The Decision To Go Bareback

[BarebackBrat]

As a deviant raw is the only way that feels natural. Taking that risk and accepting those risks is just part of it 

[timfreo]

Sometimes we make the decision to go bareback, sometimes others make it for us. Either way, no one goes back to condoms, not after experiencing the pleasure of raw cock & ass

[nils99-BB]

2 hours ago, BarebackBrat said:

As a deviant raw is the only way that feels natural. Taking that risk and accepting those risks is just part of it 

I totally agree with you there. Feeling the cock slide inside your ass slowly or feeling the insides of someones ass isn't just the same with a layer of latex in between.

And for me personally I am not able to keep being erected while wearing a condom, so one reason more to go bareback👌🏻

[hntnhole]

4 hours ago, BarebackBrat said:

As a deviant raw is the only way that feels natural. Taking that risk and accepting those risks is just part of it 

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

[BootmanLA]

On 12/11/2021 at 9:59 PM, Eunuchus said:

I did not suggest everything must be natural.

No, you did not. However, you offered no principled reason why "natural" should apply to ONE basic bodily function (sex) but not to OTHER basic bodily functions (eating, sleeping, waste elimination). Why should "natural" be important for one but not the others?

And I stand by my answer. It's not because raw is "natural"; it's because it feels better, and too many people have just enough repression that they can't admit that the only reason they do it is that it feels better.

Here's another way to look at it: tooth extraction. To do it naturally, you'd have to avoid all anesthetics. Would you argue that we should extract teeth without anesthetics because "it's natural"? Of course not - the natural way hurts more, so we don't do it. Raw sex is simply the opposite of that: we opt for raw because it feels better. If condoms somehow enhanced the feeling of sex, you can bet your ass that gay men right and left would be using them every chance they could.

[Guest]

15 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

No, you did not. However, you offered no principled reason why "natural" should apply to ONE basic bodily function (sex) but not to OTHER basic bodily functions (eating, sleeping, waste elimination). Why should "natural" be important for one but not the others?

And I stand by my answer. It's not because raw is "natural"; it's because it feels better, and too many people have just enough repression that they can't admit that the only reason they do it is that it feels better.

Here's another way to look at it: tooth extraction. To do it naturally, you'd have to avoid all anesthetics. Would you argue that we should extract teeth without anesthetics because "it's natural"? Of course not - the natural way hurts more, so we don't do it. Raw sex is simply the opposite of that: we opt for raw because it feels better. If condoms somehow enhanced the feeling of sex, you can bet your ass that gay men right and left would be using them every chance they could.

You really should stop trying to twist what I said.

I did not suggest natural should apply to one thing but nothing else.  If you wanna sit there ragging people for what they post, thats up to you, but I won't be changing my views or opinions to suit someone elses agenda.

I'm outta this thread.

 

[BootmanLA]

2 hours ago, Eunuchus said:

You really should stop trying to twist what I said.

I did not suggest natural should apply to one thing but nothing else.  If you wanna sit there ragging people for what they post, thats up to you, but I won't be changing my views or opinions to suit someone elses agenda.

I'm outta this thread.

 

I think you completely misunderstood my posts. I am not twisting what you said nor am I saying you said that "natural should apply to one thing but nothing else." What I said was that by *not* addressing "natural" with respect to other human body functions, you left a gaping hole in your argument that "natural" is the reason people have raw sex. Which, as I suggested, I think is bullshit.

You don't have to agree. I just don't think opinions expressed here are sacrosanct and shouldn't be challenged. You may or may not respond as you choose.

[ohmalewhore]

I have yet to have a man stay in a condom for longer than maybe 5 minutes with me. Most like it because it's a quick source of lubrication for them, so they slip one on and get going into me, then once they feel I'm nice and slippery they pull out, strip it off, and it's bareback all the way after that. The ones where I go to their home typically don't. It's the ones you meet in random places like a truck stop, ABS, etc. who are "prepared" with the raincoat as a starter.

[Guest]

On 12/15/2021 at 4:52 AM, ohmalewhore said:

I have yet to have a man stay in a condom for longer than maybe 5 minutes with me.
Most like it because it's a quick source of lubrication for them, so they slip one on and get going into me, then once they feel I'm nice and slippery they pull out, strip it off, and it's bareback all the way after that.

The ones where I go to their home typically don't. It's the ones you meet in random places like a truck stop, ABS, etc. who are "prepared" with the raincoat as a starter.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

I'm in my 40's now and in the first half of my sexual life I played safe (and almost exclusively I bottomed). ALL guys I met then either 'forgot' condoms, didn't want to wear them point blank or needed a bit of persuasion. 
At more anonymous hook-ups there was less fucking, lately there's more and I think that in the last 5 years or so, only 2 guys wanted to fuck/be fucked safe (condom). The rest barebacks.

Funny thing in my experience is that when I hook up now through websites, apps and chat-sites I get a lot of lip about being exclusively bareback.

A (poz) guy I dated for while had the same observations that while most (gay and bisexual) men say they are safe-only, in practice 'everyone' or almost everyone barebacks. There's in my opinion a huge amount of hypocrisy in my country where people say one thing - and are negative in putting bare backers down - but nearly everyone does another thing.

[iman2004]

2 minutes ago, BareLover666 said:

A (poz) guy I dated for while had the same observations that while most (gay and bisexual) men say they are safe-only, in practice 'everyone' or almost everyone barebacks. There's in my opinion a huge amount of hypocrisy in my country where people say one thing - and are negative in putting bare backers down - but nearly everyone does another thing.

I wonder if hypocrisy is too strong for it. I suspect for many guys the brain always says safer sex is the way ahead. Of course, by the time you are naked and about to screw it is not the head that is doing the thinking, and the dick definitely prefers to be raw.

[Guest]

Just now, iman2004 said:

I wonder if hypocrisy is too strong for it. I suspect for many guys the brain always says safer sex is the way ahead. Of course, by the time you are naked and about to screw it is not the head that is doing the thinking, and the dick definitely prefers to be raw.

Perhaps I would agree with you if the same people didn't voice their judgemental attitudes against barebackers and poz-infected people.

There are even guys who blame their rather anonymous encounters for infecting them with STD's or HIV. 
But I'm fairly certain nobody pointed a gun at their head and forced them to fuck of get fuck (or have any kind of sex) without protection.

Of course what happens in reality is exactly how you describe it. Not sure if it's 'not thinking' or something else why we, or most of us, bareback. It's not just te dick that prefers raw because being fucked bare is way smoother with less need for lubrication and because both can feel a lot better what they are doing. 

So I'm calling it hypocrisy not to judge what people might do, but because of what they are saying about others.

[germancumbear]

28 minutes ago, BareLover666 said:

Thanks for sharing your experience.

I'm in my 40's now and in the first half of my sexual life I played safe (and almost exclusively I bottomed). ALL guys I met then either 'forgot' condoms, didn't want to wear them point blank or needed a bit of persuasion. 
At more anonymous hook-ups there was less fucking, lately there's more and I think that in the last 5 years or so, only 2 guys wanted to fuck/be fucked safe (condom). The rest barebacks.

Funny thing in my experience is that when I hook up now through websites, apps and chat-sites I get a lot of lip about being exclusively bareback.

A (poz) guy I dated for while had the same observations that while most (gay and bisexual) men say they are safe-only, in practice 'everyone' or almost everyone barebacks. There's in my opinion a huge amount of hypocrisy in my country where people say one thing - and are negative in putting bare backers down - but nearly everyone does another thing.

I've made the same experience about guys officially being safe only in their dating profile but do bareback anyway. I'm straight forward about doing bare only and find it rather tiring that others don't dare to officially say it or want to keep a fake facade that makes them appear morally superior.