Barebackers Unite!

[gugaxamot]

In response to the thread where I was called a troll due to my love for barebacking t-girls. I want all fans of barebacking to give a shout out in this thread.

[pantic]

shouts out!

[MacShreach]

I bareback with my gf but I'd never do it on a casual. It's just sooooooooooooooooo much better. But, sadly, only with proper caution.

[tsadriana]

Sounds like a footbal team this topic.:mad:

[Westheangelino]

WOOOOHOOOO! My love hole is ready for some hot TS cum

[Vladimir Putin]

Sorry, but anal barebacking is no different from committing suicide.

I'm not against oral barebacking though.

[LibertyHarkness]

lol :)

[Prospero]

I've often wondered about riding horses bareback.... but I prefer a saddle.

[Jericho]

Hmmmm...DumbMotherfuckers, almost as catchy as DarwinsAngels! :shrug

[tvkim]

Sorry, but anal barebacking is no different from committing suicide.

Nicely put. Some sense on this topic at last.

[dderek123]

Every time a creampie happens. A DarwinsAngel earns its wings.

[Merkurie]

I came of age in the worst of the AIDS era. Saw way too much, and lost a very close friend.
I see no humor or sense in this post, unless it is within a committed relationship built on trust.
Sorry.

[transeeker]

It's an ironic question: For outright pleasure bareback is best - but it's the knowledge that there are guys like you out there doing it with multiple partners that would prevent me from doing it.

[gugaxamot]

I live life for love and pleasure. Barebacking is the only way.

[Michelle.]

In a committed relationship,ooh yeah!! But then the topper is risking a UTI.

[wiltthestilt]

I came of age in the worst of the AIDS era. Saw way too much, and lost a very close friend.
I see no humor or sense in this post, unless it is within a committed relationship built on trust.
Sorry.


Agreed 100%. Bare backer = asshole. Not much more to say about it. I don't even like seeing it done in porno. I wonder how many of these douchebags then go on welfare assistance to pay for their HIV medication.

[LibertyHarkness]

Agreed 100%. Bare backer = asshole. Not much more to say about it. I don't even like seeing it done in porno. I wonder how many of these douchebags then go on welfare assistance to pay for their HIV medication.


I wonder how many of these asshole smokers that go on to get cancer claim chemo/radio therapy on the welfare for the treatment .

[wiltthestilt]

I wonder how many of these asshole smokers that go on to get cancer claim chemo/radio therapy on the welfare for the treatment .

Smoking sucks, too. I hope it's banned in every public place in America soon. But the difference is that cigarettes are a taxed at a high rate to offset costs to the public related to smoking. The same is true of alcohol. I wish there were a way to tax barbacking (outside monogamy) similarly.

[MacShreach]

Smoking sucks, too. I hope it's banned in every public place in America soon. But the difference is that cigarettes are a taxed at a high rate to offset costs to the public related to smoking. The same is true of alcohol. I wish there were a way to tax barbacking (outside monogamy) similarly.
You want to tax sex between consenting adults? You did actually write that?

Dickhead.

[tvkim]

Agreed 100%. Bare backer = asshole. Not much more to say about it. I don't even like seeing it done in porno. I wonder how many of these douchebags then go on welfare assistance to pay for their HIV medication.

Totally agree on this. I can't even stand to watch bareback videos knowing those pesky little HIV blighters might be infecting another host.

As for people saying they are tested and are clean..... thats just bullshit and they know it. They can have a test one day and contract HIV the next through doing bareback. You just can't tell, so why would anyone want to risk their life playing russian roulette this way?

Everyone knows it takes 12 weeks for the virus to be detected in the blood which means you could be fucking with a carrier and you dont even know it!

"Antibody tests may give false negative (no antibodies were detected despite HIV being present) results during the window period, an interval of three weeks to six months between the time of HIV infection and the production of measurable antibodies to HIV seroconversion.

Window period - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_period)

[tsadriana]

I wonder how many of these asshole smokers that go on to get cancer claim chemo/radio therapy on the welfare for the treatment .

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[wiltthestilt]

You want to tax sex between consenting adults? You did actually write that?

Dickhead.

I considered responding, but as you wouldn't be worth talking to outside this board, you aren't worth talking to here either. Good day to you sir.

[MacShreach]

Haha good bottle. Mmmm...dickhead

[Westheangelino]

Totally agree on this. I can't even stand to watch bareback videos knowing those pesky little HIV blighters might be infecting another host.

As for people saying they are tested and are clean..... thats just bullshit and they know it. They can have a test one day and contract HIV the next through doing bareback. You just can't tell, so why would anyone want to risk their life playing russian roulette this way?

Everyone knows it takes 12 weeks for the virus to be detected in the blood which means you could be fucking with a carrier and you dont even know it!

"Antibody tests may give false negative (no antibodies were detected despite HIV being present) results during the window period, an interval of three weeks to six months between the time of HIV infection and the production of measurable antibodies to HIV seroconversion.

Window period - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_period)


Just not true. It takes UP TO three months for antibodies to the virus to show up. With a NAAT/PCR test it only takes up to 12 days to see the actual virus in your blood.

[tvkim]

Just not true. It takes UP TO three months for antibodies to the virus to show up. With a NAAT/PCR test it only takes up to 12 days to see the actual virus in your blood.

Whatever the time period is, there is no way I would have bareback sex with a porn performer, even if they do produce a "cert" to say they are healthy. How would you know its a legit copy for starters?

I cannot understand why anyone would want to risk their life fucking around with a porn performer... unless they were not telling the truth about their own HIV status

[MsDazzler]

I understand why people are for and against barebacking. I respect everyone's opinions.

That being said, I practice safe sex like a overzealous Nazi. Last night, a hot guy who I had met in a club came home with me (he knew I was trans) and tried to fuck my ass without a condom. Even drunk, I told him no.

In the morning, he attempted to penetrate me without a condom again. I got upset and asked him, "Don't you value your health?" He said, "I am clean."

Haha... like I am going to bareback with a guy who I had barely known for one night and from a nightclub and risk sentencing the rest of my life with HIV just for a fleeting pleasure?!

It is interesting.. he was either so stupid, so horny, or lied outright about being clean since he was so nonchalant about fucking without a condom.

If he had said, "Damn, baby, I want to fuck your ass without a condom, but yea, I understand why we gotta put on a condom," that would have been better.

I have only barebacked in ONE relationship and the only one so far, and that was my first boyfriend ever back then when I was 19. I do miss the intimacy and feelings... and remember running to the toilet to let all of his cum out of my asshole. LOL

It has been years, though... I have grown used to feeling condoms inside me. I want to investigate the female condom further since it can be used for anal sex, also... since the guy can still cum inside me but we are still protected. I heard it is expensive, though!

[tvkim]

Haha... like I am going to bareback with a guy who I had barely known for one night and from a nightclub and risk sentencing the rest of my life with HIV just for a fleeting pleasure?!

The most sensible thing said on here...ever!

[talldudeil]

As long as you both have recent (within one week) test results go for it, lots of fun.

[Merkurie]

Just not true. It takes UP TO three months for antibodies to the virus to show up. With a NAAT/PCR test it only takes up to 12 days to see the actual virus in your blood.

How long does it take to get HIV out of your blood, you fucking asshole?

[MacShreach]

What is withthe naked aggression being displayed here? Not to mention neo-fascist, totalitarian idiocy like suggesting some kinds of sex should be taxed (if I ever write about the most stupid things I've ever read on HA, that's gonna be on it. Wut you gonna do, bubba? Implant us all with chips so you know what we're doing every second of the day? Or just put surveillance cams in everyone's bedroom? Sometimes the stupidity is stifling.)

Sex without a condom is far more pleasurable than with, in my opinion. Unprotected sex with someone whom you've just met or do not know the history of, is not sensible, on the other hand.

BUT...What two consenting adults do in bed is nobody else's damn business, end of.

[gugaxamot]

Finally some sense from Macshreach. Thank you! The hate on this thread is amazing. I would expect this amount of hate from a conservative christian nazi forum and not a ts forum.

[dderek123]

What is withthe naked aggression being displayed here? Not to mention neo-fascist, totalitarian idiocy like suggesting some kinds of sex should be taxed (if I ever write about the most stupid things I've ever read on HA, that's gonna be on it. Wut you gonna do, bubba? Implant us all with chips so you know what we're doing every second of the day? Or just put surveillance cams in everyone's bedroom? Sometimes the stupidity is stifling.)

Sex without a condom is far more pleasurable than with, in my opinion. Unprotected sex with someone whom you've just met or do not know the history of, is not sensible, on the other hand.

BUT...What two consenting adults do in bed is nobody else's damn business, end of.

:iagree:

[wiltthestilt]

What is withthe naked aggression being displayed here? Not to mention neo-fascist, totalitarian idiocy like suggesting some kinds of sex should be taxed (if I ever write about the most stupid things I've ever read on HA, that's gonna be on it. Wut you gonna do, bubba? Implant us all with chips so you know what we're doing every second of the day? Or just put surveillance cams in everyone's bedroom?Sometimes the stupidity is stifling.

Sex without a condom is far more pleasurable than with, in my opinion. Unprotected sex with someone whom you've just met or do not know the history of, is not sensible, on the other hand.

BUT...What two consenting adults do in bed is nobody else's damn business, end of.

That we can agree upon. Thanks for serving as an illustrative example.

[Merkurie]

I get too passionate about the subject of safe sex and I should not have gotten so heated about it. To each his own.

[Willie Escalade]

BUT...What two consenting adults do in bed is nobody else's damn business, end of.
This is true...until one of those consenting adults decides to have unprotected sex with someone else without divulging their past history.

[wiltthestilt]

This is true...until one of those consenting adults decides to have unprotected sex with someone else without divulging their past history.

Exactly. But dont expect such sense to resonate with people who rely on empty cliche's such as "neo-fascist" and "consenting adult" in lieu of reasoning. Like an animal hungry for its next meal, the present is all such people can cognize. Sure, the initial sexual encounter may be between "consenting adults" but two generations later the infection may reach some drunk college kid or someone whose lover has cheated on him or her. We all make poor decisions; we all get angry, depressed, careless, drunk, or are ignorant of circumstances. I would hope adults, when sober minded, would think about others who may be affected by their current behavior. We cant make the decision for them; but we need not remain morally indifferent either. Which is why not our business does not mean not our concern.

Incidentally, for those still learning english; there has been no suggestion that it is desirable or feasible to tax people for engaging in bareback sex. It may be only one person who is confused on this point, but for those entering the thread late, no such suggestion was ever made.

[MacShreach]

Smoking sucks, too. I hope it's banned in every public place in America soon. But the difference is that cigarettes are a taxed at a high rate to offset costs to the public related to smoking. The same is true of alcohol. I wish there were a way to tax barbacking (outside monogamy) similarly.


QED, I think, dick.

[MacShreach]

Oh sorry, I misunderstood! You wrote 'barbacking' not barebacking! What is that, where you fuck the bar you spend most of your time at backwards? Do explain.

And Willie, I agree, but there are legal sanctions for deliberately endangering others already in place. The bedroom is not an appropriate place for taxation, as the previous did actually wish for (his words) whatever he may claim now.

[amberskyi]

What is withthe naked aggression being displayed here? Not to mention neo-fascist, totalitarian idiocy like suggesting some kinds of sex should be taxed (if I ever write about the most stupid things I've ever read on HA, that's gonna be on it. Wut you gonna do, bubba? Implant us all with chips so you know what we're doing every second of the day? Or just put surveillance cams in everyone's bedroom? Sometimes the stupidity is stifling.)

Sex without a condom is far more pleasurable than with, in my opinion. Unprotected sex with someone whom you've just met or do not know the history of, is not sensible, on the other hand.

BUT...What two consenting adults do in bed is nobody else's damn business, end of.

Some of the people on this forum are older and probably remember the horror of the 80s when HIV popped up as an unnamed virus no one knew anything about but claimed so many lives

[MacShreach]

Some of the people on this forum are older and probably remember the horror of the 80s when HIV popped up as an unnamed virus no one knew anything about but claimed so many lives

Actually, Amber, that would include me. I lost several friends. Still does not warrant further governmental intrusion into people's private lives. We have enough already.

And I am quite sure those whom I knew who died, would feel exactly the same.

[amberskyi]

Actually, Amber, that would include me. I lost several friends. Still does not warrant further governmental intrusion into people's private lives. We have enough already.

And I am quite sure those whom I knew who died, would feel exactly the same.

I was just giving a potential reason why some are reacting so strongly.that's all

[MacShreach]

And if I sounded snippy I apologise, I didn't mean to. Your post made me remember some things, that's all. You're one of the last people on here I'd want to make feel bad.

[mrtrebus]

bareback forever!

[Ryz]

As long as you both have recent (within one week) test results go for it, lots of fun.

Bro you're 6'8 and only 180 lbs? jesus christ go eat something

[wiltthestilt]

QED, I think, dick.

I hate to knock down your strawman when you almost had it yourself; but this is what I said:


I wish there were a way to tax barbacking (outside monogamy) similarly.

It was actually intended facetiously (which was obvious), but even literally it does not say what you are suggesting it says and is not even logically consistent with what you are suggesting it says.

I was drawing a distinction between cigarette smoking which is taxable and barebacking which is not taxable; hence the phrase "I wish there were" which implies impossibility. The verb "to wish" + the subjunctive tense "were" = impossibility. Nowhere did I say barebacking in a non-commercial venue should be taxed or that it is feasible to tax it or else I would have said that. And I phrased it in such a way that I thought was idiot-proof, but I guess not.

And now since it's obvious that you are clueless, run along and find another thread to degrade to your level.

[MacShreach]

Oh I think you probably ought to withadraw now. You have demonstrated that you are not only stupid, but devious and deceitful. Think we all have the picture. chum.

[MacShreach]

I wish there were a way to tax barbacking (outside monogamy) similarly.


there has been no suggestion that it is desirable or feasible to tax people for engaging in bareback sex.

Squeal all you like, pussy, you're hoist by your own petard...as those of us with an education sometimes say.

[wiltthestilt]

Oh I think you probably ought to withadraw now. You have demonstrated that you are not only stupid, but devious and deceitful. Think we all have the picture. chum.

I think not. You are just an arrogant moron who is incapable of adult discussion.
You have no rational argument to make--only name calling, ad hominem attacks, and cliched phrases like "neo-Fascist" which invariably you yourself don't understand. I should have followed my initial decision to ignore your juvenile banter.

[wiltthestilt]

Squeal all you like, pussy, you're hoist by your own petard...as those of us with an education sometimes say.

I would bet anything I am better educated than you are--though I am not living up to it by continuing to waste time with you. GFY. I'm finished with this.

If anyone else would like to continue the conversation I am available.

[MacShreach]

I would bet anything I am better educated than you are--though I am not living up to it by continuing to waste time with you. GFY. I'm finished with this.

If anyone else would like to continue the conversation I am available.
Oh good, it was time you realised the wisdom in the old adage 'When in hole, stop digging'.

[wiltthestilt]

Originally Posted by wiltthestilt
I wish there were a way to tax barbacking (outside monogamy) similarly.


Originally Posted by wiltthestilt
there has been no suggestion that it is desirable or feasible to tax people for engaging in bareback sex.


And to address this last bit of reading incomprehension:

I said "I wish there were a way" = there is no way, it is impossible, in a perfect world people who engaged in the behavior would pay to offset the social costs of the behavior just as smokers do. I never said such a thing should actually happen in the real word.

[wiltthestilt]

Oh good, it was time you realised the wisdom in the old adage 'When in hole, stop digging'.

Actually, I answered you moron. There you go. You didn't understand what I said and you jumped to conclusions. I don't expect you to get this either.

[MacShreach]

I think not. You are just an arrogant moron who is incapable of adult discussion.
You have no rational argument to make--only name calling, ad hominem attacks, and cliched phrases like "neo-Fascist" which invariably you yourself don't understand. I should have followed my initial decision to ignore your juvenile banter.

So explain to me how calling me an 'arrogant moron' etc is not an 'ad-hominem attack'? Which so highly educated (don't make me laugh) a person as yourself would pretend never to stoop to?

You made a stupid and thoughtless statement which you subsequently attempted to back out of under a smokescreen of obfuscatory twaddle, and became abusive when challenged by someone who is if not smarter than you, at least as smart. An honest person in your position would have accepted the fault. I think the term is 'humbug'.

[wiltthestilt]

So explain to me how calling me an 'arrogant moron' etc is not an 'ad-hominem attack'? Which so highly educated (don't make me laugh) a person as yourself would pretend never to stoop to?

You made a stupid and thoughtless statement which you subsequently attempted to back out of under a smokescreen of obfuscatory twaddle, and become abusive when challenged by someone who is if not smarter than you, at least as smart. An honest person in your position would have accepted the fault. I think the term is 'humbug'.


So explain to me how calling me an 'arrogant moron' etc is not an 'ad-hominem attack'?

It is. We are through debating. The ad hominem attacks started with you.


You made a stupid and thoughtless statement which you subsequently attempted to back out of under a smokescreen of obfuscatory twaddle

Bullshit. I phrased it that way for emphasis, and in such a way that it was clear that it was not a policy I was literally suggesting. You appear to be the only one who had trouble with it.


and become abusive when challenged by someone who is if not smarter than you, at least as smart.

More bullshit. This was your initial response to me:


You want to tax sex between consenting adults? You did actually write that?

Dickhead.

How do you expect a civil discussion to follow such a reply?


An honest person in your position would have accepted the fault.

Total bullshit. I'm not at fault for anything. If you misunderstood what I said you could have asked rather than acting like an asshole. I am a careful writer and I wrote what I intended to write. I'm not backing down because you have acted like an asshole and now are grasping for some way to justify your behavior.

[MacShreach]

No, I am afraid that just saying the same thing again and again does not improve your case. I won't lower myself to the sixth-form semantics that you apparently revel in, because it's too late here to continue to put effort into discussion with someone so intransigent and, clearly, somewhat lacking in certain social and intellectual skills, so I am going to bed. Good night.

Oh, claim victory if you will; for it to matter to me, you would have to.

But really, it takes a real dickhead to suggest taxing sex.

[wiltthestilt]

No, I am afraid that just saying the same thing again and again does not improve your case. I won't lower myself to the sixth-form semantics that you apparently revel in, because it's too late here to continue to put effort into discussion with someone so intransigent and, clearly, somewhat lacking in certain social and intellectual skills, so I am going to bed. Good night.

Oh, claim victory if you will; for it to matter to me, you would have to.

But really, it takes a real dickhead to suggest taxing sex.

Fair enough. I claim victory. You made a knee jerk response and then became even more of an unruly child when you were forced to reflect on it. If you had acted like an adult (if you are one) from the beginning all this nastiness would have been avoided, but perhaps that is what you wanted from the outset. Maybe you'll wake up a better person but I doubt it.

[wiltthestilt]

Finally some sense from Macshreach. Thank you! The hate on this thread is amazing. I would expect this amount of hate from a conservative christian nazi forum and not a ts forum.

A conservative christian board wouldn't hate on this thread. They would welcome your honesty. Among their core arguments against us are that forums such as this one promote and encourage unsafe behavior, that condoms are ineffective in controlling the spread of HIV, and that even if condoms worked correctly, the participants are so consumed with their own carnal pleasure that they would not bother to use them anyway. They have all manner of specious statistics to support these claims. This thread would go over very with them as it supports their already held assumptions. It's a shame it hasn't met with more derision here.

[LibertyHarkness]

Got to love those religion nut jobs :)