I'm not -that- horny all the time but I only enjoy BB. IDK what to do.

[verycurious]

Hello all,

I'm a total top, I don't like to suck dick or getting fucked; I only get along with total/power bottoms. I have a thick cut juicy cock and most of the time I end up with a boy in bed they just want me to ram it in raw.

I've used condoms all the time with the exception of fuck buddy-exclusivity, something I dig a lot because we both get tested and commit to fuck exclusively; it's not 100% safe but safer than barebacking randomly.

Now, I think all you guys who are always so horny as fuck are very fucking rad in choosing to bareback or even bugchase. If you're -that- horny ALL THE TIME, if sex is a big part of your life well, fuck it, go bareback, go REAL.

Anyway, I am a bit of a moody guy so I have phases where I'm just not that interested in sex and phases I'm so fucking horny. But the moment it's time to wrap it up I am just so turned off, I have condoms, I can't feel anything, the smell grosses me out and latex irritates my dick. And we all know the many little details that make barebacking so amazingly pleasurable.

I don't even get turned on by porn with condoms. When I watch hard raw bareback sex I get so fucking horny. I love to eat ass, get sucked, fuck hole then get sucked again, eat ass, ram it in and go on until I leave my load inside. It's simply the best.

I've been considering barebacking for a while but then I wonder if in my case it's worth the risk. Imagine I end up testing positive but then I'm not even horny for months. Sex isn't really that important in my life; I mean, not 24/7.

But then the little sex I have with condoms really doesn't compare to jerking off to a good bareback porn clip.

Any tips or suggestions? Should I just go for it? Is topping really "lower" risk. I mean, I haven't been in contact with other men's cum for 10 years now.

Then, these exclusive fuck friends always go crazy in love and I have to let them go. I've been without a fuck buddy for long and not many people want to commit to just "exclusive fuck-friends" since for most people exclusivity is a sentimental matter and not just safe barebacking.

I'm really confused. Having sex once in a while with condoms, well, a visit to the dentist is hotter, while one hot bareback session I'm like a mad stallion.

What to do?

Any top barebackers who'd suggest? I love barebacking but I'm not particularly hot about the bug. I'm not turned on by the HIV thing at all.

A Mexican total top is curious but confused.

[Guest GoodExercise]

Bareback. Fuck who you want, when you want -- and the way you want.

[verycurious]

I feel it deep in my heart but my minds says... YES, actually. I guess it'll get to a point I won't be able to resist and then well, you just don't go back.

[PhoenixGeoff]

OK, I'm going to sound like a anti-sex conservative here, but one thing they do say is true: the only way to be 100% sure you won't get HIV is not to have sex at all. And that's kind of what you've been doing: masturbating to bareback porn is 100% safe.

For most of us, regardless of our sex drive, that's not really an option. So we're into the realm of risk management here.

You're a total top. That reduces your chance of infection by about an order of magnitude. So that's a good place to start.

Next, you've got a sex drive that only kicks in periodically. That means you aren't out getting laid every week. Which means less sex with fewer partners overall. That reduces your cumulative risk of infection.¹

What you really want to know is how to weigh the risk between using and not using condoms and other things you can do that would balance out the increased risk of barebacking. Basically, aside from what you're already doing right now, your best bet lies in partner selection. Which you kind of get at:

I've used condoms all the time with the exception of fuck buddy-exclusivity, something I dig a lot because we both get tested and commit to fuck exclusively; it's not 100% safe but safer than barebacking randomly.

I'm going to assume here that for whatever reason, a committed, monogamous relationship is out of the question for you.

If you're just looking to get off every now and then, then your best bet would be to limit yourself to guys you know and trust to be reasonably careful with their own health.

What you're looking for isn't so much a "fuckbud" relationship (still less an anonymous and/or random hookup) as a "friends with benefits" relationship.

Let me explain the difference between the two: a fuckbud is someone you have sex with but otherwise don't really interact with socially (except maybe to say hi in a bar or on the street). You won't know much about his personal life, maybe not even if he's single or married or has a partner.

A friend with benefits, on the other hand, is a friend. You know him. You know if he tends to hit the baths or sleep around. You know if he gets tested regularly. You've built enough of a relationship with him, in other words, that, if he tells you he's HIV-, you can have some confidence that he wouldn't lie to you and that he's not the type that's likely to be unaware he's been infected. And if you're so inclined, you might cultivate two or three friends with benefits (which might work out great if you're into the group thing).

Is this foolproof? No. There's still risk involved. But it's less risk than just meeting a guy online who's profile says "HIV-". How much less risk depends on how well you know your friends and can judge their character, how prevalent HIV is where you are, and a whole host of other things.

Is it just as effective as using a condom with random hookups? I'd say no. You would be moving into a bit of a higher risk category. But you also have other things you're doing that I mentioned above that already move you into a fairly low risk group.

Is it worth it? Well, of course, on a barebacking site like this, we're all going to say it is. But that's a choice you have to make for yourself.

---

¹As an analogy, suppose you flip a coin. What is the chance that it's heads? 1 in 2. Now you flip that coin ten times. What is the chance that it's heads at least once? 1023 / 1024 or 99.90%. HIV only has to infect you once, so the more often you have sex, the more likely you are to be infected.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

MascMountainMan - I see nothing in your post that comes across (to me anyway) as an anti-sex conservative...

None of us gets out alive... So whether it is sex, or any other dimension of living we weigh risks and make choices all the time. Some close their eyes and ears and let whatever occurs to happen (their eyes, ears and choice), sometimes whining about why bad things always happens to them.

But living life aware not only gives us some participation in determining outcomes - it makes us present to life. This is true whether we are the weekend slut taking all loads at the park, or making more informed choices about intimate interactions.

Edited July 21, 2013 by JizzDumpWI

[PhoenixGeoff]

MascMountainMan - I see nothing in your post that comes across (to me anyway) as an anti-sex conservative...

I think sometimes we don't like to admit that abstinence and monogamy, both pushed pretty heavily by religious conservatives, are both (among other things) highly effective AIDS prevention strategies. They represent the top two most effective methods of preventing infection. And while a lifetime commitment to either or both might be unrealistic for many people, they might be the right things to be doing with your life at certain times and in certain places.

Gay men as a group are pretty promiscuous by most standards. And we represent the extreme fringes of that promiscuity. So I kind of take it as a given that any discussion of HIV avoidance strategies that involves giving up sex altogether or limiting your sex to just one other person is probably going to be as popular here as talk of condoms in the Vatican.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

All very true MMM. I am not sure that gay men are uniquely promiscuous though. Men are for sure...

You and I both read and participate in other posts... What I for one don't know is just how much of that is bravado and how much is real... I suspect more bravado, less real action. And I well imagine I may get grief for that comment. BUT I have seen it too many times... Stories build on the story before...

[bearbandit]

I'd add in here the capacity some men have for convincing themselves that a negative result result confers some sort of magical immunity on them. It's reckoned in the UK that something like 25% of people with HIV don't know they have it (random unmarked phials of blood are tested - no way can these samples be traced back to the donor). One of the reasons I stopped going to a local play party was that "my presence spoiled their fun as they had to have safer sex". One guy "knew" he was negative because he'd had a test. Five years ago. And he'd only bb'ed with other guys who'd tested negative. Personally I wouldn't put my trust in a group like like that...

I'd say that the safest guys to have sex with are those that know they're positive and have achieved an undetectable viral load - if he's bottoming the risk is about the same as fucking anyone else with a condom. The risk goes up slightly if he's topping without a condom. The thing that HIV unknown guys forget is that the general rule is that guys with HIV tend to see their doctors more often so things that might have turned nasty are stopped long before they prove a problem. There are arguments that someone infected today will have a slightly longer life expectancy because of the extra care we receive and the fact that we generally end up looking after ourselves better.

I have a horror of passing it on, but I'd quite happily get fucked (assuming the absence of other STIs) by negative guys. However, I only fuck guys who are already positive. I believe the oral sex transmission figures are inflated by guys who can't bring themselves to say they like it up the arse.