SirBillybob

Why complain, though? You got to proclaim what is appealing to you, not having read the room as I decorated it, as well as now establish your terms for what is and isn’t a silly ask. Grow up.

@BlackSheep, some of the aforementioned responses are missing a great deal of your subtext. Being in the driver’s seat as your own coach for a provider accommodating your limits is a well-meaning but reductionist idea. Above all, be aware that this board is not the sex trade equivalent of WebMD. Though it makes sense on the face of it, could yield minimal gain. An escort won’t necessarily possess the conceptual skill set to address the phobia and anxiety you describe, particularly as the shortlist of candidates will be restricted by the physical type that appeals to you. (Imagine if arachnophobia treatment success were to hinge on therapist appeal; all that would be required is that he or she not be The Fly … Peter Parker doesn’t count) Sure, he can be sensitive and respect boundaries. However, a systematic deconstruction of your anxiety by an expert will help to dictate the application of exposure and desensitization techniques that could more effectively bring forward growth and comfort with sex. You describe a unique blend of both homoerotic and pathogen exposure fear. The approach might be a blend of both planned and executed uncomfortable exposure and desensitization. The former in particular would probably not be initiated by you and, moreover, should not be left to the caprice of an escort whose capacity is the call to sexual pleasure, albeit well-intentioned, and his direct conformity to your limits. It all sounds left to interminable randomness in moving the needle. Rigidified limits and the hope for their softening are not always amenable to simple placement in a new context without the adjunct of trained processing by an expert. Similarly, an incorrect and underprocessed interaction could unintentionally bind physiological sexual stimulation to revulsion and set you back further. You essentially said it, after all, to your credit. Again, I don’t know your resource limits but it would be remiss to neglect a recommendation for type of approach even if it cannot be realistically accommodated. If it were to be one or the other, I’d lean to counseling over consummation. If you were to only repeatedly pay a restaurant to not feed you there would need to be an element of reality that supports that consumption model. Otherwise, really tired and really expensive in short order. That synergistic coaching element could be external or conjoined with the eatery but would give it sense and purpose in shifting consumption. Self-promotion need not be shameless to be self-serving. Who doesn’t do that to make the world turn? I haven’t acquired or delivered a service in my lifetime that wasn’t propped by PR. I don’t proclaim to have the answer. That’s OK because such proclamations are a dime a dozen. Take your pick.

Don’t believe everything you read. What is it the kids say? YMMV, and on your own thermas. If I chimed in with similar tripadvisor advice it would be a case of pulling everybody’s leg. In fact, I cannot claim to know everybody’s leg isn’t being pulled prior to my input at this instant. In my case, all I can be certain about is that I’d be pulling legs at the level of sentencing various gullible punters to a draw-and-quarter level of deception. Hyperbole meets hyperbolic, you say? Guilty as charged. Fortunately, clemency and clarity are both near at hand and DM always an option for getting priorities straight and travel structure balanced. And this is coming from a truly yours inveterate sex tourist inclined to dole out dunce hats when ‘not to be missed’ funhouses overlooked by default or design. I can assure you that no such gem exists in the G’Eixample quarter and that I hope the seeing-eye-dog assignment waitlist cranks up the obviously needed speed.

Of two responses, which would be considered the more intended, the more accurate in fact?: (A) Off his trolley; pool drained for targeted protection and for venue to circumvent a law suit based on negligence (B) Witnessing another punter daring to wear bathing trunks would freak me the fcuk out and I would simply be incapable of unseeing that image burned into my memory, would promptly demand the entry fee back and deprive myself of a variety of poles while steering clear of the venue with a ten-foot pole

Badly, you say? Too bad I’m not interested in having a pretext for proxy gushing. It’s not his name, actually, and I’m not sure he’d be open to autographing that day’s workout sheet.

While I mentioned cliché I hadn’t meant to necessarily cue it.

The point is that you could have been colouring within the lines even if taking the medication within the nutrition consumption window of a Papa Burger trio (sans fromage) at 03:00 on Sunday in the event of late night munchies a few hours following the last risk exposure. Again, the minimum 12-hour lag from sex to après-sex prophylaxis in current research protocols simply deviates acceptably from the ‘ASAP within 72 hours’ guidance. Similarly, there’d have been no reason to question the acceptability of dosing around Sunday breakfast rather than Sunday lunch. However, if you had considered the 8 ounces of food, primarily protein, as having satisfied meal accompaniment guidelines and had popped Doxy an hour subsequent to Saturday evening encounters I’d have to say that would just be showing off.

I don’t know and it is of no interest to me. A few years ago I happened to have some minor interaction with the two in a neutral public context situated in Montreal. Just one of those things in a shared non-gay space where it is naturalistic to chat with a bit of neighbourly commentary over a forgettable topic. No fantasies were evoked. They would not have known that I knew who they were, both erotica and ad backgrounds. In that context there was no reason for me to offer suggestions around their choreography. If theoretically I had been pressed to get down with one of the two I would likely have selected the Canadian (presumably Québecois), though for all I know he hails from Youcum Territory and that is what stimulated the Mecum collab. Not because he was the submissive, if I recall correctly, but because I found him to be a bit more physically attractive. I suppose I could have spilled the beans on their non-anonymity by gushing over their Rainbow Railroad affiliation at the time.

Now as the present and future self to my past self, along with some overlap in contextual and sexual development background as you, OP, I wouldn’t be time-travelling and recommending to my past self that I seek direction in a message board such as this. You are here because you ponder whether the transactional sex realm could figure meaningfully into moving the needle for you in terms of overcoming inhibitions related to intimate male-male interaction. Here you will get basic empathy and a few well-meaning but cliché suggestions from some, a thread also peppered with ignorant obnoxious scolds that could outpace anybody having upbraided you or males in general while growing up, only with a shift to criticism for the paralyzing reticence you describe and for not yet having bitten the bullet and gotten blown in your neighbourhood backroom. Therapy, and/ or paid interaction for desensitization with a fellow on the surrogate-provider continuum, will cost you financially. First of all, you wouid need to be a person of means. These are not necessarily required pathways to the progression you may desire. There exists a myriad and vast variety of storylines that represent getting from where you are (and countless others have been) to the place you think you might want to be. The thing is, these pathways have been predominantly unplanned and there is lacking a structured algorithm for advancement in homosexual self-actualization. Attempts at answering your input will likely circle around your reality with the hope of landing on target but not yield a fully rendered solution. Rather, they evoke further description by you that appears to exacerbate your fears around breached anonymity. You suggest exposure anxiety, and the notion that the more shares you risk here the greater the anxiety that runs through your dilemma. You can’t easily add the degree of elaboration that might facilitate the assortative process of trying on some ideas for size while discarding others. It’s the message board equivalent to pinning the tail on the donkey. That said, and fully cognizant that my ideas are as discardable as any, I do wonder if exploring San Fran PFLAG might be in your interest. It’s free. You don’t need to explicitly identify or testify at all, as the mix of attendees is extremely heterogeneous, consisting of gays, families, friends, allies, etc. No pressure to justify your presence whatsoever. You already know a few queers. The subject interests you. I wonder if it might promote a degree of desensitization. It’s one of a few settings where you can be gay without being gay, in a sense not unlike the post-modern phenomenon of high school sexual fluidity alliance clubs. It is not a sharing circle model. Anybody can attend for years with the option of only sitting and listening. There may be relatable guest speakers that will spur for you gradually a greater sense of normalization and personal integration.

Obvi post-edit time limit a few days ago I meant emtricitabine, the mnemonic spelling cue directed more by trying to sit following a binge as opposed to a sinfully impossible attempt at bi.

I absolutely stated no “shoulds” about Doxy uptake. Rather, described ongoing research trial protocols that are methodologically correct regarding uptake timing. The bacterial STI medicinally applied prevention problem has not been cracked like some naïvely think. However, the horse has bolted from the pen through premature marketing (in fact, none at all by Merck Pharma). If you want to enter a rodeo that is thematically closer to an underground cock or dog fight than a health regulatory body consistently and globally supported intervention, detailed questions about uptake certainly apply. It’s not just off-label; the papyrus on which the monograph is prematurely written is insufficiently processed and dried. As you can gather, I have a horse-cart cart-horse standard that needs to be satisfied. As a person older than 65, I’m already picky about curating my HIV PrEP uptake as it seems to be a well kept secret that tenofovir/ emtricitabine for HIV prevention is off-label for seniors, both daily and on-demand formats.

That’s from the abstract, usually limited in word count allowance, and Josh elaborated the protocol upthread. 12-24 hour post sex uptake in current research is consistent with that idea. Study subjects also get hours of structured counselling around their specific circumstances, even after having met inclusion criteria. A research report informs product guidance but is not the actual guidance. Moreover, the trial published in NEJM supplied delayed-release Doxy. To elaborate illustratively the timing as referenced by Josh earlier, I doubt that it is prudent to get fucked between Saturday night hockey periods and defer the desired antimicrobial intervention, a treatment that is slow-walked into your bioavailability needs, to Tuesday half-price movie night accompanied by your butterless popcorn and skittles. It is simply an arbitrary methodological post- encounter time to prophylaxis boundary but the study protocol is not set up to seek a correlation between uptake timing and efficacy. It is reasonably inferred but impossible to substantiate that a study subject always taking the dosage at hour 71 is more vulnerable to STI acquisition compared to the fellow always taking it at hour 41, all obviously give or take according to intimacy patterns and the arbitrary 24-hour gap between doses. The current arbitrary 12-hour lapse requested by investigators between sex and uptake is, similarly, not a contradiction to the ‘as soon as you can get those pills into you’ caveat but is established in order to knit together within the study protocol architecture the realities of access to drug as-needed post encounter and the necessity of a reasonably level and common playing field, of some degree of uniformity among research subjects in terms of exposure risk and the intervention targeting prevention of disease, particularly when various participant protocol assignment arms are compared.

Thoughts … One of my worries for you based on your bit of extra elaboration is that your sexual playbook, arousal template, etc, has all been based on internal fantasy or perhaps imagery included as well. That is a necessary but possibly insufficient state at the real life starting gate. In contrast to most of us having powered through initiation and clearing those newbie hurdles, I envision you possibly bucking and pulling up at the first jump. This raises the ‘what you see is what you get’ fallacy. The translation from provider presentation to our subjective experience with him is very complex for the uninitiated. Your reticence screams sex surrogacy indication, that is, a whisperer chap who has all the goods on you, empathy, and matches whatever physical prototype may have evolved so far for you. Even then, hold back on conventional sexual interaction whilst applying hierarchical systematic desensitization. Baby steps, minute by minute opt in opt out option, activity-shifting to neutral interaction over anxiety-driven bolting. Get comfortable with what could occur next week while postponing that same occurrable thing with him today. My spidey sense suggests that you have an ultra-sensitive on-off erotic switch, leaning more towards just the two settings, not on a gradient dimmer-control basis. Thus, you could be into it one minute but feel trapped the next. You also described an inability to extricate yourself when a massajista went south on you. Self-efficacy questions abound. Your shares have steered the bit of interpretation I’ve outlined above. If so, I can relate to that type of binary; I have no middle ground and he has to be completely right for me or all bets are off. Lucky for me, I’ve worked it all out to override any possibility of problematic aborts. My bewilderment at what others assert is appealing simply limits my bucket-list content while not impeding satisfaction with the hobby. Interestingly, my younger years arousal template was similarly oriented to the penisless hirstute macho prototype. There are guys out there that can walk you through and accommodate the idiosyncratic need for figurative genital amputation pending further development in the behavioural repertoire, or not. Half of the time, I don’t see the cock and what is negotiated is that he wears underwear or jeans, etc, although taking a pass on genital interaction is an atypical expectation to which the dick’s owner will have to adjust, my being submissively in-charge. Other times it’s impossible to ignore that particular gift and have it explore the few cavities in which insertion is possible. And we’ve actually glossed over the complicated question of what orientation you need him to be. I have my own locked-in rigidity on that. It limits, though inconsistently, the potential for insertive oral but I’ve learned that getting most of what you want along with unpredictable surprise is more than OK at this point in my life. STI anxiety is not non-functional. It must essentially be front of mind to a certain degree in order to evade disease and it’s cascade effects within individual life context. You shouldn’t dissociate from such worry but making a deal with it is also a prerequisite for play.

Of the 3 main explanatory possibilities, scamming, stupidity, or self-sabotaging, I have found experientially so far that the latter two cover the bases. I’ll give more leeway to an ESL fellow but, otherwise, cute deteriorates really rapidly and the net result is a free onanistic hand job. BTW, where in the world do you find a simple translation of ‘ASK’ since it’s omitted from XE? On what planet is that info not light years away?

That’s a good start, hats off and good luck, to have worked up the nerve to acknowledge and hope to climb additional steps, but I wonder if you’re asking in the right space. In this town hall you may get but commiseration and kudos. But the coffee and donuts thingy table is cluttered with ‘scort ad catalogues. Seriously. The shopaholic/ sexaholic intersection is so very insidious. I think the central conundrum, though, relates to the relative merits of abstinence versus harm reduction. IMO I have mastered the latter, but I have also read an enormous volume of lit on the subject and that could be an unrealistic undertaking for many. I am also oriented to DIY self-help rather than the collective support system model. And I have found that I can extract as much value from the writing of experts in the field as I would booking sessions with same. Also much more cost effective. No particular recs, just start anywhere, but Katehakis likely figures into it.

May have been a family-friend circle intervention for somebody having fallen off the wagon.

Because they are often fordable and come with better guardrails than BFs with gremlin traits or random pickups.

According to his professional peers, Ally McBeal as well as power couple Lucious and Cookie Lyon he is the real deal.

Ongoing Doxy for bacterial STI research is sparse but, understandably, placebo control is now off the table. Results a few more years out. Without placebo arms, these are essentially superiority comparator research models though the working hypotheses are deemed non-inferiority comparison as the framing of ‘just as good, or no less ineffective’ is preferred to ‘better or less than’. Gunning for evidence of superiority also tends to introduce methodological bias. If I refer to non-inferiority again and get whining from the rank and file about terms, I’ll merely suggest going upthread. Don’t join the seminar if you’re anaphylactic upon the call to a bit of heavy lifting. Obnoxious trolling minimally stimulates a sense of personal non-inferiority; I cannot guarantee that it’s not additionally evocative of an own troll goal. In Canada, comparing daily DoxyPrEP 100mg to DoxyPEP 200mg 12-24 hours post risk encounter (condomless oral or anal or both; insertive or receptive or both) but max 6 DoxyPEP doses weekly to control for the potential confounder of dosage-exceeding, aka antimicrobial overload, upon multiple encounters. Inclusion requires STI within past year. In Hong Kong, DoxyPEP 200mg 12-24 hrs post risk encounter, as in Canada study model above, but compared to on-demand DoxyPrEP 100mg using the same uptake structure (2-1-1-etc) as applied in on-demand HIV PrEP, in contrast to the daily DoxyPrEP (again, that version in the Canadian locations mirroring daily HIV PrEP). Qualifying behavioural STI acquisition risk past 12 months but not required to have had established an STI diagnosis within that frame. As HIV PrEP is often an accompaniment, those without encounter journaling, multiple juggling and pillbox management skills need not apply. Phew! Did I mention I just reupped my condom and tenofovir/embitritacine supply in keeping with my operating threshold situated on the dividing line between non-negative to negative about sex?

He’s hot. I see him occasionally at one of the EconoFitness branches I attend. It’s a packed gym. He ranks about #22 in heat but it’s an extremely stacked field. Even then, #1 couldn’t get $1000 out of me because, well, brazen entitlement and poutine culture tends not to go hand in hand. But I could get with reasonable offers, without a doubt, some real lookers there. He has an interesting background, quite divergent from that which is locally predominant. Not my cup of tea, but that’s just me and it’s unrelated to his roots.

No I am not saying that. You said that, well some of it anyway. That was the springboard for my adding the shave and a haircut bits about ad deletion pre-empting the access into which you had tripped. Historical access by others is not the entry point; you did not assert that and I realize it was an inquiry addition that turns out to be irrelevant. The entry point is that the ad never made it into the vault and a search function will raise the ad’s presence outside of the vault’s entrance. A formal step must be undertaken by the advertiser to submit the ad to the platform vault in perpetuity where I assume historical cream-ation is supplanted by content cremation. —— No need to be self-effacing on a troll-saturated message board where it’s all-inclusively provided. Hugs. 😏

Many advertisers are not aware that expired profiles continue to leave track marks and that simply non-renewing does not expunge all components of the ad. I was surprised to recently see that a chap at my gym long gone from the biz, now married with children, had shown up in my own history via review function several years ago that I had no idea maintained a life on the revised platform. He was understandably appreciative of getting the heads up and that I had exercised the prerogative to redact my review; however, other reviews stood, along with his profile images that unambiguously denoted the profesh. He is now in the process of re-registering on a temp basis, as the webmaster has indicated that a profile can be entirely deleted upon formal request to the help desk, the rent . men platform version. I would not have known this except for just transferring this week from the .eu to the updated system where the witness protection program is on offer, assuming that was always an option of course. Anybody grousing about being denied a revisiting of a particular lad’s profile for concrete reaching out endeavours and offers to pad their offspring’s college fund may as well be aware that serendipitous access to such is an artefact of the naïveté of some providers falsely assuming their ad dropped off the planet’s face, in the context of likely majority intentionality for deletion. That may include Planet Romeo but leave that for another day.

The prize was inaugurated sometime past the passing of pasture who probly wouldn’t have needed to curry favour for it.

Or you could all just split the one spliff.

Well I learned something interesting. I don’t use the platform much. I had always used dot eu, at least since it emerged, rather than the newer dot men. However, I wanted to edit a review (positive feedback type) shortly following submitting said review due to a minor omission that I forgot to add. BTW, I always ask for permission to submit a review and knock on wood so far have had no reason to be displeased by an encounter that emanated from an ad platform. It was not mission critical but I reached out to the help desk out of curiosity and the team patched me thru to dot men. I was puzzled by the lack of an org, com, country code suffix but so be it. However, the dot men version was emphasized as superior and the review management function is only accessible on dot men, not dot eu. Lo and behold, I gained access to the aforementioned review. That said, the dot men version, unbeknownst to me and in contrast to the dot eu platform, seemed to contain a lengthy and cluttered history, going back years in fact including reviews of long retired providers, that I cleaned up just to get whatever content lacking utility out of the way. So, torn? Not yet. I guess it’s dot men going forward but I am an infrequent browser. I probably, compared to most, pay a greater fraction of platform fees compared to the composite of said fees and platform-sourced provider charges incurred by most other punters. I think that I have messaged no more than 5 advertisers so far this year that culminated in a few guys that landed into in-person meeting territory. I tend towards a shortlist-and-repeat consumer fidelity model and a very small contingent of chaps hitting a very decent regular payday. The majority of my hiring is not sourced from ad platforms. I also learned, to illustrate here my skill deficit, to block my viewing history that has in the past triggered a response such as: “hey I noticed you checked me out”. When I shop I’m open to security guards monitoring my moves but not keen on shopkeep hovering.