I’m no expert on the bareback flip-fucks of 2013, but if there are any more adorable than the one Tyler Morgan and Kip Ryker filmed for Guys In Sweatpants, then I will run a marathon wearing Mike Dozer‘s infamous “Condoms are for pussies” t-shirt, a pair of sneakers and nothing else.
As you’re probably aware, plenty of gay porn studios have exploited the “bareback boyfriends” angle this year, in an attempt to satisfy viewer demand for raw content. Most of them made the mistake of focusing too much on the raunchy aspect, rather than capturing the passion and romantic connection between the couple. They assumed we’d rather see two dudes felching instead of two dudes truly inviting us into their relationship for a half-hour (or however long the damn scene runs).
I can say with great faith that Guys In Sweatpants doesn’t make those same mistakes. Real-life couple Tyler and Kip reach a level of onscreen intimacy that hasn’t been seen since the now-bittersweet “Austony” series, the Parkers‘ videos for High Performance Men or the homemade sex tapes of Jesse Jackman and Dirk Caber.
Is it less sweet when you know that both Tyler and Kip have filmed multiple bareback videos for Jason Sparks Live, including one released last month where Tyler gets slammed raw by his “boyfriend” Jake Bolton? (Not to be confused with this Jake Bolton.) I’ll leave that up to you!
My ol’ buddy Zach wrote a somewhat-related piece about that on his new site STR8UPGAYPORN. It’s a good read… Though, out of curiosity, do any of you even come here to read? I’m assuming you skipped this bullshit introduction, clicked through to Guys In Sweatpants and started fapping to the sight of Tyler blowing his load deep into Kip’s ass.
– Dewitt
Photo credit: Guys In Sweatpants
Take a look at Tyler and Kip’s totally cute flip-fuck below:
Watch this full scene now at GUYS IN SWEATPANTS.
_______________________________________________________________________________
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE…
–
–
GISP is off my list, I don’t find anything adorable about bareback.
Fortunately for those of us who like bareback, there’s market demand for bareback videos so we have some great options (sean cody, corbin fisher, bel ami) and not just the former options of drugged-out, dirty looking guys barebacking. Fortunately for you (and unfortunately for me because fucking with condoms will never get my dick hard), many studios still require condoms. I’d never like to see condoms, you’d always like to see them, but we have options.
Just out of curiosity, would your opinion be different if they were a 100% monogamous couple who isn’t being paid to have sex on camera?
I’m not playing devil’s advocate or anything. I’m genuinely curious.
It’s apples and oranges, what people do in private is up to them, Porn isn’t private, especially when it’s for profit.
The neatest part of this is that they could be actual boyfriends – the chemistry is that good.
I’m with you. Interestingly enough, when I had my adult film company back in San Diego, I required condoms. I prefer to watch movies without them, though. Most of our videos were solos, but on occasion, we’d have a model or 5 who would email me and beg to be set up with one of the other models. Being the caring friend I was to all of our guys, I was happy to hook them up…. on camera, for me! LOL We all had a good time and condoms were to protect my business as much as it was to protect them. Being the host for someone to contract HIV is a scary thought and my lawyers strongly suggested condoms would be mandatory to help avoid lawsuits.
Personally, both back then and now, I will watch a condom flick, but I prefer bareback flicks instead. If the top wears a condom, I want to see him continue fucking and cum while he’s fucking. It’s a whole ‘nother experience when you cum while you’re pounding away and those facial expressions are usually far hotter than a guy jerking off. Just sayin’.
I don’t think he wrote natural sex was adorable, rather the men here. So you just saw the headline about bareback sex and decided you had to go out of your way and let us know how much you don’t like it? Cool
I’m glad you think it’s cool. You usually try to shut down anyone who doesn’t agree with bareback porn.
I read what is written Dewitt so no worries there.
While the pictures and sometimes the video’s are hot I prefer to check it all out and see what others opinions are on the subjects.
But yes BB sex between a real couple is usually hotter due to the real feelings and intimacy.
But there are times the non couple ones are hot as well when you can see the 2 guys are seriously into each other. Just can not hide or fake that look between the 2.
In today’s world where BB sex is so risky on so many levels most do not do it so of course seeing it in films helps with the fantasies and desires most of us have but may never act on.
Changing topics completely:
Can we talk about that ‘bow’ tat on his leg? I mean REALLY.
Don’t these kids (i’m only 30) realize that when they are 40 or 50 that their bodies aren’t gonna be so tight and right. #smh
I just don’t get why someone pierces their nipples…they are perfect on their own and need no embellishment…same goes for penises…in my humble opinion
By shutting down you mean that what informed consenting adults do is their business?
You know, I totally didn’t think how my tattoos would look later on considering they’re a permanent fixture! D’oh!
That was all sorts of romantic and beautiful.
It’s ok to film real couples doing BB because if they’re a couple that MUST mean that they’re 100% monogomous right? Plus, guys NEVER catch STDs from their boyfriends do they? But then again none of that matters anymore sense PrEP makes it impossible to get HIV when you bareback, it’s like magic.
Adults can do what they want but it’d be nice not to hear all the grandstanding from the POZ people that willingly had high risk sex about us being “HIV equal” and how it’s not a death sentence anymore . Oh and my favorite are the guys that brag about having a ton of bareback sex but get mad if you 1. assume they’re POZ (honestly what the hell do you expect someone to think) and 2. decline to sleep with them even with a condom. Somehow that makes you a badguy but I don’t get offended when people assume that I’m negative because I use condoms and I definitely don’t get mad at anyone who refuses to sleep with me because I use condoms.
“Natural sex” kinda reminds me of how food companies slap natural on their labels and it actually doesn’t mean anything at all. So if somehow gets a disease from “natural sex” should they just let the disease take it’s “natural course” or use a “natural cure” like ginseng or ginkgo baloba? My guess is that those who advocate “natural sex” would be more than ok getting a manufactured cure/treatment in the form of a prescription. Way to try to imply that using a condom is “unnatural”, I think we hear enough about how “unnatural” our sex life is from bigots and religious extremist without needing to see it in our own community just for choosing to be safe.
The “bow” tat is very feminine and a huge turn-off for me.
I use it because condomless or barrierless seems too much. It is our natural state to not wear condoms, so what’s wrong with writing natural? I’m not talking about mislabeling a product to make it appeal to health nuts, I’m talking about the actual state of our bodies. This is akin to referring to intact penises s uncircumcised, as if circumcision is the default… It isn’t. I’ve also never written one should not use condoms, ever. I’ve written about informed, consenting adults engaging in what comes naturally. I’ve used condoms to prevent pregnancy and before I knew my partners health status, I have no issue with condoms.
IMO, what people do privately is their business. What people do for profit on film for public consumption is open for anyone to comment on.
I use to have pierced nipples but my body rejected them and forced them out. But ever since that time they have been totally wired to my entire body.
As for a cock piercing to be honest I always wanted to know what it felt like to have one inside of me. But would be nervous about sucking one with it.
The actual state of our bodies also involves untrimmed pubes, uncircumsized penises and undouched butts, so unless all of those factors are also present, I doubt you’re having “natural sex”. Also, in the actual states of our bodies, we wouldn’t be able to fight off the diseases that can be contracted through “natural sex”, when animals catch life threatening diseases in nature, they die. Like I said, it’s easy to advocate “natural sex” but I’d bet you’d take a man-made prescription to clear up any natural illness you were exposed to. The connotation sounds ridiculous and calculated. You could just have easily said bare or raw, both are terms which are more accurate than the way you used the word “natural” to refer to condomless sex. That’s your choice to use a condom or not, but remarks that classify one type of sex as more “natural” than the other are ignorant, divisive and shaming. Many extremist also say it’s only “natural sex” if it’s between a male and a female. The really was one of the most unelightened comments I’ve ever seen advocating for unprotected sex.
You actually make a good point. While trying to be in a more natural frame of mind, I’ve made poor word choices and have indeed come off as you write. It’s hard for me to explain in writing how I feel about things like this. I see the intent in my head, and seem to lack the ability sometimes to make a point without coming off as arrogant. I concede that I should be better with my words.
Thanks, let’s hug it out.
BARE BACKING is NOT worth the risk PERIOD !