with all guys naked), there were guys who's Cocks were mere nubs - not one pubic hair - and some guys with a full bush of pubes, and clearly an able Cock & balls. That's not to say that a "late bloomer" can't be sexual - but laying down the law at X age without taking into account the physical maturity of the kid seems a bit too iron-clad. Maybe I'm just a bit on the jaded side 😁

Well, that's another new one for me ... never heard that term before. Thanks, JamesL100 !!

Mine as well, fuckholedc. Thanks so much for the more in-depth explanation.

Mr. Smith: 1. You don't know that. 2. There is nothing "hysterical" whatsoever about the exchange of ideas with one's peers. There are a number of threads on BZ that I'm not interested in, so I don't read them. I suggest you follow suit. 3. "uhh" is not a word. Maybe it's you that's living in some "magical whirlwind". 4. Since it appears you're only interested in throwing road apples, however ridiculous, may I mention that there's a contrivance here on BZ wherein we can "block" individual members, and thus not be bothered by their input. At the top of this page, there are 7 links, the 5th of which is entitled "other". If you need help in accomplishing this task, one of the moderators will help you "block" the input from other members that seem to irritate you so substantially. I encourage you to use that function as it relates to my input. This site is for every guy, exchanging viewpoints on all kinds of issues, and doing that with some measure of respect for the viewpoints of others. Myopia simply doesn't work well in this type of milieu. In any case, good luck to you.

To the OP's initial question, not at all. Love to do it to bottom guys though.

Maybe it's just me, but that link took me to the "subscribe" page, with a number of teasers included. I do wonder why Orlando, as opposed to, say - Ft. Breedingdale or Miami - but I doubt I'll subscribe to that newspaper just to read the answer, if there is one. Anyone else experience the same issue?

I'm guessing 'for what it's also worth'? I'm only familiar with N.O., since there was a regional convention there (pertaining to the business). I absolutely loved New Orleans, and still do. There was a bar around the corner from the place we stayed, two-storey, with iron grilled balconies guys fucked on. People on the street could watch if they wanted to. Can't recall the name of the joint, but it was a First Class Pigpen. Antoine's, Brennan's, Galatoire's, Court of the 3 (?) Sisters, so many wonderful restaurants, with the Blues bars, Jazz joints everywhere ... I just loved it. Thanks for mentioning the UU's; I've respected those folks for many years.

First, welcome to the site - we hope to hear more from you. To the question, no, dammittall. I have to take a breather for a while before Breeding another Hole. But then, my first rodeo was a long time ago too.

Better than poppers any time. I don't care of other guys use poppers; I just don't care for them. But a "natural" smell on a cumdump's body does the same damn thing for me.

Shucks - it would be worth that just to get him out the door (in Monopoly money, of course).

Thanks for the kind response. This is what in-depth discussion of serious issues is all about - and the reason I enjoy BZ so much. While I don't read every single post about every single subject, I always enjoy reading what you have to say; most worthwhile every single time. 😉

I don't know how I missed this topic entirely, but I did. Fascinating issue and discussion. Thanks.

eeeewwwwww .... that's disgusting .... but, we work with what we have, eh?

As I understand it, the more you take part in conversations (I mean, writing something), the more opportunities you "earn" for leaving a "reaction" to other guy's additions. It took me a while to figure that out too, so don't be unhappy - it'll sort itself out.

Well said, ellentonboy !! There's also this thing called 'Learned Skill', which some heavily-hung guys never had to learn. The technique, experience, all of that counts for something too. A modestly-proportioned Cock can put the BreedSweat on a bottom too, provided the Top knows what he's doing.

I was in the publishing business, and learned to "speed-read" early on. I review the content each time I add a reply, and still sometimes miss a needed correction in phrasing, typing, whatever. You're right though - steamier would have been good too. I enjoy writing, but I like to do it correctly too. Old habits, I guess.

I hope so too, for both of your sakes. Good luck !!

Or, how about a "walk of Pride" !!!

I'm glad to know that. The SELCA I referred to above, was a part of the old Augustana Synod, before becoming absorbed into the ELCA, and remained more "conservative" culturally than the ELCA, but still a part of it. As I recall, when the "new" ELCA hymnal (Lutheran Book of Worship, red in color I think?) was introduced, the SELCA kept it's old black hymnal/BoW as well. Reportedly (I was a teen at the time), the Lords of Lutheranism got fairly pushy about the issue, and the ELCA won in the end. But, we still kept the old Augustana Synod hymnals/BoW in the pews, right alongside the new ones, and used them regularly. Lots of the hymn texts were printed in Swedish, natch. Shortly after I left for school, I was approached by the pastor of the Swedish services to "organize" (meaning, produce) a paper-back hymnal containing many of the old favorites of the Swedish hymns. There were forms passed out, where each member of the congregation could write in a few of their personal favorites, from which I chose 92 (just now looked it up), and rendered them onto staff-paper myself, along with all the verses. I only refused to accept one, entitled "There is a fountain filled with Blood". The first verse began: "There is a fountain filled with blood, drawn from Immanuel's veins - and sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their earthly pains". Absolutely ghastly. Once delivered, I went dancing out the door of Lutheranism for good.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised either. I was not born with "gaydar", and I'm not good at "knowing at a glance or twenty" at all. But there's something a bit cloying about that innocent little-boy smile that seems frozen onto his mug, like some hellish Halloween mask. Plus his incessant going on about gays (as well as others, of course) just seems like he protesteth a bit too much. On another front, he probably believes that "God" has rewarded him with his meteoric rise to power, and thus he not only believes he's entitled to enforce the will of that deity, he believes that he simply must. If true, I would imagine that one of these days his body might just instantaneously burst into flame, self-immolating his guilt, whether he actually is a repressed gay or just another run-of-the-mill hatemonger.

I had no idea that was happening. Years ago I held a position as music director for a while in a UMC, and found the opposite: there were plenty of gay members, the pastor was a lesbian, and it seems so refreshing after the church I grew up in. Everyone seemed to get along well with everyone else, and I felt more "at home" there than any Lutheran Church I ever set foot in. Plus, I had a 32' bourdon on that organ, which was fun. You "felt" it as much as you heard it. Organized Religion just doesn't seem to be cutting it anymore.

Well, now I know more than I did before. I'd never heard of a "prayer call", but I definitely remember conference calls - when every employee tried to interrupt every other employee, advancing their own interests. Glad those are in the rear-view-mirror now. Thank you, brnbk, for your gracious responses. I share the same wishes for Mr. Johnson, preferably far from a governmental position.

I didn't imply that. It would be not only idiotic, it would be impossible. Most of these kinds of "partnerships", for lack time to explain the complexities here, are inevitably much longer in duration - often a matter of years, and fairly often, for many years. My apologies if you assumed it was for something else. I'll just leave it with this: The act of "taking" a sub, a boy (of whatever age) for one's own is - within the parameters of the Leather Ethic as I learned it years ago - at the very least a semi-permanent act. The use of a safe-word in the thread was merely that for introductory or casual scenes, which was the subject of the thread, I mentioned that old-fashioned idea of "tear down, rebuild up" as an example of what is far from a mere hook-up, for which a negotiation is required. I don't know your experience in this arena, and I'm not asking. I only know what I've learned over the years, and I mentioned that old adage for context. As I did mention, that "tear-down/build up" construct never made any sense to me years ago, and still doesn't today. Any guy on BZ that's considering such a partnership should investigate closely before he enters into that kind of a relationship. Of course, at the initial negotiation. Or, say they initially meet each other by happenstance at some bar, get to chatting, agree to meet again, and eventually and sense something drawing them to each other. In any event, I call that getting acquainted. It would take quite a bit more substantial conversation to get to the point of exploring the possibilities of the Dom "taking" the sub as his own, and the sub realizing that this particular man is something special. That's when the serious discussions would begin, culminating in the initial negotiation. Since I'm at it, the references to household issues like income, etc are ancillary to establishing the basic level of trust required as we're discussing here. If a Bd/Sm relationship develops, grows, comes to fruition, sure - the sub may move in with the Dom, and then the house-hold issues would rise to the surface and that would be great for both men. Those issues however, would not be germane to an initial scene. Thanks for your always-worthwhile response. I very much hope I've been clear. I would go so far as to say that there are "wannabe" Doms that have not one tiny clue what the whole thing is about. This kind of interaction is a very serious, deep and potentially harmful (both physically and certainly emotionally) relationship that must be founded on well-earned Trust between the two (or sometimes more) men. A mere negotiation is for a one-time scene, and sometimes blossoms into a full-on relationship. I can guarantee you that there are some wannabe Bd/Sm Tops that have not one iota's worth of a clue what they're about. Calling them "skewed" in their perceptions is gentle indeed. That's not to belittle the importance of a negotiation for an initial scene; establishing the limits is crucial in this kind of exchange; the negotiation is merely a Bd/Sm version of meeting, shaking hands, and saying something innocuous like I'm this - what are you? The first step in becoming familiar, and perhaps trusting of the other. If there are subs that don't understand it all, and there definitely are, there are just as many Doms that don't either. This is why the Leather Community can be so helpful. I'm referencing established "big-city" Leather communities here. There are also online sites which I don't use anymore, sites like ReCon used to be, where a sub interested in putting a toe in the water can find help. There are Bd/Sm organizations like CHC where a potential sub can find the real deal about another man. Not that there are many anymore, but the *real* Leatherbars used to be at least some place to start investigating too. I'm still in touch regularly with subboys from years ago, one calls every Sunday. It's one of those truly life-changing experiences for the serious ones.