hntnhole

A virgin Hole ??? Wow - that's a rare commodity these days !!! There has to be a back-story here somewhere ......

The way I see it, a Hole is a Hole. I'd rather fuck an ass-Hole, but a "head-Hole" can be a lot of fun too, assuming the talent is there (meaning, the bottom knows how to keep his teeth out of the way; I'm on the thick side). As to the hands, some hand-action is ok, but I don't go to the fuckjoints to get jacked off either. Any guy can tell at the first gobble whether the Cocksucker knows his craft or not.

Is there some other reason to kiss a guy that's not your lover/husband/partner? Snowballing is hottttt - only enhances that "connection" I sometimes go on about ....

Actually, this is spot-on. Fortunately, most gay men, and particularly barebackers, are utterly promiscuous, which of course expands the chances of catching a bug occasionally. A pair of (gay) lovers who are scrupulously monogamous would likely never encounter an std in the first place. Since most of us here on BZ are the last thing from monogamous, PReP, regular testing, is the next best thing to living a full, enriching sexualy life.

HAHAHAHAHA ..... I'd go Breed Holes with YOU anytime .... loved your response !!!

Agreed 100%. To put it another way, completely natural. No silly business - just a hot, load-hungry Hole needing hard, raw Cocks rutting/Breeding it.

Fucked a neighbor in between two pickups parked on the street almost in front of my house in Chicago ...

Almost like debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin ...

It seems that way to me as well. I think the whole point of "watching" other guys fuck is an exercise is heightening one's own Lusts; sort of saving the biggest lump of frosting on a piece of cake until last. Postponing the final thrill of joining the action implicitly requires a willingness to actually join in after watching the "tease". Me too. If they're not going to jump onto the pile of rutting men at some point, they're taking up space where a guy who will should be.

To the OP's question though, there can be times when we're willing to do what we're not inclined to do. When covid first came along, one of my fb's and I got through it together, meaning exclusive sexually, We got together once or twice a week - with me fucking him. After a while though, he surprised me with announcing that he wanted to fuck me !!! I'd never seen him fuck guys at the orgies, so it was a surprise when he asked. We'd been casual buddies for a fairly long time (I liked him personally, and I'm sure it was mutual), and I knew that he didn't have much in the Cock dept. So, eventually I did allow it. Can't say I enjoyed it, but fair is fair, covid was running rampant, so I allowed it. I will never believe that he liked my ass - no one would - but he needed to Breed too occasionally, so I allowed it, because we were buddies trying to get through a dangerous time together. We still are in touch, but not really close now. And that's alright. We were there for each other when we needed each other, and that's reason enough.

I'm assuming the "something" you mention is shit. I don't think it's asking too much for bottoms to pep their guts for getting fucked before heading out to the fuckjoints. I know accidents happen, but since we're interested in fucking an orifice that does "double-duty" physiologically, it's incumbent on bottoms to take care that the original purpose has no lingering bits or pieces, and he's ready to devote himself fully to the more exciting purpose. The "sniff-test" I perform before I even touch a Hole isn't totally fool-proof, but it can go a long way to avoiding something unpleasant. Addressing your point directly though, I think I can count on one hand the number of times I actually have detected some residue of that which should have been excused before the bottom went out to take loads, and I've fucked tons of guys. I think 99% of them are responsible, and don't want to offer themselves to hard Cocks unless they're confident of their prep-work. Thus, if it's true that some would-be Hole eaters are "too scared of tasting "something", chances are they're not really that interested in eating Hole in the first place. Don't be. It's like trying to eat some (actual) food that you simply detest, but was served to you at a dinner party by someone you really liked. It's up to us to develop our own means and methods of pushing the dread item around on our plates, cutting it up in tiny pieces while we enjoy the rest of the food, talking and enjoying the evening with friends. By the same token, even if we do encounter some lapse in preparation for a night at the fuckjoints, all that's needed is some polite phrase about nothing, and we step away. When it's clearly evident that no preparation was taken, that will empty out a darkroom quicker than anything, and there will be plenty of guys loudly calling out the offender, and rightly so. If some guys have come to believe that eating wet Holes is somehow expected of them, they'll wake up one of these days and figure it isn't for them. Or, they'll need to put their mouths on wet Holes so badly that they'll overlook an unexpected event, and deal with it in their best way possible. Never feel self-conscious about beginners that are just learning the ropes - after all, each of us started at some point, and we didn't know every single thing when we started out doing what we now do best.

I would say that the preference is already expressed when a Cocksucker is on his knees, saliva drooling, offering his throat to Cocks. That said, there ae so many guys that love to suck off Cock after Cock, that no Top should be surprised when the bottom spins around and spreads em. If that doesn't happen, and the Top really does want to fuck, all that's needed is a quick "wanna get fucked?" and that'll answer the question. Point: it's never all about what just one participant wants - it's about what both participants want and agree to.

Yeah, that does sound a bit back-asswards to me too. There can be very firm loving relationships that endure for many years, but the foundation of those relationships are emotional, spiritual, whatever you want to call it. A wanton sexual component can be a foundational part of the relationship, but that can develop later too. I'd never heard of these "cuddle" events before you mentioned them (I think previously?), and at least for me, it doesn't add up. Maybe these guys are trying to develop relationships on a deeper level than the wanton sexual level, and I'd be curious to know what percentage of them are successful. In the various gay social clubs around here, I'm very sure there are guys who meet, get to know each other a bit, fuck, and go on to develop a loving relationship. That's just not what I'm after when I hit the fuckjoints.

Just beautiful, phoenix4350 !!! I know why he asked you to post it too. He's damn Proud of you, and I bet you know it.

Welllllllll ............ I'm not sure about in your area, but in many places, damn right the next guy will want to rut / Breed in your wet Hole. Any pigCock would need to add to the mix. As you handle alludes to: that's one tank that will never get too full.

I don't think I knowingly ever let my teeth hit the tender flesh of a Hole. ErosWired is correct in my view, in that it's lips, tongue that do the eating. Tongue for exploration, lips for retrieving that which the tongue brought forth. I have caught a hair in my teeth, which couldn't have felt good when withdrawing, but if the bottom tenses up for one reason or another, I take extra care not to do any actual damage - that would be directly counter to the entire experience of eating a Hole - both for him and for me. More, I tell him it was my mistake. I'm not afraid to own up to a mistake when I inadvertently make one. Everybody makes mistakes once in a while.

I hope some of us read, re-read, and re-re-read gaypigbb's thoughts on the issue. He gets it. Thanks, gaypigbb.

Usually, "bareback group breeding".

<<<smiling>>> Kinda sounds that way to me too .....

Thanks, drscorpio.

and will remain so, if all of us vote to preserve our rights. Look what just happened in Ohio. The R's in that state just got a swift kick in the balls for their mendacious meddling.

Agreed. That's one thing I never did quite "get". Guys should do what they want/need to do, of course - and owe no one an explanation. That said, are the shavers/manscapers trying to appear more feminine? That would be as substantial a turn-off as an "unprepared" Hole. If a Hole is naturally smooth (or very little fine hair), that's what we fuck. Not the bottom's fault he's not hairy. It's not like I would just never fuck a naturally smooth Hole either. I have and will again. But given a choice, I'll go for the hairier, tastier, more enticing naturally Hairy Hole every time.

That's true, however "character" may have little to do with it. That excitement you allude to may not transmit to the Cock immediately. The more 'experienced' the Cock, the more time it may take to wake up again after Breeding a Hole, which has more to do with biology than sexual excitement. Give the "experienced" Top a little time - go take a couple more loads off other Cocks - and then go back to get a second helping of the first, more experienced Cock.

I understand a lot of what these responses are about, but why not make it easy: after the first "hi, howya doin", just say that you'll only take it raw or only take it bagged? Get it over and done with first thing, so you can move on to the next guy if this one won't fuck how you need it. No pressure one way or the other, just laying the cards on the table. Easy, simple, no pressure, and each guy gets back to doing whatever he needs to do.

Agreed. The term "hierarchy" is a construct to define a specific entity. For example, pertaining to a business, with the owner at the apex, descending in importance (to the company, I mean) to mid and lower echelons of importance (to the company). This has no connotation to the value of any of the folks populating any given level within the hierarchy (other than their value to the entity). While it's probably true that the higher on the construct an individual is placed, the more likely he/she is to have the capacity for Dominance, or put another way, the ability to project well-reasoned business plans, ability to set attainable goals, etc, and inspiring the population of the lower levels to work towards achieving X goals as laid out for them by the primary member at the top. If, however, this thread is about how any given person is perceived by others on a scale of Dominance/submission, either unconsciously expressed or purposefully cultivated, it seems to be drifting away from hierarchy, and inching more towards the inborn nature of a given individual, which is obvious in every facet of his/her life. In this case, the lowliest "go-fer" person in the hierarchical construct can be almost palpably Dominant, or similarly submissive. I've read and re-read this most interesting thread lately, and I don't see what "hierarchy" has to do with it. What am I missing?