SirBillybob

Better be an option of hand-cut, curly, and sweet potato.

“This is what I pay, full stop. How happy I end up may vary. All physiological releases are as normative as the nongenital musculoskeletal benefits of body message. If I squeal too loudly for the neighbours we can chalk it up to primal therapy.” [Ball in play] ”I capitulate to paying more because that is the convention established by other payers in which degrees of happiness are ranked according to degrees of payment. Ejaculate is yucky, an imposition on you, and should cum at a premium. That is the prevailing narrative, the unalterable contract established by my peers, one I grudgingly accept as compensation for unpleasantness and loud noises.” [Own goal] In other words, it takes a unified village and that’s not going to happen.

Surely the flattery of having any service proclaim that one is their best customer should inspire one to be consistently generous to a fault.

If you want to avoid the top Apple rental rate, Sinners début on Max and on Crave (Canada) is July 4th.

I believe it about as much as I believe that some men have the potential to be well bred.

Good to know because Kilometrage is such a mouthful.

I wouldn’t share deets and my personal take on a provider with an unknown third party unless I was prepared for it to go full circle. Even if they were positive comments it could come across as spilled tea, as there’s no control over context, and possibly bite me in the ass. In many cases the inquirer is a fuss-budget and mostly wishes to compare what you got with what he could get out of a booking. If you can’t figure out on your own how to vet and whether to take a leap then this hobby is not a good fit for you. I also have no desire to have a good cultivated relationship compromised by being somehow linked to a client that proved to be undesirable. My tribe does not at all consist of apparently polite strangers. I also have no problem with myself being a nobody in that regard.

Search “prostate cancer receptive anal sex” to access a few good scholarly articles pertinent to gay men. One consequence of prostate removal is that after it’s done there’s no option to backtrack to less radical approaches that may have been worth exploring. Few Urology programs and urologists will take the time to package patient education that comprehensively reviews the decision tree of progressively greater complexity with the developing emergence of novel prostate cancer management. Particularly if you’re older the assumption may be that you’ve had a good sexual run and the path of least resistance is removal because it’s such an established procedure. My urologist does not refer for brachytherapy or focused laser ablation. You accept his suite of options and like it or lump it. Fortunately, I haven’t been confronted with such a step and needing to undertake searching for an alternative that would likely involve inconvenient travel. Anecdotal reports … wait for it … of robust sexual enjoyment along with $3.50 might get you a bottle of Evian that might increase semen volume you may not actually visibly perceive, but won’t predict your own post-op sexual experience. I do think that if you are already inclined to an erogenous orientation with your skin and brain front and centre erotically as bona fide sexual organs, and not strictly genital-centric, then that portends a better outcome following prostatectomy.

No low pressure system allowed.

Hummm … he is misrepresenting prostate health surveillance guidance but I suppose it’s not so bad since physicians know the deal about the applicability of digital rectal exam and prostate-specific antigen in terms of flagging irregularities. One conundrum is putting in bold relief blundering inadequacies. Besides, if hamburgers are to be subject to portion control don’t otherwise threaten deprivation of a harmless good time while simultaneously encouraging opening up.

The idea that paid sex surrogacy defines clients as being low on the dateable continuum is one that clients may harbour and work at resolving. That the escort constituency may directly or indirectly manifest that view is of manipulative value to them; yet it isn’t uniform within that group. Simplistically, if you are old, paid intimacy is easily conflated with ageism on the one the one hand, or on the other hand objectification of paid others, depending on collective membership and bias regarding commercial sex work. If non-role prescribed denigration spills out, the easiest and laziest slur relates to paying; the only potential being loss, a loser. Ideal psychological resolution is zero sum, in which the idea of the dating pool analogy for objective worth has no real relevance. Money as appealingly compensatory stands in for other attributes that conventionally increase dateability. As a collective, some clients’ identity representation is bound up in personal sexual agency and it’s apparent lacking, the aforementioned grade of appeal aspect, while other clients may have conventional game capable of attracting non-transactional sexual experiences. Or circumstances unrelated to the trend of devaluing others based on age and stereotypes of sexiness may dictate hiring. The slur is tangential and essentially absurd. Who knew that dining out solo when invited to home-cooked dinner is preferred cloaks one as pathetic? Paid intimacy is also accompanied by the fantasy/reality dichotomy, no need to elaborate here. Race play (assuming BDSM elements, as opposed to non-BDSM sex partner race preference in which conceptual overlap may occur) conflates racism with a fantasy/reality dichotomy wherein some aspect of race is eroticized, arguably fused with the concept of power. This forum is oriented to commercial sex but I’m not sure how the notion of tran$actional sex advances a discussion of race play, particularly if attitudes that devalue punters seep in, but notwithstanding that cash cannot be decoupled from power. It’s already so complex and controversial.

Yes.

This reinforces the long held idea that the best thing about porn is choice.

As somebody already indicated, they can. I think you are wondering about a contradiction between stated boundaries and apparently demonstrating greater flexibility in harm reduction at the booking or meeting stage. The practice guidance emphasizes having methods for negotiating out of condomless sex if the context warrants it. Some sex workers understandably frame this dynamic upfront from a point of being uncompromising so that there are no surprises regarding the prohibition yet may be open to relaxing it. While some may upsell the greater risk as a way to earn more, others may do so in order to discourage unprotected sex, neither strategy necessarily taking precedence overall. As a condom is the only truly inanimate thing that I have fetishized to some extent, unwrapping, on me, on him, what have you, the sex worker need not insist on it.

As far as interaction goes, petal, yours is risk free for me. If you want to be someone that others are then inclined to handle, so be it. One would think you might be licking a few residual wounds and were reactive more to an implication of interpersonal deficiency than protesting writing style. If grandstanding helps restore equilibrium all the better. No skin off my teeth. But by all means do reveal what gets your goat because I’m not sure how you thrive. That said, relax, the topic theme was distrust and you had simply presented the idea of reading into somebody’s preference, one that you obviously honoured yet framed as curious, the possibility that their declaration had been misrepresented. This was in keeping with the thread. In fact, in some situations that type of attribution may uptick protectiveness beneficially. In actuality, sex workers that access good prevention programs and know what’s up will aim for condom use. Perhaps that had already been emphasized upthread. Their risk factors are unique. My input wasn’t designed to shame, to negate that you complied with a decision within an encounter in which it seems you’d have opted for condomless intercourse having executed your due HIV prevention diligence on your side of the equation. By accommodating him you played a part in solidifying his comfort with his boundaries. Next.

The provider declining condomless insertive or receptive anal intercourse is following clinical guidance, attending to the education and recommendations that accompany best health systems counseling practices surrounding his PrEP testing for HIV and other STIs. With solid self-efficacy, his personal autonomy should override any concerns he might have that declining condomless intercourse leads to assumptions that the veracity of his HIV and PrEP status is questionable. I’d be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that his skills and experience inform him that no free pass is conferred by PrEP. If also reciprocally mistrustful on top of the non-culpable unknown, that fits neatly with the risk mitigation agenda inherent in his personal agency as a sex worker. With less than robust self-determination and prophylaxis intentionality he could be exposed to a bacterial or viral infection, or subsequently worry about it and/or suspend his commercial sex livelihood when in fact he might have preferred the enhanced protection.

The drop down menu covers the essential status options. What it cannot do, other than not being able to resolve intentional misinformation, is display a HIV-negative person’s possible actual positive status due to the lag time between an infection unbeknownst to the person because the person may have transmissible HIV prior to the evidence of seroconversion that informs the person accurately. PrEP is not treatment for diagnosed HIV infection. Similarly, PrEP status actual protection is not unambiguously known because there are high rates of community HIV infection incidence due to lapses in uptake adherence.

Empathic attunement, however, usually comes from a place of being other than the reference person or group to whom the intended support is directed. Otherwise it leans to commonality in identification. I think I picked up an angry flare that may provide a glimpse into how furious your perception of rejection makes you. You seem to have assumed the content creator was disingenuous, and that his own relationship is smooth. This isn’t to say anger isn’t legit or real but it can insidiously become characterological over time while not necessarily expressed or manifested, eg, vociferously, in the way typically expected. How do you mentalize the rejection? It is human to (harmlessly) fantasize retribution that may befall somebody in an attempt to balance the ledger. However, that can bleed into expectancies with respect to subsequent encounters and self-fulfilling prophecy. This is basic object relations theory in which need-meeting and need-withholding commences in infancy. Therapy is the place we should utilize to reveal the degree to which we aren’t always as nice as we aim to project.

OP, without necessarily stating your racial admixture as you seem reticent to do so, and since race has come up thematically a bit, could you try to elaborate on how you think this variable plays out in such a way as to obstruct access to men and to your stated intimacy desires? After all, you broke it down in your app project as an essential descriptor along with generic commentary about relational availability. You can be general about it as there is some degree of commonality in racially based selectivity that transcends the specificity of racial stratification, so you can cover some of this territory without an explicit personal racial pie chart. Additionally, to what degree can folks that meet you without context pinpoint the racial admixture that characterizes you? How well is it identifiable? If you politely disclose it what kind of responses do you get? Surprise, cliché? And would there be anything about your speech that sets you apart as being from away, as I think you mentioned a home town but I’m not sure if you immigrated to USA?

New book from Oxford University Press. Expensive and not all chapters relevant but at least try to read the free sample which is fairly generous in length.

Well, since you understandably wish feedback from consumers … I have only used on-demand since commencing PrEP about 7 years ago. The grade of evidence for protection is strong, see attached for the randomized control trial results that underpin on-demand legitimacy. In contrast to daily PrEP the strength of recommendation is weak. That difference is not based on efficacy. Rather, there is no placebo control research evaluating efficacy among those using PrEP sporadically due to being sexually active sporadically, that is, like you and me. What happened in the on-demand trial is that participants did not take PrEP daily but took on average about 15 doses monthly and that was close to the average monthly uptake (4 doses weekly) in studies of daily (intended to be daily adherence) PrEP. They planned for sexual activity quite frequently irrespective of having it or not. That also may account for the higher rate of renal adverse events than would occur for sporadic 2-1-1 users. Personally I do not conflate the two-pronged strong/weak versus strong/strong with one being better. It’s all in the reasonable tailoring. The difference is an artefact of the inability to logistically and ethically design research in which more accurate effectiveness across all sexual activity frequency groups could be calculated. It would have taken too long to follow and evaluate for infrequent users because background HIV incidence is too low compared to flu, coronavirus, other STIs, etc. Any study of efficacy requires a relatively poor outcome for some participants. The protectiveness of on-demand in gold standard research is also superior to the findings of retrospective research of the daily regimen. That said, I haven’t not used a condom for anal insertive or receptive in 40 years. I don’t consider PrEP as TGTBT since the probability of HIV infection over extremely long life periods of risky sexual activity is elevated and the trade-off is higher vulnerability to other STIs. Regarding dose loading, some guideline entities for daily PrEP are now stating 2 doses just as in on-demand, or the option of 7-day but inserting a one-time 2-dose uptake as in on-demand if the abstinence is not possible to sustain for the week.

Lauren Weedman is a private chef in Sirens (Netflix). I think the series was already touched upon in this subforum.

My fitness coach can spell my asshole.

As we say in my neck of the woods, a nice Registered Retirement Savings Plan contribution.

Of the dozens of cases reported in Europe over the past decade, TMVII occurred predominantly among men having sex with men, often multiple partners, the majority HIV positive or taking PrEP, although this is not to say that lack of condom use is a factor. Of the dozen Paris cases in 2021/2022 some during Mpox peak incidence were co-infected with Mpox. It is deemed to be transmitted through sexual activity and is challenging to treat. Of all of these cases there have been none that pose a strong contradiction to the assumption that the route of transmission is sexual with negligible crossover to the adult female population. That is why the original post referring to the single American case refers to it so. Temperature and humidity unknown.