Sean Cody’s Three-Way Double-Penetration Breeding Bareback Bonanza

I guess if you’re gonna do something, you might as well go balls to the wall and do it all. Sean Cody’s first bareback scene last week was nothing compared to this one, a three-way in which everyone (Dennis, Calvin, Jordan) fucks each other, Dennis gets double penetrated and then creampied, and everyone swallows cum. Happy new year!

I’m glad that Sean Cody dropped the stupid euphemism (“unwrapped”) and is calling this exactly what it is: A bareback three-way starring three of the site’s best models. Unfortunately, that awful, hypocritical disclaimer still plays at the beginning:

Preview photos (watch in full here):

[Sean Cody: Dennis, Calvin & Jordan Bareback Three-Way]

 

60 thoughts on “Sean Cody’s Three-Way Double-Penetration Breeding Bareback Bonanza”

  1. My God you guys are so pathetic, if you don’t like bareback porn then don’t watch it. I’m going to continue to watch it cause it turns me own to get off but in the real world I play safe. Why go bash those that enjoy watching bareback porn, that would be like a straight group bashing you for buying a gay porn at the video store in the gay section no matter whether it was condom or bareback. Talk about hypocrites, you guys sound just as bad as the christians that are anti-gay. Geez you guys might as well be a republican.

  2. YAY! Flame wars!!

    But seriously, we’re Americans. We have companies that produce products that they know will KILL US.

    I mean, cigarette, anyone?

    The demand for new bareback porn is not going away any time soon, kind of like stamping out nicotine addiction is never going to happen. And as long as the demand is there, companies will exist to financially exploit those desires. No moral concern there, and if that asshole Ayn Rand were still around, she’d probably say there shouldn’t be, either.

    For as much as I may object to the production of bareback porn on an ethical basis, I’m just politically moderate enough to realize that the nanny-state approach is also wrong. How is condemning bareback porn producers different (except perhaps in degree) than the PTC going after F/X for broadcasting, say, Nip/Tuck? Moral objection is just that here; a question of degree, and bareback porn is just a point on the continuum. There are people who find ANY gay porn morally objectionable, and people who find ALL porn morally objectionable. Who’s wrong? And why should any of them get to say, on moral grounds, that none of it should be allowed to exist, even for people who WANT it?

  3. God that looks like an awesome time! I feel a little guilty for enjoying it, –but damn! If it were another era I’d probably jump in there with them! I could not/would not take the chance in this day and age….no matter what kind of testing they do -my paycheck would get eaten up instantly by all the meds

  4. For so many of you who are PRO bareback sex here is a question for you: Would you date and build a relationship with a guy who is HIV+, take all of the safer sex precautions or would you pass him by? Please tell the truth and please respond.

    1. What is the purpose of this question? MOST guys (probably unfairly) dismiss a guy who is HIV+, and that INCLUDES PROcondom people, which to me is what’s MOST fascinating. Personally, if I really liked a guy who was HIV+, yes I would use condoms, but that doesn’t change the fact that I would strongly wish that we could forego them.

  5. I agree with all people above being against bareback and behavior with risk.
    The best is to ignore them, to cancel mebership.
    They do it for moeney, so let’s keep our money and let them die.
    They do sell death.
    Shame on SC and all other barback and death promoters.

  6. My generation was the first to die of AIDS. I knew men who died of a disease that didn’t yet have a name. I have known hundreds of men who have since died of AIDS, and most of them went painfully and unwillingly to their deaths. They were all on their way to the apex of their lives, after years of education and hard work, ready to take their rightful place in the world. Their talent and ability never blossomed, wasted and killed by a horrible, horrendous, insidious plague that made them pariahs by ignorant, bigoted assholes. My most vivid memory is of visiting Mark in the hospital only hours before his death. Once a strapping 6’4” 250lbs mountain of muscle, he was sweet and gentle, kind and good. He had wasted away to a 75lb skeleton who looked nothing like the man I had known since college. He struggled to hold my hand as he told me how scared he was to die. I was scared for him as well. His death was a blessing as it ended years of pain and suffering, much of it the result of the medication that was supposed to help him.
    I wonder if the men who engage in bareback sex today have any idea about what it used to be like. I know that AIDS is not the immediate death sentence it once was, but it is still a fatal disease. It can also be prevented.

    1. I find it astounding that in the midst of all this bittersweet nostalgia about the 70’s and 80’s, we turn a completely blind eye to the unabashed hedonism of gay male culture during this era. Why is there little criticism of this? It’s really fun to bash the “ignorant” generation of today for their “misguided choices”, but the guys of the past who lost their lives are viewed through some kind of rose-colored lenses. Are we scared to say the obvious – that had the gay men of that time not been such shameless whores, (which we still are and of which we still condone and approve – even the safe sex alarmists) that we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion today? People who learn the WRONG lesson from history are doomed to make the same mistakes as well. I kind of think that this issue is so controversial because some of us feel that gay disease and death shine a light on the underlying dysfunctional truth of gay male interaction (that the condom is depended on to be a band-aid solution for) – which is that when it comes down to it, gay males in general have a lot to learn about relationships with each other.

      1. What an ignorant, self-loathing response. Not all gay men are whores. All it takes is one sexual encounter to contract the disease. And by the way, AIDS is not a gay disease – most of the people who die from it are straight. People in general have a lot to learn about relationships, since more than half of straight marriages end in divorce.

        1. Why is Samson’s response ignorant and self-loathing? Maybe his statement that if gay men in the 70’s and 80’s had been less sexually active that we might not be discussing the implications of bareback sex.. is a bit of stretch. I’m from your generation too and I agree with him that most gay men in those decades were whores. Maybe this generation is a little more discrete as to where,when and with whom they have sex…. unlike our generation that use to brag about banging our best friend’s partner or participating in group sex at rest areas and truck stops. Monogamy back then and to some extent now is a joke. I remember the AIDS educational posters on the bathhouse walls. Talk about irony. Still the majority of sex in those places was unprotected. Maybe our generation should have taken the advice of one sexual encounter is all it takes to become infected.
          I can’t count on both hands how many friends of mine died from HIV complications and I still have friends who are living with it today. A few of my friends who suffered continued with unprotected sex well after the time the public was educated…. just like today.

          1. Disease is not a moral issue. Samson believes that gay men deserve to die of AIDS based on his definition of morality (gay men = whores = death by AIDS). Samson also believes that gay men are dysfunctional idiots incapable of having healthy relationships. Any gay man with that amount of hatred towards other gay men must hate themselves.

          2. You completely butchered what I said. No where did I say or even imply that anyone deserves to die. I also never said gay people are the only ones with problems. But as far as this particular issue is concerned, gay men choose to be most vocal, thus that’s what I addressed. The central theme of what I posted was: responsibility or blame, if you will. Whereas in knee jerk fashion, a lot of us (particularly the older guys looking down at the “naive” youngsters) want to point the finger at bareback sex, I say that some of us have a little selective amnesia and need to go back a little further…back to the genesis of gay culture where the meat market mentality prevailed. Phallus appears to agree somewhat but disagrees on whether bareback sex would be this big controversy today had gay men not decided to abandon all aspects of traditional morality and essentially go on a sexual rampage during the 70’s and 80’s. I firmly believe that we would not be talking about AIDS today. Would STD’s be obsolete? I highly doubt it. But if gay men during that era had not been working so hard to make non-monogamy or at least instant sexual gratification the norm, I believe we would be enormously better off. You may say that the same could be true if people had be educated about safer sex, but that’s more dubious because people knew about condoms and their purpose. They just chose to disregard them because guess what, sex without them is more desirable to the average person. Of course you can counter that playing the field is also something we desire. Unfortunately, there cannot be two norms in one community. I for one favor the one where “needing” condoms to be safer is exception rather than the rule because face it, while this sounds offensive to some, bareback is going nowhere and will continue to be a potential hazard if not accommodated by a mature society.

        2. Well that’s kind of a red herring. True, all it takes is one encounter to contract HIV but it’s also true that all it takes is one person thinking the world is their sexual buffet for a disease to go from a manageable problem to becoming a pandemic. Which is the bigger problem from just a theoretical pov? Sure you can counter that all we need is condoms but they have limitations – one being diseases we have yet to discover and hence control another being that many people simply do not adjust well to them which ties to the most important point which is why should we rely on an artificial solution to something that can largely though not completely (in the beginning) be dealt with through behavior changes that are beneficial to us all – behaviors that unfortunately for gay males we generally reject? It’s quite ironic to me but it seems that gay men have a bigger problem abandoning promiscuity (condom or no condom) than even monogamous bareback sex due to the love/hate relationship with this sexual behavior.

          1. Why don’t you tell us what STDs do you have? How did you get them and for how long have you had them? I’m curious to know what your own sexual history says about you. What kind of person wants the self-inflected sexual abuse of unprotected sex?

          2. What is your definition “traditional morality?” Marriage between a man and a woman? How many sex partners does it take to become one of your “shameless whores?” Two? Five? Fifty? Five hundred? Your term “meat market mentality” is a pejorative moral judgment on behavior. And by using that term, you are in effect saying that people who behave this way deserve to get AIDS. If you think “we would not be talking about AIDS today” if there had been no “sexual rampage,” you know nothing about the pathology of disease. How do you explain the incidence of AIDS in Africa? Do they make “instant sexual gratification” the norm? Are Africans savages with no concept of “traditional morality?”
            Judge not lest ye be judged.

          3. I shouldn’t even dignify your comment with a reply cause it’s obvious that you are deliberately trying to be obtuse. You’re just the kind of knee-jerk reactionary that I’m talking about. So I’m just gonna scroll down to the only part worth mentioning: AIDS In Africa. AIDS in Africa, first of all is a red herring, but it has many of the same sources as anywhere in the world: lifestyle issues – promiscuity, sex work, drug use, subjugation of women, no education. All of which, despite being social ills independent of condom use, are assumed to be remedied by said thing, and in fact anyone who disagrees must “want” people to die. I believe I’d sen that sentiment expressed more than a few times forums such as this, when the topic was the current one, by people who, if the tables are turned, have the audacity to spout off some shameless plea to be spared of the judgement themselves.

  7. What’s worse masterbating to bareback performers or scenes with dead porn stars that died from complications to due HIV?
    We all have choices and opinions but in the end it’s the pornstars themselves that make this decision. If SC or any other filmmaker terminates a contract due to the fact that performer refuses to have bareback sex… so be it. We as consumers can pick and choose to buy or refuse to buy bareback porn.

    I hardly doubt too that if all gay porn performers refused to do bareback and if all the gym addicts stopped trying to look pretty, the gay community would have a better chance of equality. We just have to be better than the critics, plain and simple which…… ain’t gonna happen.

  8. To the producers/owners of Sean Cody

    I’m writing to say that I’m enormously disappointed in you for your recent decision to start filming unsafe sex scenes.

    I have been for 10 years a professional porn reviewer, writing as a paid critic since the days of VHS. It is only in the past couple of years that I have decided I simply can’t do it anymore – mostly because of the increasing popularity of bareback porn in the marketplace. I find the complete irresponsibility of it depressing to the point where I cannot bear to be a part of the industry any longer.

    I have also followed your site since its launch. You were one of the first studios to launch the straight-to-web format, along with Corbin Fisher, Randy Blue and Chaos Men. I went off CM almost immediately over their decision to promote unsafe sex. CF followed eventually over their likewise decision. That left you and RB as the only ones I was still prepared to give my own money to, even after I no longer received free memberships and screening copies as a critic. I stuck with you through the accusations of homophobia, of favouring your straight models over your gay ones, and through your rather childish and bitchy response of revealing the real name of the model in question. I stuck with you because you had not succumbed to the money-over-morals bareback trend.

    But now you have. And why? Do you think you have to, to remain relevant? Consider this – your selling point could have been that you are the studio that cares more about its models AND its viewers than that. “We are the ones who will not give in to the almighty dollar, the ones for whom setting a good example for our fans is more important.” That could have been your niche. Now what are you? One of the whole crowd of studios who don’t care. Wallowing in the mud with the rest. In an attempt to keep up with the times, you’ve given up what made you special and respectable.

    Yes, you’ve got a lot of blog chatter out of it. And all press is good press, right? You may get a few more memberships out of this too, but really, they’ll be from people whose money I wouldn’t want to have, and it will come at the expense of your high ground.

    And that’s not even considering the fact that you have now given up the chance you had to educate your audience. You may think it’s not your responsibility to educate, only to entertain. That porn is only a fantasy, not anything that people might try to emulate in real life. I think that’s a fantastically naïve perspective. Of course entertainment educates at the same time. “People see murders all the time on TV – it doesn’t mean they’ll go out and murder people,” you’ll say. Well, they have the whole of society telling them not to murder anyone. No-one is telling young gay men how to have sex. The educational system doesn’t even like to admit gay people exist, so they’re certainly not teaching them what they need to know about safe sex. In that absence, porn producers take on an educational responsibility by default. Up to now, you were doing it well. Now you have apparently decided it’s not necessary.

    Even if you think it’s NOT your responsibility, that you don’t HAVE to do this, don’t you at least feel that you OUGHT to do this? Why not take the chance you have to teach your viewers good habits, ensure they keep themselves safe to enjoy more sex in the future? Do you not think that’s a good thing to be doing, something you should want to do?

    Yes, you placed the “disclaimer” at the front of the clips, written by a highly paid lawyer to make sure you’re legally covered I’m sure. Three points on that. 1 – you wouldn’t have to do that if you just kept using condoms. 2 – if you really think anyone is going to stop to read a safe sex disclaimer and consider what it says before going on to the sex, then I can only assume you’ve never been a teenage boy with a hardon. 3 – the disclaimer itself is hypocritical in the extreme. You claim that you do not support or recommend unprotected sex, yet that’s exactly what you’re doing by producing this scene in the first place, upon which the disclaimer is placed. You even say “it was the hottest thing we’d ever seen,” glorifying it above all your other productions right there while having the gall to say you don’t “support” it.

    And you claim you do not recommend unsafe sex “even within a relationship,” and yet in the two scenes in question (so far), you also then go on to clearly say that the models have only just met each other. Within a relationship is bad, but complete strangers is good? Yes yes, they all had tests. So you say. What proof do I have of that? Your word? Do you not realize how many HIV infections in the world came as a result of people trusting another person’s word? I can’t see those tests or those negative results. You know what I can see? A condom.

    Test all you want, it’s great that you do. But why not use condoms as well? It is really so difficult or unpleasant or troublesome? Is it really better for you to spend all the money of tests and lawyers and arguments on the internet than it is for you to just slap a condom on your models and provide a good example for your audience as well? I disagree in the strongest possible terms. Because the fact is, you had the opportunity to be part of the solution to the continuing rise of HIV infections. Instead you’ve chosen of your own free will to become party of the problem. When the next innocent gay boy tests positive, you could have rested safe in the knowledge you did nothing to contribute to it. You can’t do that anymore. I can’t prove that watching a bareback porn clip will force him to go out and have unsafe sex, but you can’t prove that it won’t. Why not err on the side of caution?

    I hope you can see that this email, assuming you have read it through, is attempting to provide rational arguments to persuade you that you have made the wrong decision. I am not some crazed internet ranter just spouting off without having thought about it. I feel very strongly about this, and I hope I’ve given you some food for thought.

    Regards

    Ed Woody

    1. tl;dr

      So did you actually email them (and this is your way of CC’ing us)? ‘Cause I don’t think they’re in the habit of reading this blog…

      1. The former. I actually emailed them, and then came and posted it here, and on other blogs as well. I’ll be interested to see if I get any response beyond a generic “thank you for your comments.”

        1. Ed, the reply will be…”we’ll pass this along to Sean.”

          This decision has been made and there is nothing that will change their minds. They’re happily going forward with bareback.

        2. I seriously doubt your letter will have any effect. For every person that decides to boycott SC over this, there will be two or more that subscribe. It’s the direction the entire industry seems to be taking…

          I’m curious… did you send a similar letter to CF when they began dabbling in BB more than a year ago (first, with the stealthy “half-bareback” updates on their main site and then with a separate paysite devoted almost entirely to BB porn)?

          1. Actually no, I didn’t, I just stopped subscribing. Like you, I’ve almost given up any hope that this trend might reverse and people might realise HIV is still a problem.

            Received this this morning:

            Ed,
            Thank you for your feedback. I would like to assure you that Sean reads all emails that members have sent in on this matter.
            Michael,
            Sean Cody Support

  9. Yeah bb awesome breeding the best and hate condoms wish I would feel their asses after they loaded each other! Only bb and love my ass dripping with seed!

  10. Did we wear those red ribbons for decades in vain? Whole groups of gay men have died like a generational genocide in the late 70s to early 80s. Besides HIV, when did becoming a human petri dish for hepatitis C, herpes, and other STDs seem to be supposedly manageable with or without a compromised immune system. How as gay men can we treated equally as spouses, if not prospective parents, when we can’t even respect our very own bodies physically and emotionally? The new normalcy of bareback in gay porn, where gym memberships are still mandatory as various cocktails of pills are taken as vitamins, doesn’t realize that the level of care varies greatly between the likes of Magic Johnson and that of the average gay man living in Chelsea, West Hollywood, or any places in between and beyond. There’s only so much free clinics and the reluctant government can do. Was sexualizing fear, anxiety, and uncertainty worth the momentary orgams?

      1. Seriously. Now we’ve got “I’m glad that Sean Cody dropped the stupid euphemism (“unwrapped”)”, but it seems the stupid euphemism “bareback” is still just fine. I’d rather have no stupid euphemisms at all, thanks: it’s death fetish porn. Nothing more, nothing less. And the one thing they’re doing that shows any responsiblity at all — the disclaimer — is supposed to be the bad thing? What kind of screwed-up logic is that?

    1. Your sentimental stroll down memory lane ignores important differences between then and now. People were contracting HIV then because they were truly ignorant. People nowadays do because of the fact that people today (much like their predecessors) very much like bareback sex for quite simple reasons that we often gloss over in favor of more convoluted explanations, yet are driven underground by people who, like you, tell them that there is something wrong with them for even liking it (kind of like anti-gay zealots do with gay people) and where extreme subcultures develop e.g bug-chasers – people who actively seek out HIV. Add to this fire the completely normalized behavior of promiscuity (manhunt, grindr, a4a anyone?) and you have a recipe for nihilsm where guys just accept as fact that they have no recourse for their completely natural and moral desires. Afterall, instead of being met with a community that values relationships and/or at least honesty and faithfulness, they are met by one that shuns bareback sex but accepts as inevitable and even glorifies, quick easy anonymous, random sex. So one is often left burning/bargaining with a desire that doesn’t fit neatly into a cultural paradigm that frankly the “older-timers” helped to create (not exactly role models of healthy gay relationships) and in the end just say, “oh well, whatever will be will be” But we all should know that a position one is forced into. In the spirit of the blame game, I say you can pat yourself on the back for that one.

      1. Safe sex is a sense of self-respect. If you’re willing to bareback, I suggest you be able to pay for your healthcare and especially meds on your own. Contract multiple strains of whatever viruses you want. Let’s see how manageable your life is not just physically but emotionally, spiritually, and mentally. No one is suggesting that people are barebacking because of some social construct or the dynamics between groups in society. Try not to infect anyone else but don’t expect to face difficulties in your personal and professional relationships in this most unfair world. I just don’t want to support one’s lack of continued self-care of barebacking on any level, be that financial, social, and the like. I for one don’t donate and volunteer for HIV/AIDS organizations who so that others use their every orifice as human receptacles for infected and diseased bodily fluids.

        1. Feel free to write to your Congressman if you have a problem paying taxes for anything.
          As for a reply to my comment, come back when you’re ready to submit the final draft.

  11. you rotten thoughtless old trolls! i can’t believe you people seek out bareback porn (encourage it!) without any care for what it will probably mean for the health of these poor stupid young men. I wish I believed in health because you all deserve nothing less.

    1. Not that I condone bareback worship, but…you don’t believe in health? So everyone is diseased in some way? Is this a Scientology thing?

  12. No matter what they do, some people are always complaining. I’m just happy this is a hot scene and I truly enjoy it.

      1. That could be anything, and is most likely a razor bump from shaving. Like they’re really gonna let him film with something dangerous or contagious. Please.

        1. Oh honey. Are you really going to try and convince the plethora of queens who are just trying to make themselves feel better by bashing porn stars? It’s a defense mechanism probably brought about by the shame of having to pay or “work hard” in order to see hot men doing it.

        2. LOL. You poor, ignorant sap. If anybody wants a perfect example of how uneducated people are about safe sex then take note from Zach. You DON’T HAVE UNPROTECTED SEX WITH A SORE ON YOUR COCK! SC should be condemned for fucking up that message alone.

        3. I’ve actually seen straight porn where there were visible genital warts and sores that looked like herpes lesions pop up. The porn industry doesn’t test for either. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that there is an unusually high amount of cervical cancer cases in the straight porn industry. A simple yearly pap smear could eliminate most of those cases, but as of now it’s not a part of the standard testing procedures required to work.

          1. And now that, thanks to PornWikiLeaks, Sharon Mitchell and AIM have gone under, who’s going to even INFORM the straight porn women about these things, much less refer them?

  13. People are getting all caught up in the disclaimer and the deeper meaning of it. Give it a rest. There’s no hypocrisy – all Sean is doing is covering his tail legally. I can assure you that a very expensive attorney wrote that copy.

    1. Of course it’s hypocritical to say “unprotected sex is not something we recommend or endorse” when it’s clearly okay for the models they’re paying to do it. I agree the statement is to cover their arses legally, that doesn’t make it any less moronic though.

      1. LOL. High horse. Technically, it’s not really “unprotected” sex if you’ve undergone rigorous amounts of testing–which they claimed to have gotten.

        1. As a very expensive attorney, let me say that no self-respecting very expensive attorney wrote that disclaimer. It contradicts itself as they clearly endorse unprotected sex if they make money off it (testing not withstanding). What they may think about the sexual practices of a couple in a relationship is irrelevant. If I were writing it, I would add a statement that the models had been fully informed of the risk of condomless sex and had agreed to accept those risks.

          I too am of the generation who watched as our friends and partners were decimated by AIDS, including my partner of two years. I knew he had tested positive early in the relationship, we enjoyed the time we had together (with proper precautions) and I remain thankful that I was able to support him at the end. That said, we each make our own choices in life. We each bear the responsibility to know the risks before bedding down with someone, to question sex partners about their status and to decide the level of risk we choose to bear.

          1. I high five you. As I said below, other studios that have been shooting bareback scenes for far longer have more user-friendly boilerplate.

      2. Please grab a dictionary. “I do not recommend” does not equal “I am against”. As others have suggested in other ways, I am sure that the disclaimer is there to convey to the audience that simply because the video contains bareback sex does not mean he is ENCOURAGING them to emulate what they see, and by extension, BLAME his video for their actions – something I’m sure some nut-jobs would do. In fact, most anti-bareback critics fall in that category by their mere suggestion that bareback porn is gonna make others want to bareback.

    2. More like a very expensive attorney’s paralegal. A paralegal who never read the less mixed-message boilerplate copy that other sites and production companies have been using for years.

  14. I only ever watch bareback porn because condoms are such a turn off.
    But I find the warning more than a little cynical, not even in a relationships? So the inference is its OK if you’re getting paid? The not ‘endorsing it’ is just hypocritical, you are endorsing it by making a movie and selling it. At least have the balls to stand by your principles of proper testing and leave the moralising to the god botherers and PC nazis.

    1. Well put. The disclaimer is a bit disingenuous. Calling it what it is and explaining why is certainly enough. Saying that they don’t endorse barebacking while flatly offering up barebacking as a sexual fetish is such a logical disconnect that I find myself wanting to kick the producer in the balls. And not in that fun, sexy, Shotgun Video kind of way.

  15. Well, I’ll say this much: I appreciate the lack of subterfuge. It’s not “condomless” or “condom-free”, it’s BAREBACK.

  16. Fucking A………….I came 2 times watching this scene. This is possibly the hottest scene I’ve ever watched on Sean Cody. Wow!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 50 MB. You can upload: image. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Scroll to Top