Corey and CJ

[jasonaz]

I am so enjoying this thread !!

Longtimefan... I'm with you buddy, CJ is the reason I joined Broke Straight Boys to begin with.
I can not think of a video where CJ ever had any kind of an erection problem, on the contrary, his is usually the first hard cock out the underwear! I have to agree that CJ must have been turned off, or perhaps a bit embarassed of being the object of affection of some "nelly queen" fag boy. I have never noticed CJ being as cognizant of the camera as he was in this shoot either. It was almost as if he was afraid he would be seen having a good time. Ater CJ came, I swear it seemed as if he was gonna taste his cum, then realized the camera was on him.Although he was having erection problems, I thought he gave a great performance, he really seemed to be actually enjoying the fucking he was getting, he was doing some moaning and groaning that you usually don't hear from him, trying to pull Corey deeper into him. The way he sucked Corey's dick!! OMG he was so into it! I will give Corey this much, he had one of the stiffest hardons I have seen on this site! And he was able to maintain that stiffy throughout the shoot.

Now comes the $64,000.00 question. Is Corey too "nelly" to be on Broke Straight Boys?
Probably. But I do understand the role of the gay boy on this site, although ideally, it should be all "straight boys", realistically, it's not. I can handle Corey's gayness, he's pretty low key compared to some of the shallow, flambouyant queer boys I have seen here. 1st runner up... The Faux-hawked Marlin, (coming soon), talk about a nelly boy! And the winner for the most shallow, flambouyant queer boy that should never been seen on Broke Straight Boys again.......(drumroll please)..... Aiden! (of the Aiden, Torrin scenes)
[SIZE="2[COLOR="Red"]"](the views expressed in this post are solely those of the person posting them and do not reflect the views of anyone not reading it)[/[/COLOR]SIZE]

The PC Police line forms on the left.

Mikeyank, can you head up security on this one? lol!

 

[mikeyank]

I am so enjoying this thread !!

The PC Police line forms on the left.

Mikeyank, can you head up security on this one? lol!

I am enjoying this thread as well, Jason. I enjoy the injection of some reality on this board. I'm a disciple of the late Howard Cosell, who championed, "telling it like it is". Speaking the truth, and not being afraid to offend someone else by doing it, is a good thing, not bad.

While considering myself a liberal, both politically and socially, I try not to be a "push-button liberal". Therefore, whenever someone says anything that may be somewhat "offensive" to a gay guy, I don't get my panties twisted up, and start shouting the PC words like homophobe and bully. I don't dust off my protest march signs and begin picketing the person who gave an honest, heartfelt opinion.

A reminder to the Broke Straight Boys PC Police force here. Keep in mind that gays come in all sizes, shapes, colors, and degrees of masculinity and femininity. We all have an equal right to live our lives as we choose, and to offer our opinions, as we see them. And, as this site is a place where we spend our discretionary income, why do the overly sensitive PC police here want to censor our opinions on the forum?

You have every right to like vanilla, while I enjoy chocolate. I defend your right to attend performances of the opera and ballet, and to attend Broadway openings, while I prefer to attend opening day at Yankee Stadium. But I am as gay as you are, and if I prefer watching straight appearing, masculine guys performing on the futon, while you choose feminine, "campy" acting guys for your sexual pleasure, you certainly have that right, (while I question your motivation in joining and paying for a site called Broke Straight Boys, if you prefer watching more fem boys). To me, that is like my joining an all lesbian site, and complaining that I'm not seeing enough cock, but to each his own.

And to those posters who do not like to read any divergence of opinion, and want all "nice" posts here, to me nice posts often equal boring posts. I actually enjoy a lively debate. I think it is healthy and interesting. And I wouldn't worry about the models reading any negative posts of their performances. First of all, if you accept pay for a public performance, like any actor, or professional athlete, you must be prepared for public criticism, and more importantly here, the forum is only available to paying members of the site, and I highly doubt if CJ, wherever he is today, is a paying member, and reading this board. And if Corey has access to the site, I'm sure he is a tough enough guy to accept that the majority of members here, want to see the masculine self proclaimed straight guys more than the fem boys that David occasionally inserts into the scenes, for various reasons.

Overall, I enjoy this site very much, and if a video is not to my liking, I wait patiently for three days and hope that the next one is more to my liking. And I enjoy the forum, and I enjoy lively debate, and divergent opinions offered without censorship. Long live Broke Straight Boys and the open and free forum here, too. It all contributes to making this the only pay site that I subscribe to.

 

[slimvintage]

Now comes the $64,000.00 question. Is Corey too "nelly" to be on Broke Straight Boys?

A grosso modo whoever ends up on the site is who should be on the site, since the guy responsible for the entertainment we all enjoy put him there. If Broke Straight Boys were populated solely by real straighties who couldn't get even a pulse in their dicks in the presence of another guy, or whose idea of the preface to projectile vomiting is the taste of someone else's penis, we wouldn't have a site to subscribe to. You at least are willing to contemplate a nelly scale (just pretend for the moment that they're all potentially if not actually more or less gay) at one end of which are boys you don't like to see. You're furthermore even willing to recognize some positive qualities in the ones you want banned. But the presumption that they shouldn't be on the site is ludicrous. David needs them. They serve a purpose. The site tries to "portray" reality as closely as it can, and these guys are out there in their thousands, and suck more straight dick than you do. David does us all a favor by having them on every now and then, partly because a lot of us like them, but mainly so the fetish fantasizers will have a frightenend straightie to watch. I think whatsisname who started the nelly slurs really only wanted some attention, and to see what kind of a rise he could get out of jon. He's just as pleased as he can be now his rant brought us all out into the open. I feel a little stupid having risen to the bait myself, but some people you just have to quell.

 

[slimvintage]

While considering myself a liberal, both politically and socially, I try not to be a "push-button liberal". Therefore, whenever someone says anything that may be somewhat "offensive" to a gay guy, I don't get my panties twisted up, and start shouting the PC words like homophobe and bully. I don't dust off my protest march signs and begin picketing the person who gave an honest, heartfelt opinion.

Mike, I knew you were a philosophical type but hadn't realized you belonged to the Sophist School. It took some wild driving to get to where you ended up in that paragraph lol.

The terms homophobe and bully antedate Liberal political correctness by centuries, and to use them on homophobes and bullies is actually not PC. PC is all that shit about being follicle-ly challenged instead of bald.

And by your contention that calling effeminate kids those names can ever be "heartfelt" you're crediting the homophobe with having something more than numbness where the feeling should be.

But again, he just wanted to scatter the chickens in the coop for his own amusement. If he really feels that way, let him live with it.

 

[mactee]

I am enjoying this thread as well, Jason. I enjoy the injection of some reality on this board. I'm a disciple of the late Howard Cosell, who championed, "telling it like it is". Speaking the truth, and not being afraid to offend someone else by doing it, is a good thing, not bad.

While considering myself a liberal, both politically and socially, I try not to be a "push-button liberal". Therefore, whenever someone says anything that may be somewhat "offensive" to a gay guy, I don't get my panties twisted up, and start shouting the PC words like homophobe and bully. I don't dust off my protest march signs and begin picketing the person who gave an honest, heartfelt opinion.

A reminder to the Broke Straight Boys PC Police force here. Keep in mind that gays come in all sizes, shapes, colors, and degrees of masculinity and femininity. We all have an equal right to live our lives as we choose, and to offer our opinions, as we see them. And, as this site is a place where we spend our discretionary income, why do the overly sensitive PC police here want to censor our opinions on the forum?

You have every right to like vanilla, while I enjoy chocolate. I defend your right to attend performances of the opera and ballet, and to attend Broadway openings, while I prefer to attend opening day at Yankee Stadium. But I am as gay as you are, and if I prefer watching straight appearing, masculine guys performing on the futon, while you choose feminine, "campy" acting guys for your sexual pleasure, you certainly have that right, (while I question your motivation in joining and paying for a site called Broke Straight Boys, if you prefer watching more fem boys). To me, that is like my joining an all lesbian site, and complaining that I'm not seeing enough cock, but to each his own.

And to those posters who do not like to read any divergence of opinion, and want all "nice" posts here, to me nice posts often equal boring posts. I actually enjoy a lively debate. I think it is healthy and interesting. And I wouldn't worry about the models reading any negative posts of their performances. First of all, if you accept pay for a public performance, like any actor, or professional athlete, you must be prepared for public criticism, and more importantly here, the forum is only available to paying members of the site, and I highly doubt if CJ, wherever he is today, is a paying member, and reading this board. And if Corey has access to the site, I'm sure he is a tough enough guy to accept that the majority of members here, want to see the masculine self proclaimed straight guys more than the fem boys that David occasionally inserts into the scenes, for various reasons.

Overall, I enjoy this site very much, and if a video is not to my liking, I wait patiently for three days and hope that the next one is more to my liking. And I enjoy the forum, and I enjoy lively debate, and divergent opinions offered without censorship. Long live Broke Straight Boys and the open and free forum here, too. It all contributes to making this the only pay site that I subscribe to.

Mike,
I'm glad you pointed out the receiving of money by all Broke Straight Boys models. That makes a big difference to my thinking, while I would not consider these models professional actors, they are none the less playing the part. As you so clearly pointed out the performance is public therefore criticism both positive and negative should be expected.
WoW! Is this a great country or what?

 

[mikeyank]

Mike, I knew you were a philosophical type but hadn't realized you belonged to the Sophist School. It took some wild driving to get to where you ended up in that paragraph lol.

The terms homophobe and bully antedate Liberal political correctness by centuries, and to use them on homophobes and bullies is actually not PC. PC is all that shit about being follicle-ly challenged instead of bald.

And by your contention that calling effeminate kids those names can ever be "heartfelt" you're crediting the homophobe with having something more than numbness where the feeling should be.

But again, he just wanted to scatter the chickens in the coop for his own amusement. If he really feels that way, let him live with it.

Slim, I believe that the "offensive" terminology used by longtime fan in his post was:

".........and if CJ is getting fucked, he wants to be fucked by a man, not some sissy. I'm done with the sissy fags on Broke Straight Boys"

While I wouldn't use such blunt, harsh language on the forum, I am not easily offended by words, particularly by a fellow gay man. While I don't consider myself a "sissy", I have certainly referred to myself as a "fag" at times, with fellow gay friends, and at times with close straight friends who know that I'm gay. To be shocked and offended by words like this is what I refer to as political correctness, here.

For many year's there was an extremely popular and talented humorist talk show host in Miami, named Neil Rogers. He came out as being gay many years ago, and often referred to himself, on the air, as being a fag. His show was the top rated program in his time slot, and his audience was primarily a heterosexual male demographic audience. I believe that Neil did more good in changing the average straight man's opinion of gay men, than any harm he did in calling himself a fag.

Using language that is commonly used, while not politically correct is really okay. I'm a fag. I like to suck cock. So what. These are words. Do you remember the old "sticks and stones" nursery rhyme?

If you prefer to use politically correct terminology on this forum, so be it, but I think a dose of reality is not a bad thing. To use words that people use in everyday life does not offend me. It is the context in which they are used that matters to me. If a poster was advocating beating up a fag, that would be way different to me than saying that one is "done with sissy fags on Broke Straight Boys". To me, he was stating an opinion using language that is a bit strong, but very descriptive and to the point.

 

[longtimefan]

A grosso modo whoever ends up on the site is who should be on the site, since the guy responsible for the entertainment we all enjoy put him there. If Broke Straight Boys were populated solely by real straighties who couldn't get even a pulse in their dicks in the presence of another guy, or whose idea of the preface to projectile vomiting is the taste of someone else's penis, we wouldn't have a site to subscribe to. You at least are willing to contemplate a nelly scale (just pretend for the moment that they're all potentially if not actually more or less gay) at one end of which are boys you don't like to see. You're furthermore even willing to recognize some positive qualities in the ones you want banned. But the presumption that they shouldn't be on the site is ludicrous. David needs them. They serve a purpose. The site tries to "portray" reality as closely as it can, and these guys are out there in their thousands, and suck more straight dick than you do. David does us all a favor by having them on every now and then, partly because a lot of us like them, but mainly so the fetish fantasizers will have a frightenend straightie to watch. I think whatsisname who started the nelly slurs really only wanted some attention, and to see what kind of a rise he could get out of jon. He's just as pleased as he can be now his rant brought us all out into the open. I feel a little stupid having risen to the bait myself, but some people you just have to quell.

I did not want attention nor did I expect such a response to my post. I merely had a very strong opinion and I wanted to make it known to David that I didn't care for that movie. That is it.

I get enough attention during my day and getting rises out of people is never fun. Most times it ends up with name calling and hurt feelings, and the only thing you should feel stupid about is your poor analysis of my post.

 

[longtimefan]

Slim, I believe that the "offensive" terminology used by longtime fan in his post was:

".........and if CJ is getting fucked, he wants to be fucked by a man, not some sissy. I'm done with the sissy fags on Broke Straight Boys"

While I wouldn't use such blunt, harsh language on the forum, I am not easily offended by words, particularly by a fellow gay man. While I don't consider myself a "sissy", I have certainly referred to myself as a "fag" at times, with fellow gay friends, and at times with close straight friends who know that I'm gay. To be shocked and offended by words like this is what I refer to as political correctness, here.

For many year's there was an extremely popular and talented humorist talk show host in Miami, named Neil Rogers. He came out as being gay many years ago, and often referred to himself, on the air, as being a fag. His show was the top rated program in his time slot, and his audience was primarily a heterosexual male demographic audience. I believe that Neil did more good in changing the average straight man's opinion of gay men, than any harm he did in calling himself a fag.

Using language that is commonly used, while not politically correct is really okay. I'm a fag. I like to suck cock. So what. These are words. Do you remember the old "sticks and stones" nursery rhyme?

If you prefer to use politically correct terminology on this forum, so be it, but I think a dose of reality is not a bad thing. To use words that people use in everyday life does not offend me. It is the context in which they are used that matters to me. If a poster was advocating beating up a fag, that would be way different to me than saying that one is "done with sissy fags on Broke Straight Boys". To me, he was stating an opinion using language that is a bit strong, but very descriptive and to the point.

Thank you Mike for your eloquence. I couldn't have said it better myself. You sound kind of hot. Wanna go out? LOL just playing.

 

[slimvintage]

Slim, I believe that the "offensive" terminology used by longtime fan in his post was:

".........and if CJ is getting fucked, he wants to be fucked by a man, not some sissy. I'm done with the sissy fags on Broke Straight Boys"

While I wouldn't use such blunt, harsh language on the forum, I am not easily offended by words, particularly by a fellow gay man. While I don't consider myself a "sissy", I have certainly referred to myself as a "fag" at times, with fellow gay friends, and at times with close straight friends who know that I'm gay. To be shocked and offended by words like this is what I refer to as political correctness, here.

For many year's there was an extremely popular and talented humorist talk show host in Miami, named Neil Rogers. He came out as being gay many years ago, and often referred to himself, on the air, as being a fag. His show was the top rated program in his time slot, and his audience was primarily a heterosexual male demographic audience. I believe that Neil did more good in changing the average straight man's opinion of gay men, than any harm he did in calling himself a fag.

Using language that is commonly used, while not politically correct is really okay. I'm a fag. I like to suck cock. So what. These are words. Do you remember the old "sticks and stones" nursery rhyme?

If you prefer to use politically correct terminology on this forum, so be it, but I think a dose of reality is not a bad thing. To use words that people use in everyday life does not offend me. It is the context in which they are used that matters to me. If a poster was advocating beating up a fag, that would be way different to me than saying that one is "done with sissy fags on Broke Straight Boys". To me, he was stating an opinion using language that is a bit strong, but very descriptive and to the point.

Lordy lordy, I think maybe in the end it's just the unwarranted attitude of superiority and intolerance that's mildly repugnant, not the language per se. People can call each other anything they want to if the tone hits a balance and the intention is one of respect. Other members with his vocabulary stir it up every now and then on this message board and there are always tears at the end of the day. He wants cute, obviously gay twinks banned from the scenes David shoots and I want them occasionally included. To my mind he was slovenly in his mode of expression and allowed himself the typical linguistic overkill that these guys always use to make their point. I just hope David doesn't pay any more attention to him than his one vote merits. I love gay boys, they make superb lovers and excellent companions; they're loyal and steadfast and have tons of character. They're bright and beautiful and funny as hell. They're great to watch being all these things, especially as contrast and counterpoint to a cute pseudo straightie who "has never done oral with another guy". To tell the truth, I just don't get where he's coming from. Is it insecurity? Is it some atavistic reflex instinct, like spiders? Is is fear? Is it shame?

 

[dande01]

So I'm reading this thread..wow...this was entertaining...so what have we learned from this thread.

longtimefan does not like Corey.

I guess its sort of like when the reporters asked Mrs. Lincoln, "Besides your husbands death Mrs. Lincoln, tells us how your really felt about the play?" LOL.

I love our members....

 

[mikeyank]

So I'm reading this thread..wow...this was entertaining...so what have we learned from this thread.

longtimefan does not like Corey.

I guess its sort of like when the reporters asked Mrs. Lincoln, "Besides your husbands death Mrs. Lincoln, tells us how your really felt about the play?" LOL.

I love our members....

And we love you too, David.

 

[joninliverton]

Lordy lordy, I think maybe in the end it's just the unwarranted attitude of superiority and intolerance that's mildly repugnant, not the language per se. People can call each other anything they want to if the tone hits a balance and the intention is one of respect. Other members with his vocabulary stir it up every now and then on this message board and there are always tears at the end of the day. He wants cute, obviously gay twinks banned from the scenes David shoots and I want them occasionally included. To my mind he was slovenly in his mode of expression and allowed himself the typical linguistic overkill that these guys always use to make their point. I just hope David doesn't pay any more attention to him than his one vote merits. I love gay boys, they make superb lovers and excellent companions; they're loyal and steadfast and have tons of character. They're bright and beautiful and funny as hell. They're great to watch being all these things, especially as contrast and counterpoint to a cute pseudo straightie who "has never done oral with another guy". To tell the truth, I just don't get where he's coming from. Is it insecurity? Is it some atavistic reflex instinct, like spiders? Is is fear? Is it shame?

Where you thinking of me then Slim xx

 

[tampa24]

And we love you too, David.

Yes we do David!

And I'll be glad when we get to Wednesday's update so we can talk about something else besides this one. Most of our feelings on these topics are very well known already. We've seen this same thread/movie before and we know how it ends. With good friends sniping at each other and feelings getting hurt. It serves no good purpose to keep beating a dead horse.

But it's a free country so you guys can keep on going if you want. I myself choose not to play. To quote Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"

 

[slimvintage]

Where you thinking of me then Slim xx

Not only then hottie, often, often...

 

[tampa24]

That's better. I'm feeling the love. haha

 

[mactee]

That's better. I'm feeling the love. haha

I want to feel the love too! Should we get together over a good fire and make smoors and sing? lol

Have a great night everyone, love to you all!

 

[longtimefan]

So I'm reading this thread..wow...this was entertaining...so what have we learned from this thread.

longtimefan does not like Corey.

I guess its sort of like when the reporters asked Mrs. Lincoln, "Besides your husbands death Mrs. Lincoln, tells us how your really felt about the play?" LOL.

I love our members....

I love you too David, and I love your work. Keep it up.

Longtimefan

 

[slimvintage]

I want to feel the love too! Should we get together over a good fire and make smoors and sing? lol

Have a great night everyone, love to you all!

Excellent idea, but instead of smoors, could we make smoore29?

 

[mactee]

"Excellent idea, but instead of smoors, could we make smoore29?"

I would not want to roast him, but I bet we could come up with ideas that would benefit all of us and him too! lol, oops, what am I thinking?

 

[slimvintage]

"Excellent idea, but instead of smoors, could we make smoore29?"

I would not want to roast him, but I bet we could come up with ideas that would benefit all of us and him too! lol, oops, what am I thinking?

Or what about spit roasting him: not the same as toasting him over a bonfire. Sounds rather like a plan to me.

Verb: to spit roast. A sexual activity involving 3 people, two active males and one passive. Man 1 penetrates man 2 from the rear while he (man 2) sucks the penis of man 3. ...as if you didn't know lol...