Barebacking, Porn & Role Models

[BewareofNick]

>People on this website always Throw out accusations but I

>truly believe it does not come from anywhere, just come from

>their own experience and culpabilities.

>Just let people do what they want da!@#t.

>What they cannot admit and will never, is one of them might

>not agree about bareback video but thousands of others will

>and they just keep quiet and enjoy the show.

 

I don't think anyone has a problem admitting that. Bareback video is hot. I know my favorite video of all time is Leo and Lance from the "pre-condom" era as it is now called. The problem is, as deej deftly pointed out, is the influence that these videos have on gay youth. HIV hasn't gone away and it's spread fastest, by you guessed it, bareback sex.

 

>Again I agree, what is the difference here? Promoting escort

>at any age selling theirs bodies and souls for money or

>watching two guys fucking the way they want and really

>enjoying themselves? If people can't handle it I would suggest

>them to get to the straight world where mostly bareback is

>happening...... That might change their point of view....

>with probably a hard on....

>They are legal age to do what they want, it is not like you

>are forcing them to do things their are against.... Same as

>escorting.

 

True, but even if it is consensual, we all pay for it. The rising cost of health insurance if nothing else should be reason enough, even if death by AIDS doesn't scare you.

 

>During my escorting time, what amazed me the most was the

>drugs that both Escorts and Clients was using..... People do

>want they want, I don't judge them because they do it, I don't

>care, it does not hurt me.... but did not say anything about

>it.... just stayed quiet and let them do what they want as I

>was not involved....

>It just happens that one of the best escorts in the world has

>to be smart in marketing and knows where the money is and does

>what he wants to do as an adult. Again escorting which is

>illegal again, is not a problem for those people complaining

>right now, but two adults barebacking isn't illegal to my

>knowledge. You might not like it, I might not like it, but

>some people out there enjoy watching it and doing it.

 

And there are those out there who enjoy making it. Stephan appears in a bareback video entitled Twinks Swallow. The site I saw said there was mixed condom use, so I suppose it is possible that Stephan did use a condom in his scene with Court Logan, but once again, we have a higly respected porn star/ex-escort who is out there promoting unsafe sex.

 

http://www.eboysvideo.com/store/videos.htm

 

>Aaron keep up the good work..... Those yelling right just beg

>for more vidoes but they will never admit it ...

 

Perhaps Aaron and Stephan will do a bareback video together. I do agree with Stephan's last statement. There are many out there who protest against bb videos, yet they won't hesitate to go home and pop one in. And again, just for the queens who have come in off the veranda, I have no issue with Stephan personally. He is, by all accounts, a wonderful human being and was a hell of an escort. I just question whether he is justifying Aaron or himself.

[Doug69]

>People on this website always Throw out accusations but I

>truly believe it does not come from anywhere, just come from

>their own experience and culpabilities.

 

Stefan - It is truly astounding - and, by itself, a reason to come here periodically - that this site, which is entirely devoted to faciliating escorting transactions and is comprised of those participating in such transactions, is, at the same time, a venue for the most moralistic, judgmental, self-righteous sentiments to be expressed, again and again, regrading other people's sexual choices.

 

One would think - wrongly, it turns out - that those participating in escoting transactions would have an aversion to adults wanting to impose moral judgments on other adults with regard to their sexual choices. After all, not only are virtually all such participants here gay, they also either hire escorts or are escorts. One would expect to find very little, if any, such moralizing here.

 

And yet, as you so eloquently observe, the order of the day in this forum is so often moralistic condemnations and judgmental, baseless rumor-mongering against those accused of being sexually irresponsible and immoral. One so often has the feeling when visiting this forum of being in the middle of a coffee klatch of old, vicious Victorian women trying to out-do each other with their high moral standards - and yet, this is, at the same time, a place devoted to escorts. Go figure.

 

I believe that what underlies this perpetural, extreme moralizing is that most (but not all) of the participants in the escorting transactions (those who write on this Site) feel deep down that what they are doing is wrong and improper, and so they are desperate to find groups and individuals to sigmatize and put down, so that they can feel better about what they are doing. The amount of personal, rumor-ish attacks on other people's morality and sexual behavior which occurs in this form is truly remarkable to behold.

 

As you point out, this thread went beyond mere moralizing into the vile realm of openly speculating about someone else's health, and raising innuendos about it, based on nothing but moral judgments about their behavior. It's as though they "uncovered" something secret about Aaron which is bad and awful morally, and now he must be attacked. The pack mentality is bizarre.

[Guest alanm]

Barebacking videos reinforce young guys' views that HUV/AIDS is a

a manageable illness that is fairly harmless. Aaron knows that and

continues to make and sell bareback videos. I've talked to Aaron; he is a very bright guy. There were a lot of things he could have done with his life after escorting. With his brains and marketing ability,

he almost certainly would have been a success at anything he tried.

 

The very real downsides of escorting (for both clients and escorts) should be discussed more often on the Message Center. The same with the use of drugs. But, this discussion is about barebacking videos and Aaron Lawrence. Aaron is important because Hooboy has stated that

Lawrence was the inspiration for this site. Maybe this incident will make clients think about what happens to escorts after the glory days are over.

[Doug69]

BoN's vicious attack on Stephan - accusing him of barebacking and suggesting that he do a bb video with Aaron, merely because he defended Aaron from these attacks - is despicable and baseless, but totally expected.

 

I just posted that it is truly astonishing that this site, while comprised of people like BoN who are obviously quite enmeshed in escorting transactions, is nonetheless so frequently the venue for vicious, personal, rumor-mongering and attack based upon the immorality of other adults' sexual choices.

 

Then I saw BoN's post after I was done. Thank you for so brilliantly illustrating what I was describing. You are a living, breathing model for what I was talking about.

 

>And there are those out there who enjoy making it. Stephan

>appears in a bareback video entitled Twinks Swallow. The site

>I saw said there was mixed condom use, so I suppose it is

>possible that Stephan did use a condom in his scene with Court

>Logan, but once again, we have a higly respected porn

>star/ex-escort who is out there promoting unsafe sex.

 

Look at how sick this is. Stefan expresses a view that BoN disagrees with, and he defends the rights of someone who makes bareback videos, and based upon that - and that alone - BoN goes and "researches" Stefan to try to dig about dirt about his sexual past so BoN and his Victorian comrades can giggle and use it to discredit Stefan's statements.

 

To make matters worse, much worse, BoN's "research" is, as usual, completely shoddy and shallow, like BoN. BoN finds a video with Stefan that expressly states that only some, but not all, of the individuals in that video barebacked. In other words, BoN has no idea whether he did or not, and so his "research" is irrelevant and reveals nothing.

 

But that doesn't stop BoN. The goal is to attack Stefan as immoral, regardless of whether there is a basis for it. And so BoN as much accuses Stefan of barebacking and raises questions about his sexual activities, even though he has no basis whatsoever for doing so. It's pure sexual McCarthyism - try to associate Stefan with barebacking in some way - regardless of whether it's true - in order to smear his reputation and discredit him.

 

Funny - if you read Stefan's post, the one to which BoN is responding, he is pointing out that this site contains numerous people desperate to sit in moral judgment of others by making baseless accusations about their sexual behavior. And then, lo and behold, BoN appears and illustrates precisely what he Stefan talking about. Stefan should thank BoN, too, for making such an excellent example.

[BewareofNick]

>BoN's vicious attack on Stephan - accusing him of barebacking

>and suggesting that he do a bb video with Aaron, merely

>because he defended Aaron from these attacks - is despicable

>and baseless, but totally expected.

 

As evidenced by your mindless, tow the party line posts in the Politics forum, you once again show your complete and utter lack of ability to comprehend what people write. Much like Aaron runs his own porn business, so does Stephan with eboys, but perhaps that comparison elude you.

 

>I just posted that it is truly astonishing that this site,

>while comprised of people like BoN who are obviously

>quite enmeshed in escorting transactions, is nonetheless so

>frequently the venue for vicious, personal, rumor-mongering

>and attack based upon the immorality of other adults' sexual

>choices.

>

>Then I saw BoN's post after I was done. Thank you for so

>brilliantly illustrating what I was describing. You are a

>living, breathing model for what I was talking about.

 

One would have to make sense of the gibberish before one could tell if I was a role model for it or not.

 

>Look at how sick this is. Stefan expresses a view that BoN

>disagrees with, and he defends the rights of someone who makes

>bareback videos, and based upon that - and that alone - BoN

>goes and "researches" Stefan to try to dig about dirt about

>his sexual past so BoN and his Victorian comrades can giggle

>and use it to discredit Stefan's statements.

 

I had already been well aware of the existence of this video, and quite frankly had been extremely surprised that Stephan and eboys had put it out, MUCH LESS that Stephan was starring in it.

 

>To make matters worse, much worse, BoN's "research" is, as

>usual, completely shoddy and shallow, like BoN. BoN finds a

>video with Stefan that expressly states that only some, but

>not all, of the individuals in that video barebacked. In

>other words, BoN has no idea whether he did or not, and so

>his "research" is irrelevant and reveals nothing.

 

Do you ever read what people post or does your Repiglican programming only go so far as you launching into a mindless diatribe against that which offends your delicate sensibilities? Here are some of the blurbs from eboysvideo:

 

"Action: Sucking, Fucking, Rimming, Bareback, Facial Cum Shot, Swallow Cum..."

 

"Court Logan and Stephan Lacoste coming out of a dream. Court’s screaming and asking for more fucking, before they shoot some huge loads of cum. Brandon Weber and Troy Austin getting down to business while they fuck bareback, suck, shoot and swallow all their hot cum. Be there to witness a hot fucking session on a steamy afternoon with Jeremy and Dillon. These horny boys sure do not waste any time. See them sucking and jerking off their hot and hungry cocks only to shoot their warm loads over their smooth young bodies. On a road trip, Zaky and Cody stop for quick hot sex in the car. All that sucking will surely not cool them off when they shoot and swallow all their hot juice. Roy Fischer is getting fucked by Tony Diaz with his 9 inches dick, and eat Tony’s load."

 

There is nothing on the eboys site that implies condom use at all. The mixed condom use was froma video store website which may or may not be accurate. I pointed it out in the issue of fairness (but no the Fox News version).

 

>But that doesn't stop BoN. The goal is to attack Stefan as

>immoral, regardless of whether there is a basis for it. And

>so BoN as much accuses Stefan of barebacking and raises

>questions about his sexual activities, even though he has

>no basis whatsoever for doing so. It's pure sexual

>McCarthyism - try to associate Stefan with barebacking in some

>way - regardless of whether it's true - in order to smear his

>reputation and discredit him.

 

His studio made the video. I guess it's a real stretch to associate him with it.

 

>Funny - if you read Stefan's post, the one to which BoN is

>responding, he is pointing out that this site contains

>numerous people desperate to sit in moral judgment of others

>by making baseless accusations about their sexual behavior.

>And then, lo and behold, BoN appears and illustrates precisely

>what he Stefan talking about. Stefan should thank BoN, too,

>for making such an excellent example.

 

Good thing you're not sitting there in moral judgement on anyone, eh?

[Doug69]

>As evidenced by your mindless, tow the party line posts in the

>Politics forum, you once again show your complete and utter

>lack of ability to comprehend what people write. Much like

>Aaron runs his own porn business, so does Stephan with eboys,

>but perhaps that comparison elude you.

 

So fucking what? His studio released a video with a bareback scene. You pay young boys to be intimiate with you and pretend to love you because they need the money.

 

I don't really think you're in a position to be making value judgments about other people's sexual choices.

 

Stephen, as an adult, is making a video with consenting adults which other adults want to buy. What business is that of yours?

 

>and quite frankly had been extremely surprised that Stephan

>and eboys had put it out, MUCH LESS that Stephan was starring

>in it.

 

When you found out, did you put your lace glove to your mouth and cover it with your fingers, exprsesing shock and dismay? Or did you just wait and save your little find for when you thought you could unleash it against Stefan when he expressed an opinion you dislike? My bet is both.

 

>Here are some of the blurbs from eboysvideo:

>

>"Action: Sucking, Fucking, Rimming, Bareback, Facial Cum

>Shot, Swallow Cum..."

 

>There is nothing on the eboys site that implies condom use at

>all. The mixed condom use was froma video store website

>which may or may not be accurate. I pointed it out in the

>issue of fairness (but no the Fox News version).

 

There is also nothing in there which implies in any way that Stefan did such a scene. In other words, you have no basis for your innuendo, but you know that simply casting the innuendo will do the trick, so you try to smear his reputation with no basis at all. That's what makes you so vile - or at least it's one of the things.

 

And, even if he had done such a scene (and I, like you, have no idea), what is the purpose of your post? To step in and cast moral judgment on him for his prviate, consensual sexual choices. And therein lies the hilarious, absurd irony of this site: all of this on a gay escort site. Who would believe it?

[Chuck50]

Do you know or care that Stephan doesnt work there anymore and maybe that is the reason I am not sure. But truly a nicer person you will not meet. He may be on the cover but doesnt mean that he does it. HUGS Chuck

[BewareofNick]

>And, even if he had done such a scene (and I, like you, have

>no idea), what is the purpose of your post?

 

As opposed to you who come in and cast moral judgements as the self appointed arbitor of right and wrong. The purpose of my post was to express an opinion (something that I know is prohibited by your superiors in the Reborglican Collective), and to point out that which others might not know: Stephan's opinion on Aaron comes from being in the same situation.

 

>To step in and

>cast moral judgment on him for his prviate, consensual sexual

>choices. And therein lies the hilarious, absurd irony of this

>site: all of this on a gay escort site. Who would believe

>it?

 

Thanks for once again proving my point that you do not read or comprehend very well. This is not about Stephan's prviate (sic) consensual sexual choices. It is about his public consensual sexual choices. I suppose that distinction, like most other rational thought, is lost upon you. Absurd irony indeed.

[BewareofNick]

>Do you know or care that Stephan doesnt work there anymore

>and maybe that is the reason I am not sure. But truly a nicer

>person you will not meet. He may be on the cover but doesnt

>mean that he does it. HUGS Chuck

 

I have never once stated that Stephan was anything BUT a decent human being. Read my original post.

[Guest Utopia]

BoN come on you've been around here long enough to know that we don't ever suggest, hint, splash innuendo, mock, question, judge, think, feel, anything about Stephan that doesn't reference to him as the lord.

 

Lord Stephan has returned to post here and we should all be on our knees begging him please ... to point out that he is on a cover of a video that includes and promotes barebacking is a sin and you must be punished for it.

 

Even though you qualified your response that this wasn't an attack on Stephan and you were quite clear that you felt he was a great former (actually he still works) escort and a great human being you made the mistake of being too intelligent for this message center.

 

Shame on you.

 

We all understand that there are a chosen few here (and I am not referring to our Jewish readers) who set our life's standards and we must obey them. They explain how we should feel and they dictate what is appropriate or not.

 

It's about time for Tampa Yankee to set us all straight, isn't it?

[Doug69]

>BoN come on you've been around here long enough to know that

>we don't ever suggest, hint, splash innuendo, mock, question,

>judge, think, feel, anything about Stephan that doesn't

>reference to him as the lord.

 

Oh no, of course not. After all, he's just an escort and porn actor, so it's perfectly fine to accuse him of whatever you want, regardless of whether it's true. And anyone who thinks it's sleazy and vile - not to mention indescribably hypocritical - to publicly and baselessly spread innuendo and cast aspersions about people's sexual behavior must be thinking this only because we want to please Stephan, not because it's actually true.

 

Amazing the lengths you'll go to defend the base moralizing and rumor-mongering that goes on here.

 

>Lord Stephan has returned to post here and we should all be on

>our knees begging him please ... to point out that he is on a

>cover of a video that includes and promotes barebacking is a

>sin and you must be punished for it.

 

To be honest, I don't give a fuck for Stephan. He's only the latest target of this sort of rumor-spreading tsk-tsk'ing that goes on here all the time. There are countless others.

 

>Even though you qualified your response that this wasn't an

>attack on Stephan and you were quite clear that you felt he

>was a great former (actually he still works) escort and a

>great human being you made the mistake of being too

>intelligent for this message center.

 

Some day, I'd love to know what is "intelligent" about publicly accusing someone of barebacking with no basis whatsoever for the accusation - followed by grandmotherly moral condemnations of the accused act - but I suspect I'll never find out.

[Guest Jason Mpls]

Frankly, Utopia, I have NO FUCKIN IDEA why I'm even bothering to respond, except maybe in the hopes that one of these times you'll get the point. x(

 

My beef is with porn studios that feature barebacking -- particularly among late teens/20-somethings.

 

What anyone -- of whatever age -- does in the privacy of his/her/their bedroom (or, for that matter, on the sofa, in the shower, in a recliner, on the deck/balcony, in the woods, in a peep show booth, standing on one's head, on the Brooklyn Bridge, etc.) is of none of my business.

 

All I hope is that that behavior is conducted with full knowledge of the risks of HIV transmission. Porn Studios that include barebacking scenes at best blur that risk and at worst suggest that it's "no big deal."

 

At the risk of being repetitive (which you seem to think is a cardinal sin, or at least boring), if anyone engages in barebacking with full knowledge of the risks, that's their business -- and their consequences.

 

Got it now?? :+

 

P.S. You wanna take me on in a skewering contest re: Pat Robertson/The "Moral Majority"/Fundamentalists? Have at it dude. We'll have a blast! }(

[Guest ncm2169]

Oh Christ, I AM SORRY!!

 

Jason Mpls was here a while ago and I forgot he was still logged in on my comp under his name. x(

 

Those comments are TOTALLY from me -- NOT Jason, I assure you!!

 

Once again, I apologize, and I'm really embarassed. DUH. :o

[BewareofNick]

Doug's right. I guess Stephan doesn't appear in a bareback video. I guess is image on the box cover and in the movie is actually CGI or something.

 

But what use are facts to a Republican? Fox News. We spin. You comply.

[Doug69]

>Doug's right. I guess Stephan doesn't appear in a bareback

>video.

 

"Appear[ing] in a bareback video" is a misleading phrase you use to slime his reputation. You repeatedly implied, and even stated (when you suggested that he next make a "bareback video" together with Aaron) that he himself barebacked in the video. You have no basis for that whatsoever, and instead use the phrase "appear in a bareback video" to try to maintain this smear with no evidence.

 

And again, even if he did do that, what business is it of yours? If you want to go around clucking and moralizing, why not start with your own condcut of paying young men to be intimate with you because they need the money, rather than digging into other people's sexual behavior?

[BewareofNick]

>"Appear[ing] in a bareback video" is a misleading phrase you

>use to slime his reputation. You repeatedly implied, and even

>stated (when you suggested that he next make a "bareback

>video" together with Aaron) that he himself barebacked in the

>video. You have no basis for that whatsoever, and instead use

>the phrase "appear in a bareback video" to try to maintain

>this smear with no evidence.

 

Only to those incapable or reading and comprehending prior posts. Of course, leave it to you to tell an outright lie: You repeatedly implied, and even

>stated (when you suggested that he next make a "bareback

>video" together with Aaron) that he himself barebacked in the

>video. Please reference the post where I wrote that. Since you cannot, I'll accept your apology beforehand.

 

>And again, even if he did do that, what business is it of

>yours? If you want to go around clucking and moralizing, why

>not start with your own condcut of paying young men to be

>intimate with you because they need the money, rather than

>digging into other people's sexual behavior?

 

So now you admit to the possibility that he did? Next thing you know, you'll respond to the posts in the Politics forum about Bush's fiscal irresponsilibity and the 9/11 report which confirmed no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. But hey, you haven't let the truth get in the way of your ramblings yet. Why now? And thanks once again for not passing moral judgement on me, since you seem to be so opposed to others doing it.

[Guest ncm2169]

< so BoN and his Victorian comrades >

 

Aha! So, now it's "Victorian" to acknowledge the facts about HIV transmission and barebacking? x(

 

JESUS CHRIST!! WHAT planet/universe/solar system are you living in?

 

Frankly, I am sorry I started this thread. It only reminded me of how many sickos are out there who can find umpteen reasons to justify barebacking.

 

For those of you who chimed in on the side of the impressionable kids, clearly you're the compassionate ones here. :o

[Doug69]

>Only to those incapable or reading and comprehending prior

>posts. Of course, leave it to you to tell an outright lie:

>You repeatedly implied, and even

>>stated (when you suggested that he next make a "bareback

>>video" together with Aaron) that he himself barebacked in

>the

>>video. Please reference the post where I wrote that.

> Since you cannot, I'll accept your apology beforehand.

 

If proposing to him that he next made a bareback video together with Aaron isn't accusing him of engaging in barebacking, then nothing is. I don't blame you for trying to conceal the fact that you made this accusation - perhaps you are beginning to realize how despicable it is and are trying now to pretend you didn't do it. That, in a perverse way, would be progress.

 

>>So now you admit to the possibility that he did?

 

I never claimed to know one way or the other. It's for exactly that reason that I have refrained from speculating; I have no evidence if he has or hasn't (nor am I interested in any such evidence, because it's none of my fucking business, just like it's none of yours!), and therefore, unlike you, I will not pretend to know.

 

You, by sick contrast, despite having no evidence as well, repeatedly insinuated and suggested, and then outright said, that Stephan engaeges in barebacking. The difference between us is so fundamental (thank God) that it shouldn't escape even you: I don't make statements without having any evidence on which to base them. You, quite clearly, have no such qualms.

[Guest ncm2169]

Will someone please just go and rent the fucking video (Twinks Swallow), and report back? I mean, it's not like it's a nuclear secret or something. x(

 

But, of course, what would some people here do with their time after they found out the answer? }(

[Doug69]

>Will someone please just go and rent the fucking video

>(Twinks Swallow), and report back? I mean, it's not like it's

>a nuclear secret or something. x(

 

Does it fucking matter if he did or didn't? Why is this an issue of public discussion for you - whether or not a particular person ever barebacked before? Do you want to burn a big "B" on his forehead?

 

>But, of course, what would some people here do with their time

>after they found out the answer? }(

 

You're the one running around investigating people's sexual behavior and urging that campaigns be started to induce/intimidate them to change their sexual behavior. I think you're the one with a little too much time on your hands.

[Guest Utopia]

>>Doug's right. I guess Stephan doesn't appear in a bareback

>>video.

>

>"Appear[ing] in a bareback video" is a misleading phrase you

>use to slime his reputation.

Doug are you brain dead? Are you lacking quality air? Can you fucking read a sentence and understand what it means?

 

I never accused lord Stephan of anything nor did BoN. You continue to select words and make your own sentences.

 

Amazing.

===

"You realize that life goes fast

It's hard to make the good things last"

[taylorky]

are you on any kind of psychotropic medication ?

[kjun]

It appears that you are off-base Oz. Barebacking is a dangerous thing. This is fact. To compare it to hiring escorts is just not reasonable.

 

I agree that it is, also, unfair to trash Aaron about the barebacking. Particularly the crude acuzation about his status. But, if he does include barebacking in his videos then it does carry a message which could be considered to promote this act. Not good! So, if you feel this to be true, send him a note to that effect. He may just need a reminder.

 

the Cajun

[+ Lucky]

RE: Cajun Breakfast

 

Kjun, you must not have had a spicy breakfast as your post is too kind. Aaron does not need a reminder as I am sure he is well-aware of what he is doing. He seems at the least to be a consumate businessman. He is intelligent enough to know that you can go to Eastern Europe and obtain an unlimited supply of boys and men willing to do porno for a lot less money than they do in the USA.

So one has to assume that it is a business decision to include barebacking in his videos. If these were private acts between consenting adults who knew the dangers of AIDS, we could only criticize them for their recklessness. But they are being commercially exploited for Aaron's financial gain, are they not? So he is actually making money from others unsafe behavior. Behavior they might not engage in but for financial need. This is indeed unsavory in my opinion.

[+ Lucky]

RE: Barebacking, Corn & Pole Models

 

Well,, why not you? You started this thread!