I guess there are three separate questions here:

(a) Is it dangerous to watch bareback porn?

Answer: No! At least no more dangerous than the dangers of porn consumption in general.

(b) Is a sexual partner who watches bareback porn likely to be more risky in their real-life behaviour than one who only watches condom porn, other things being equal?

Answer: I would have to say possibly yes. People who are fastidious about only watching condom porn are probably going to be more fastidious in their sex lives, other things being equal. I say this as someone who overwhelmingly prefers bareback porn and (when on prep and with chosen partners) likes bareback in real life. The problem with judging sex partners by their porn preferences, just from a practical perspective, is that it might not be a big enough factor in a person's real life behaviour to be worth worrying about compared to other things.

(c) Is it ethical to watch bareback porn if you consider it too risky to do yourself?

Answer: On a simple level, no maybe it isn't. Porn actors (unlike professional sportspeople or adventurers) generally do what they do for money and not for the love of it. If we consider an action unacceptably risky we generally shouldn't ask others to do it on our behalf for money.

However, this assumes that our personal judgment of risk must be a Kantian universal judgment for all humans. It might be, but it seems reasonable for someone to say: "I personally wouldn't accept the 1 in a Million chance of catching HIV whilst on prep having sex with other, frequently tested, partners also on prep, but it's still a low enough risk that it's not irrational for a porn actor to take it for good money, even though I personally wouldn't. Therefore, if such people want to accept that risk, I shall watch their material."

@job said in Can someone help me identify this Japanese hot guy?:

i

He looks great! Don't know who he is but I'm sure we can both shower the uploader in seed bonus points if anyone has any of his videos.

@job said in Can someone help me identify this Japanese hot guy?:

i

He looks great! Don't know who he is but I'm sure we can both shower the uploader in seed bonus points if anyone has any of his videos.

@blablarg18 said in Should we adopt naval gun caliber conventions to specify penis dimensions?:

@trader42 Realistically: It would be fun, but it would not make anyone's self-reporting more accurate nor their grindr profile more honest

Sadly that problem that seems to be ineluctable - I do agree

Sometimes on Grindr I've observed guys putting something like 20x14 to mean a 20cm long, 14cm circumference penis.

Wouldn't it be much more fun if we specified our members using large caliber gun conventions?

Under these, the 5"/54 calibre gun of the US Navy means a 5" diameter gun barrel, with a length 54 times 5" (e.g. 270").

Hence, in future you could tell prospective sexual partners that you have a 2.5" / 3 caliber penis, meaning that your length is 7.5" with a 2.5" diameter. It would need some mental arithmetic, I admit, but fostering such skills could be a useful side-effect.

@beardycub86 said in Will you not watch bareback porn even though you practice safe sex?:

He doesn't sound very smart. Also he's missing out on the hottest porn. Condom porn is so boring to me. The sex looks so boring. Barebackers fuck like they REALLY mean it.

Notwithstanding the Kantian considerations advanced above, this I have to agree with!!

I guess there are three separate questions here:

(a) Is it dangerous to watch bareback porn?

Answer: No! At least no more dangerous than the dangers of porn consumption in general.

(b) Is a sexual partner who watches bareback porn likely to be more risky in their real-life behaviour than one who only watches condom porn, other things being equal?

Answer: I would have to say possibly yes. People who are fastidious about only watching condom porn are probably going to be more fastidious in their sex lives, other things being equal. I say this as someone who overwhelmingly prefers bareback porn and (when on prep and with chosen partners) likes bareback in real life. The problem with judging sex partners by their porn preferences, just from a practical perspective, is that it might not be a big enough factor in a person's real life behaviour to be worth worrying about compared to other things.

(c) Is it ethical to watch bareback porn if you consider it too risky to do yourself?

Answer: On a simple level, no maybe it isn't. Porn actors (unlike professional sportspeople or adventurers) generally do what they do for money and not for the love of it. If we consider an action unacceptably risky we generally shouldn't ask others to do it on our behalf for money.

However, this assumes that our personal judgment of risk must be a Kantian universal judgment for all humans. It might be, but it seems reasonable for someone to say: "I personally wouldn't accept the 1 in a Million chance of catching HIV whilst on prep having sex with other, frequently tested, partners also on prep, but it's still a low enough risk that it's not irrational for a porn actor to take it for good money, even though I personally wouldn't. Therefore, if such people want to accept that risk, I shall watch their material."

At the end of the day, if they're 18+ then I don't think there's a problem and some of the twinks are stunningly beautiful (hexcutie for example). They're of age to fully consent, so maybe we should just be grateful that we can see such beauty so intimately!

However, I think you have a point in terms of unintended consequences. If a super cute 20 year old makes a million dollars after tax from their OF career over a few years, and sensibly invests it in a house + world stock portfolio + education, I guess you could argue it's set them up very well and it's a great thing for them.

The problem is the 20 year olds who only make $40,000 from their entire OF career and have to go through the next 10-15 years fielding questions about their past porn acting and potentially being limited in choice of future career (education will be a difficult field to enter, for example). For the less successful OF stars, it may end up being a bad decision to put themselves out like that.

I second this. Some of the specsaddicted content looks great.

I'm a big believer in Pareto-style analysis and always try to make sure that my skincare routine strikes the right balance between effort and effect size.

Currently I wash twice a day with a low-end dedicated 'face wash' product, apply serum (Boots No. 7) at night and sometimes in the morning, use retinol once a month, and generally wear moisturiser and appropriate sunscreen when out and about.

What would you all suggest I add if I want to dial up my effort levels a bit in return for a big improvement? I'm 34 and white if that makes a difference, and I rarely spend much time in the sun.

I second IF. Start with no calories for 15 hours and 9 hours of eating and then maybe move to 16:8 once you are achieving it consistently. Combine it with moderate calorie counting.

@Grotomode:

Or hook ups with HIV+ men who take their medication.

That's a very good point. Undetectable is generally regarded as untransmissible.