FabSwingers.com > Forums > Swingers Chat > is bareback ever right
is bareback ever right
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
my answer is yes. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging "Not for us, personally, but of course it's right for some. Their choice.  | |||
| |||
  | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
 | |||
| |||
"Of course...as already said with consent.. Now can we finally put this to bed "Maybe that's why it looks so angry and red.  | |||
"Of course...as already said with consent.. Now can we finally put this to bed
Maybe that's why it looks so angry and red. " | |||
X | |||
"For me and my other half it is..that's why I got my contraceptive so we don't have to use condoms!
X "Only with him though, no one else X | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Of course...as already said with consent.. Now can we finally put this to bed
Maybe that's why it looks so angry and red.
" | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging "Are you from Sydney University? | |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging
Are you from Sydney University?"i am. 0
that how come i knew that condoms don't protect against some STIs that do not cause symptoms in all people and the GUM clinics don't test for these STIs until someone gets symptoms. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging "Depends how many babies you want | |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life. "Eh? | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Pretty sure the human race would twiddle pretty quick if it wasnt for BB sex Id say it has it plus sides. "That's in vanilla land not swinging though  | |||
| |||
 | |||
"Pretty sure the human race would twiddle pretty quick if it wasnt for BB sex Id say it has it plus sides.
That's in vanilla land not swinging though " | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"It's amazing people's lack of education on STIs!! The HPV virus seems to get alot of news these days because its linked to cervical cancer!! But it comes in lots of different forms plus theres no test for it available, It is very very rare to get an sti form oral sex!! The best thing we can do is educated ourselves on the dangers!! I suppose it's just common knowledge! if you're meeting multiple partners always get checked and use protection!! " Thank you doctor for your input | |||
| |||
"russian roulette.
my answer is yes. "Damn; someone got in before me | |||
"russian roulette.
my answer is yes.
Damn; someone got in before me "i got in before shag did also. am feeling proud. | |||
"At the end of the day, it should come down to trust. How long have you known this person, how confident are you that they're protecting themselves elsewhere, do you both get tested regularly? If you're happy with the answers to these questions, then go for it. " I would never be happy with the answers to those questions from someone who was involved in swinging. Why would they have bareback sex with me but protect themselves elsewhere? | |||
| |||
| |||
"At the end of the day, it should come down to trust. How long have you known this person, how confident are you that they're protecting themselves elsewhere, do you both get tested regularly? If you're happy with the answers to these questions, then go for it. I would never be happy with the answers to those questions from someone who was involved in swinging. Why would they have bareback sex with me but protect themselves elsewhere? "it can happen. not all of us are selfish liars. i wouldn't fuck many bareback but if i felt i would be comfortable enough to tell them i have caught an STD then the possibility is there, very rarely. i think that's all the trust you need, that the person would not give you abuse for the risk they took with you. if any random thinks it's ok to ask me for bareback after reading that then you don't understand what i said. | |||
"i only bareback with my regular guy - condoms at all other times for both of us "
Same here
Others I give the 'benefit of the doubt' and treat them as if they were carriers of the bubonic plague | |||
"At the end of the day, it should come down to trust. How long have you known this person, how confident are you that they're protecting themselves elsewhere, do you both get tested regularly? If you're happy with the answers to these questions, then go for it. I would never be happy with the answers to those questions from someone who was involved in swinging. Why would they have bareback sex with me but protect themselves elsewhere?
it can happen. not all of us are selfish liars.
i wouldn't fuck many bareback but if i felt i would be comfortable enough to tell them i have caught an STD then the possibility is there, very rarely. i think that's all the trust you need, that the person would not give you abuse for the risk they took with you.
if any random thinks it's ok to ask me for bareback after reading that then you don't understand what i said."I don't suggest that everyone is a selfish liar, I'm just not convinced I could tell who was and who wasn't | |||
| |||
| |||
"At the end of the day, it should come down to trust. How long have you known this person, how confident are you that they're protecting themselves elsewhere, do you both get tested regularly? If you're happy with the answers to these questions, then go for it. I would never be happy with the answers to those questions from someone who was involved in swinging. Why would they have bareback sex with me but protect themselves elsewhere?
it can happen. not all of us are selfish liars.
i wouldn't fuck many bareback but if i felt i would be comfortable enough to tell them i have caught an STD then the possibility is there, very rarely. i think that's all the trust you need, that the person would not give you abuse for the risk they took with you.
if any random thinks it's ok to ask me for bareback after reading that then you don't understand what i said.
I don't suggest that everyone is a selfish liar, I'm just not convinced I could tell who was and who wasn't"i didn't think you was, just saying i know they eist and not all of us are one. and no, you can't tell who is or isn't and have to go with your gut. so it's another risk again right there. i've been gutted when i made the wrong choices but lucky enough that it didn't matter. | |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh? "Confused? Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs. The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk. Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK? | |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5
cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?"So ?? Is it worth it. ? I personally hate the feeling or non feeling a rubber gives. Xx | |||
| |||
"I think there is only one form of bareback swinging that is ok. Nobody plays with anyone for 3 months, gets tested, and only then plays. Same really for meeting a new girlfriend. No bareback unless std free for more than 3 months. Hiv is not for me." this for me | |||
"As long as you're both checked regularly I'd say it's cool " oh come on get real havnt you ever heared about a liar | |||
"russian roulette.
my answer is yes.
Damn; someone got in before me
i got in before shag did also. am feeling proud. "Yes _osie we did there and yeah, you got in there too before me | |||
"if you think about it the most highly transmittable STIs condoms don't protect against them anyway." Totally agree , condoms sole purpose is to stop baby's | |||
"if you think about it the most highly transmittable STIs condoms don't protect against them anyway. Totally agree , condoms sole purpose is to stop baby's " Fuckin bullshit. They protect your life in many ways baby's is just one. Ive had my balls bricked so it's a disease risk versus sensual pleasure. | |||
"For me? No For others, well it is entirely their choice." What she said. Also I'll add, if anyone ever told me "it's fine if we have fun without a condom" then it makes me wonder how many others they may have slept with whilst bareback, I'd basically be sleeping with ALL of their previous encounters too. ...my health means more to me than a fuck But I will add, if I had assurance that all or any participants were sti-free (proof given, and immediately recent) then yeah sure, I'd love it like the next guy | |||
| |||
"I think barebacking is totally wrong in the swinging community, with the amount of dishonesty between couples , bi men playing straight , and those married cheaters. If I meet someone in this community and they offer me sex. I wear 4 condoms at all times , 2 dental dams , surgical mask , and full hazmat suit... But in the vanilla world I'd be insulted if a female ask me to use a condom. That's because I know these girls are clean because they are not swingers. "Haha! But seriously, they say double bagging (or quadruple bagging in your case) is just as dangerous as bb. The friction gives massive potential of a rubber split just throwing an fyi | |||
"It's amazing people's lack of education on STIs!! The HPV virus seems to get alot of news these days because its linked to cervical cancer!! But it comes in lots of different forms plus theres no test for it available, It is very very rare to get an sti form oral sex!! The best thing we can do is educated ourselves on the dangers!! I suppose it's just common knowledge! if you're meeting multiple partners always get checked and use protection!! " Sending out false information is not educational you say it is very very rare to get an sti from oral!! this is coped straight from the NHS web site........ Oral sex is the stimulation of the genitals using the mouth and tongue. It is one of the ways that sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are most frequently passed on. Link. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/970.aspx?CategoryID=118 Id say the doctors disagree with you | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging "The question should be is bareback right for you!! If not put a condom on. If yes then don't simple as that really. I'm sure there's plenty of people who would say swinging is wrong but is that ever a topic. People should pay more attention to what they want themselves and less in other people. | |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging
The question should be is bareback right for you!! If not put a condom on. If yes then don't simple as that really. I'm sure there's plenty of people who would say swinging is wrong but is that ever a topic. People should pay more attention to what they want themselves and less in other people. " | |||
"It's amazing people's lack of education on STIs!! The HPV virus seems to get alot of news these days because its linked to cervical cancer!! But it comes in lots of different forms plus theres no test for it available, It is very very rare to get an sti form oral sex!! The best thing we can do is educated ourselves on the dangers!! I suppose it's just common knowledge! if you're meeting multiple partners always get checked and use protection!! Sending out false information is not educational you say it is very very rare to get an sti from oral!! this is coped straight from the NHS web site........ Oral sex is the stimulation of the genitals using the mouth and tongue. It is one of the ways that sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are most frequently passed on. Link. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/970.aspx?CategoryID=118 Id say the doctors disagree with you " Most medical literature states that it is possible to transmit some STI via oral, but it is much less risky. From my searches on the subject, current evidence is vague about the level of risk. I suspect there are a lot of doctors who would agree it's rare, but there will be some who will interpret current evidence with more caution. More research is probably needed to ascertain how risky oral sex is. Certainly at the sexual health clinic that I attend, I have never been advised to use condoms for oral. | |||
| |||
"It's amazing people's lack of education on STIs!! The HPV virus seems to get alot of news these days because its linked to cervical cancer!! But it comes in lots of different forms plus theres no test for it available, It is very very rare to get an sti form oral sex!! The best thing we can do is educated ourselves on the dangers!! I suppose it's just common knowledge! if you're meeting multiple partners always get checked and use protection!! Sending out false information is not educational you say it is very very rare to get an sti from oral!! this is coped straight from the NHS web site........ Oral sex is the stimulation of the genitals using the mouth and tongue. It is one of the ways that sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are most frequently passed on. Link. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/970.aspx?CategoryID=118 Id say the doctors disagree with you Most medical literature states that it is possible to transmit some STI via oral, but it is much less risky. From my searches on the subject, current evidence is vague about the level of risk. I suspect there are a lot of doctors who would agree it's rare, but there will be some who will interpret current evidence with more caution. More research is probably needed to ascertain how risky oral sex is. Certainly at the sexual health clinic that I attend, I have never been advised to use condoms for oral. " How can it be less risky putting a cock in your mouth uncovered is the same as putting it in a pussy uncovered bodily fluids are still entering you. Same for licking a pussy your actually swallowing the juice that comes out. Sex is risky full stop but people like to make a big thing about bareback sex. But I'm sure the ones who play bareback get checked a lot more often than people who don't. We've been given oral devices every time we've been to a clinic and advised to use protection when giving oral. No we don't use them and never been asked to but no one seems to think that's a problem. If it's less risky why does it say that it's the most frequent way that sti's are passed on. | |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?"I don't think they were confused, the"eh?" was used to question whether you knew what bollocks you were writing! Flu alone very very rarely kills anyone... flu exascerbating existing illness in the elderly, young or those with compromised immune system makes up the majority of the 12k you referred to! Then there's smoking and cancer, incidental meeting of someone with cancer will not mean that you "catch" anything. More importantly, "normal life" because you bareback, you are not protected from the normal life risks. So it's a bit like addition of risk.... normal life risk + bareback risk = increased risk of disease, whether life threatening or not! Does a disease have to be life threatening for me to attempt to protect myself against it? Overall you've used some words to attempt to get your point across, if you just reorder some, omit some, use some others and don't quote nonsense facts ... then it's a very informative post! | |||
"It's amazing people's lack of education on STIs!! The HPV virus seems to get alot of news these days because its linked to cervical cancer!! But it comes in lots of different forms plus theres no test for it available, It is very very rare to get an sti form oral sex!! The best thing we can do is educated ourselves on the dangers!! I suppose it's just common knowledge! if you're meeting multiple partners always get checked and use protection!! Sending out false information is not educational you say it is very very rare to get an sti from oral!! this is coped straight from the NHS web site........ Oral sex is the stimulation of the genitals using the mouth and tongue. It is one of the ways that sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are most frequently passed on. Link. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/970.aspx?CategoryID=118 Id say the doctors disagree with you Most medical literature states that it is possible to transmit some STI via oral, but it is much less risky. From my searches on the subject, current evidence is vague about the level of risk. I suspect there are a lot of doctors who would agree it's rare, but there will be some who will interpret current evidence with more caution. More research is probably needed to ascertain how risky oral sex is. Certainly at the sexual health clinic that I attend, I have never been advised to use condoms for oral. How can it be less risky putting a cock in your mouth uncovered is the same as putting it in a pussy uncovered bodily fluids are still entering you. Same for licking a pussy your actually swallowing the juice that comes out. Sex is risky full stop but people like to make a big thing about bareback sex. But I'm sure the ones who play bareback get checked a lot more often than people who don't. We've been given oral devices every time we've been to a clinic and advised to use protection when giving oral. No we don't use them and never been asked to but no one seems to think that's a problem. If it's less risky why does it say that it's the most frequent way that sti's are passed on. " Because lots wear condoms!, but indulge in unprotected oral! | |||
| |||
| |||
"As long as you're both checked regularly I'd say it's cool oh come on get real havnt you ever heared about a liar " Our thoughts precisely, see our earlier post. | |||
"It's amazing people's lack of education on STIs!! The HPV virus seems to get alot of news these days because its linked to cervical cancer!! But it comes in lots of different forms plus theres no test for it available, It is very very rare to get an sti form oral sex!! The best thing we can do is educated ourselves on the dangers!! I suppose it's just common knowledge! if you're meeting multiple partners always get checked and use protection!! Sending out false information is not educational you say it is very very rare to get an sti from oral!! this is coped straight from the NHS web site........ Oral sex is the stimulation of the genitals using the mouth and tongue. It is one of the ways that sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are most frequently passed on. Link. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/970.aspx?CategoryID=118 Id say the doctors disagree with you Most medical literature states that it is possible to transmit some STI via oral, but it is much less risky. From my searches on the subject, current evidence is vague about the level of risk. I suspect there are a lot of doctors who would agree it's rare, but there will be some who will interpret current evidence with more caution. More research is probably needed to ascertain how risky oral sex is. Certainly at the sexual health clinic that I attend, I have never been advised to use condoms for oral. How can it be less risky putting a cock in your mouth uncovered is the same as putting it in a pussy uncovered bodily fluids are still entering you. Same for licking a pussy your actually swallowing the juice that comes out. Sex is risky full stop but people like to make a big thing about bareback sex. But I'm sure the ones who play bareback get checked a lot more often than people who don't. We've been given oral devices every time we've been to a clinic and advised to use protection when giving oral. No we don't use them and never been asked to but no one seems to think that's a problem. If it's less risky why does it say that it's the most frequent way that sti's are passed on. " It's less risky because the digestive system, and in particular saliva, destroys some viruses and bacteria before it enters other systems of the body. I didn't say there is no risk, but it is reduced. Current medical evidence evidence is inconclusive as to how the risk compares, but it is generally accepted in medical literature that oral sex is least risky for these reasons, followed by vaginal sex, then anal sex being the riskiest. | |||
"I think there is only one form of bareback swinging that is ok. Nobody plays with anyone for 3 months, gets tested, and only then plays. Same really for meeting a new girlfriend. No bareback unless std free for more than 3 months. Hiv is not for me." HIV is no longer a death sentence, I'd actually be more worried about other debilitating STI'S. we love BB are are extra cautious about who with, so it v rarely happens | |||
"I think there is only one form of bareback swinging that is ok. Nobody plays with anyone for 3 months, gets tested, and only then plays. Same really for meeting a new girlfriend. No bareback unless std free for more than 3 months. Hiv is not for me. HIV is no longer a death sentence, I'd actually be more worried about other debilitating STI'S. we love BB are are extra cautious about who with, so it v rarely happens " While no longer a death sentence it's fair to say the HIV is more than an inconvenience? How do you choose when being extra cautious? | |||
| |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?
I don't think they were confused, the"eh?" was used to question whether you knew what bollocks you were writing!
Flu alone very very rarely kills anyone... flu exascerbating existing illness in the elderly, young or those with compromised immune system makes up the majority of the 12k you referred to!
Then there's smoking and cancer, incidental meeting of someone with cancer will not mean that you "catch" anything.
More importantly, "normal life" because you bareback, you are not protected from the normal life risks. So it's a bit like addition of risk.... normal life risk + bareback risk = increased risk of disease, whether life threatening or not!
Does a disease have to be life threatening for me to attempt to protect myself against it?
Overall you've used some words to attempt to get your point across, if you just reorder some, omit some, use some others and don't quote nonsense facts ... then it's a very informative post!"Flu is given as the cause of death on the death certificate. Are you saying this is incorrect? Please inform the Office for National Statistics. I did not suggest you could catch cancer. But if you smoke you face a far higher risk of premature death from cancer than if you engage in bareback sex. Of course bareback is an additional risk. So is cycling, skiing, trampolining, playing rugby, swimming, bungie jumping, boxing, eating the wrong foods, going to foreign countries, driving a car or motorbike, flying etc etc. Not all those are absolutely necessary to life. So for many BB risk is just another risk undertaken as part of enjoying a full life. | |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?
I don't think they were confused, the"eh?" was used to question whether you knew what bollocks you were writing!
Flu alone very very rarely kills anyone... flu exascerbating existing illness in the elderly, young or those with compromised immune system makes up the majority of the 12k you referred to!
Then there's smoking and cancer, incidental meeting of someone with cancer will not mean that you "catch" anything.
More importantly, "normal life" because you bareback, you are not protected from the normal life risks. So it's a bit like addition of risk.... normal life risk + bareback risk = increased risk of disease, whether life threatening or not!
Does a disease have to be life threatening for me to attempt to protect myself against it?
Overall you've used some words to attempt to get your point across, if you just reorder some, omit some, use some others and don't quote nonsense facts ... then it's a very informative post!
Flu is given as the cause of death on the death certificate. Are you saying this is incorrect? Please inform the Office for National Statistics.
I did not suggest you could catch cancer. But if you smoke you face a far higher risk of premature death from cancer than if you engage in bareback sex.
Of course bareback is an additional risk. So is cycling, skiing, trampolining, playing rugby, swimming, bungie jumping, boxing, eating the wrong foods, going to foreign countries, driving a car or motorbike, flying etc etc. Not all those are absolutely necessary to life. So for many BB risk is just another risk undertaken as part of enjoying a full life. "Very well said | |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging "You are assuming that people who swing are all promiscuous. Some of us do not have multiple partners at the same time. Myself, I have no partners and mainly only do oral so I class myself as safe sex! I always have condoms handy but I don't use them for oral so irrelavent. | |||
| |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?
I don't think they were confused, the"eh?" was used to question whether you knew what bollocks you were writing!
Flu alone very very rarely kills anyone... flu exascerbating existing illness in the elderly, young or those with compromised immune system makes up the majority of the 12k you referred to!
Then there's smoking and cancer, incidental meeting of someone with cancer will not mean that you "catch" anything.
More importantly, "normal life" because you bareback, you are not protected from the normal life risks. So it's a bit like addition of risk.... normal life risk + bareback risk = increased risk of disease, whether life threatening or not!
Does a disease have to be life threatening for me to attempt to protect myself against it?
Overall you've used some words to attempt to get your point across, if you just reorder some, omit some, use some others and don't quote nonsense facts ... then it's a very informative post!
Flu is given as the cause of death on the death certificate. Are you saying this is incorrect? Please inform the Office for National Statistics.
I did not suggest you could catch cancer. But if you smoke you face a far higher risk of premature death from cancer than if you engage in bareback sex.
Of course bareback is an additional risk. So is cycling, skiing, trampolining, playing rugby, swimming, bungie jumping, boxing, eating the wrong foods, going to foreign countries, driving a car or motorbike, flying etc etc. Not all those are absolutely necessary to life. So for many BB risk is just another risk undertaken as part of enjoying a full life.
Very well said "Really? Ok then so assuming those Deaths registered by the ONS where flu is grouped WITH pneumonia are 12000, we next need to look at age as that's a way to remove the 'at risk' group from the stats. So 8000+ of those were 80yrs or over, then using the next age group, 65-79 they account for over 2000.... , 20-64 years reveals just about 700. Where do you think the greatest number of sexually active people would fall?? Then we should look at how we avoid flu! It's nigh on impossible but the majority of us try our best! So let's rule out doing that eh? Your use of statistics is flawed. Then the issues around cancer... your post argued that you're more likely to catch a non sti than an sti.... absolutely true, though statistics, I imagine, I can't be arsed looking so I'll use common sense, would suggest that those engaged in sex with multiple partners are more likely to contract an STI. You brought cancer into your infestion  argument. Which is ridiculous. However there are no statistics I'm aware (again can't be arsed)of which prove the link between let's say cervical cancer and STI's, though studies suggest the link exists.
You go on to use wellbeing activities and general life activities as also being risks. The benefits of cycling,we'll say, far outweigh the risks. Though you would recommend to a cyclist that they wear a helmet so that they can enjoy this beneficial activity while reducing the risk as far as is practicable.
Your original post was nonsense, your follow up was flawed though one thing was outstanding and accurate "of course bareback is an additional risk".... it is and most people try to avoid additional risk.
While I wasn't having a bareback argument earlier, simply pointing out your post was tripe I feel I must make the following point...
There's a load of threads about the NHS and how it's fucked! How much would you reckon that lifetime treatment of one HIV infection costs? £380000.!
While not isolated, in terms of STI, so you may have to research further, the cost to the NHS and wider services from unwanted pregnancy AND STI's between 2013 and 2020 are likely to range between £70-125 billion pounds!
Now.... can you tell me about balancing the increased pleasure derived from bareback against protected sex?
| |||
| |||
"i only bareback with my regular guy - condoms at all other times for both of us " Back in the day that's exactly how we saw it, we had to trust the guy and establish himself as a regular guy before we considered it. She went bareback with one regular quite often | |||
"Yeah if you test positive it's too late but at least you would be able to do something about it"
better than dying from a treatable infection. | |||
| |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?
I don't think they were confused, the"eh?" was used to question whether you knew what bollocks you were writing!
Flu alone very very rarely kills anyone... flu exascerbating existing illness in the elderly, young or those with compromised immune system makes up the majority of the 12k you referred to!
Then there's smoking and cancer, incidental meeting of someone with cancer will not mean that you "catch" anything.
More importantly, "normal life" because you bareback, you are not protected from the normal life risks. So it's a bit like addition of risk.... normal life risk + bareback risk = increased risk of disease, whether life threatening or not!
Does a disease have to be life threatening for me to attempt to protect myself against it?
Overall you've used some words to attempt to get your point across, if you just reorder some, omit some, use some others and don't quote nonsense facts ... then it's a very informative post!
Flu is given as the cause of death on the death certificate. Are you saying this is incorrect? Please inform the Office for National Statistics.
I did not suggest you could catch cancer. But if you smoke you face a far higher risk of premature death from cancer than if you engage in bareback sex.
Of course bareback is an additional risk. So is cycling, skiing, trampolining, playing rugby, swimming, bungie jumping, boxing, eating the wrong foods, going to foreign countries, driving a car or motorbike, flying etc etc. Not all those are absolutely necessary to life. So for many BB risk is just another risk undertaken as part of enjoying a full life.
Very well said Really?
Ok then so assuming those Deaths registered by the ONS where flu is grouped WITH pneumonia are 12000, we next need to look at age as that's a way to remove the 'at risk' group from the stats. So 8000+ of those were 80yrs or over, then using the next age group, 65-79 they account for over 2000.... , 20-64 years reveals just about 700. Where do you think the greatest number of sexually active people would fall??
Then we should look at how we avoid flu! It's nigh on impossible but the majority of us try our best! So let's rule out doing that eh?
Your use of statistics is flawed.
Then the issues around cancer... your post argued that you're more likely to catch a non sti than an sti.... absolutely true, though statistics, I imagine, I can't be arsed looking so I'll use common sense, would suggest that those engaged in sex with multiple partners are more likely to contract an STI. You brought cancer into your infestion argument. Which is ridiculous. However there are no statistics I'm aware (again can't be arsed)of which prove the link between let's say cervical cancer and STI's, though studies suggest the link exists.
You go on to use wellbeing activities and general life activities as also being risks. The benefits of cycling,we'll say, far outweigh the risks. Though you would recommend to a cyclist that they wear a helmet so that they can enjoy this beneficial activity while reducing the risk as far as is practicable.
Your original post was nonsense, your follow up was flawed though one thing was outstanding and accurate "of course bareback is an additional risk".... it is and most people try to avoid additional risk.
While I wasn't having a bareback argument earlier, simply pointing out your post was tripe I feel I must make the following point...
There's a load of threads about the NHS and how it's fucked! How much would you reckon that lifetime treatment of one HIV infection costs? £380000.!
While not isolated, in terms of STI, so you may have to research further, the cost to the NHS and wider services from unwanted pregnancy AND STI's between 2013 and 2020 are likely to range between £70-125 billion pounds!
Now.... can you tell me about balancing the increased pleasure derived from bareback against protected sex?
"Yawn yawn very boring read. Chances that at some point we will all die 100% so why not enjoy it while it lasts, by the way how far up you backside is that stick? Does it need surgical removal yet | |||
| |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?
I don't think they were confused, the"eh?" was used to question whether you knew what bollocks you were writing!
Flu alone very very rarely kills anyone... flu exascerbating existing illness in the elderly, young or those with compromised immune system makes up the majority of the 12k you referred to!
Then there's smoking and cancer, incidental meeting of someone with cancer will not mean that you "catch" anything.
More importantly, "normal life" because you bareback, you are not protected from the normal life risks. So it's a bit like addition of risk.... normal life risk + bareback risk = increased risk of disease, whether life threatening or not!
Does a disease have to be life threatening for me to attempt to protect myself against it?
Overall you've used some words to attempt to get your point across, if you just reorder some, omit some, use some others and don't quote nonsense facts ... then it's a very informative post!
Flu is given as the cause of death on the death certificate. Are you saying this is incorrect? Please inform the Office for National Statistics.
I did not suggest you could catch cancer. But if you smoke you face a far higher risk of premature death from cancer than if you engage in bareback sex.
Of course bareback is an additional risk. So is cycling, skiing, trampolining, playing rugby, swimming, bungie jumping, boxing, eating the wrong foods, going to foreign countries, driving a car or motorbike, flying etc etc. Not all those are absolutely necessary to life. So for many BB risk is just another risk undertaken as part of enjoying a full life.
Very well said Really?
Ok then so assuming those Deaths registered by the ONS where flu is grouped WITH pneumonia are 12000, we next need to look at age as that's a way to remove the 'at risk' group from the stats. So 8000+ of those were 80yrs or over, then using the next age group, 65-79 they account for over 2000.... , 20-64 years reveals just about 700. Where do you think the greatest number of sexually active people would fall??
Then we should look at how we avoid flu! It's nigh on impossible but the majority of us try our best! So let's rule out doing that eh?
Your use of statistics is flawed.
Then the issues around cancer... your post argued that you're more likely to catch a non sti than an sti.... absolutely true, though statistics, I imagine, I can't be arsed looking so I'll use common sense, would suggest that those engaged in sex with multiple partners are more likely to contract an STI. You brought cancer into your infestion argument. Which is ridiculous. However there are no statistics I'm aware (again can't be arsed)of which prove the link between let's say cervical cancer and STI's, though studies suggest the link exists.
You go on to use wellbeing activities and general life activities as also being risks. The benefits of cycling,we'll say, far outweigh the risks. Though you would recommend to a cyclist that they wear a helmet so that they can enjoy this beneficial activity while reducing the risk as far as is practicable.
Your original post was nonsense, your follow up was flawed though one thing was outstanding and accurate "of course bareback is an additional risk".... it is and most people try to avoid additional risk.
While I wasn't having a bareback argument earlier, simply pointing out your post was tripe I feel I must make the following point...
There's a load of threads about the NHS and how it's fucked! How much would you reckon that lifetime treatment of one HIV infection costs? £380000.!
While not isolated, in terms of STI, so you may have to research further, the cost to the NHS and wider services from unwanted pregnancy AND STI's between 2013 and 2020 are likely to range between £70-125 billion pounds!
Now.... can you tell me about balancing the increased pleasure derived from bareback against protected sex?
Yawn yawn very boring read. Chances that at some point we will all die 100% so why not enjoy it while it lasts, by the way how far up you backside is that stick? Does it need surgical removal yet"You mean you haven't a clue how to answer? Just to be clear.... it's not chances are ... it's we will all die at some point! Statistics are quite boring I agree, initially I didn't quote them! | |||
"Yes. If they want. It is far more natural than condoms. You are far less likely to meet someone with a life threatening STI doing bareback than you are a life threatening non-STI going about your normal life.
Eh?
Confused?
Many Non-STI infestions are easier to catch, far more wide spread among the general population and kill far more people each year than STIs.
The only life threatening STI, assuming you are treated, is AIDS and those people with it who are on medication now have the same life expectancy as ordinary folk.
Flu alone kills 12,000 per annum in the UK and for smokers cancer in all its forms is the cause of death in 1 in 5 cases. Non-STI diseases. OK?
I don't think they were confused, the"eh?" was used to question whether you knew what bollocks you were writing!
Flu alone very very rarely kills anyone... flu exascerbating existing illness in the elderly, young or those with compromised immune system makes up the majority of the 12k you referred to!
Then there's smoking and cancer, incidental meeting of someone with cancer will not mean that you "catch" anything.
More importantly, "normal life" because you bareback, you are not protected from the normal life risks. So it's a bit like addition of risk.... normal life risk + bareback risk = increased risk of disease, whether life threatening or not!
Does a disease have to be life threatening for me to attempt to protect myself against it?
Overall you've used some words to attempt to get your point across, if you just reorder some, omit some, use some others and don't quote nonsense facts ... then it's a very informative post!
Flu is given as the cause of death on the death certificate. Are you saying this is incorrect? Please inform the Office for National Statistics.
I did not suggest you could catch cancer. But if you smoke you face a far higher risk of premature death from cancer than if you engage in bareback sex.
Of course bareback is an additional risk. So is cycling, skiing, trampolining, playing rugby, swimming, bungie jumping, boxing, eating the wrong foods, going to foreign countries, driving a car or motorbike, flying etc etc. Not all those are absolutely necessary to life. So for many BB risk is just another risk undertaken as part of enjoying a full life.
Very well said Really?
Ok then so assuming those Deaths registered by the ONS where flu is grouped WITH pneumonia are 12000, we next need to look at age as that's a way to remove the 'at risk' group from the stats. So 8000+ of those were 80yrs or over, then using the next age group, 65-79 they account for over 2000.... , 20-64 years reveals just about 700. Where do you think the greatest number of sexually active people would fall??
Then we should look at how we avoid flu! It's nigh on impossible but the majority of us try our best! So let's rule out doing that eh?
Your use of statistics is flawed.
Then the issues around cancer... your post argued that you're more likely to catch a non sti than an sti.... absolutely true, though statistics, I imagine, I can't be arsed looking so I'll use common sense, would suggest that those engaged in sex with multiple partners are more likely to contract an STI. You brought cancer into your infestion argument. Which is ridiculous. However there are no statistics I'm aware (again can't be arsed)of which prove the link between let's say cervical cancer and STI's, though studies suggest the link exists.
You go on to use wellbeing activities and general life activities as also being risks. The benefits of cycling,we'll say, far outweigh the risks. Though you would recommend to a cyclist that they wear a helmet so that they can enjoy this beneficial activity while reducing the risk as far as is practicable.
Your original post was nonsense, your follow up was flawed though one thing was outstanding and accurate "of course bareback is an additional risk".... it is and most people try to avoid additional risk.
While I wasn't having a bareback argument earlier, simply pointing out your post was tripe I feel I must make the following point...
There's a load of threads about the NHS and how it's fucked! How much would you reckon that lifetime treatment of one HIV infection costs? £380000.!
While not isolated, in terms of STI, so you may have to research further, the cost to the NHS and wider services from unwanted pregnancy AND STI's between 2013 and 2020 are likely to range between £70-125 billion pounds!
Now.... can you tell me about balancing the increased pleasure derived from bareback against protected sex?
Yawn yawn very boring read. Chances that at some point we will all die 100% so why not enjoy it while it lasts, by the way how far up you backside is that stick? Does it need surgical removal yet"And because my actions may produce an unnecessary burden on others! | |||
| |||
| |||
"I only bareback with people that look clean "Surely that's enough ??? | |||
"I only bareback with people that look clean
Surely that's enough ???"Yes , I live by a motto If bareback is wrong , I don't ever want to be right | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Something to think about. Every time you get behind the wheel. You are in danger. Propaganda. Scare tactics. Monkeys. Goats. Doctors tell me I'm going to get cancer because I smoke. We all have it. Just the trigger is needed" You know better than this don't you?! | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Yes if your willing to live with the consequences of what your doing" And the. Consequences of cost to the NHS! | |||
| |||
| |||
"A forum search could've saved you the thread too OP. I think someone maybe did one on this subject before." Really!?!?
But what's your opinion Georgie? | |||
"A forum search could've saved you the thread too OP. I think someone maybe did one on this subject before. Really!?!?
But what's your opinion Georgie? "I believe that folks on here are responsible for themselves. If you have any doubts about a prospective partner, then you gotta play safe! If you know and trust your partner then that's all good too. Folks can decide for themselves like the conscientious people that they no doubt are. What's the chances that those words haven't been said before by someone? Probably almost exact! | |||
| |||
"A forum search could've saved you the thread too OP. I think someone maybe did one on this subject before. Really!?!?
But what's your opinion Georgie?
I believe that folks on here are responsible for themselves. If you have any doubts about a prospective partner, then you gotta play safe!
If you know and trust your partner then that's all good too. Folks can decide for themselves like the conscientious people that they no doubt are.
What's the chances that those words haven't been said before by someone? Probably almost exact! " | |||
"A forum search could've saved you the thread too OP. I think someone maybe did one on this subject before. Really!?!?
But what's your opinion Georgie?
I believe that folks on here are responsible for themselves. If you have any doubts about a prospective partner, then you gotta play safe!
If you know and trust your partner then that's all good too. Folks can decide for themselves like the conscientious people that they no doubt are.
What's the chances that those words haven't been said before by someone? Probably almost exact! "Haha - yes dear  | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Is it wrong to think of trying bearback sex due to never trying it I've always played it safe?" Only if the person is not a swinger | |||
"Is it wrong to think of trying bearback sex due to never trying it I've always played it safe? Only if the person is not a swinger " Because only swingers are capable of contracting STD's? This reply baffled me to be honest. | |||
"Is it wrong to think of trying bearback sex due to never trying it I've always played it safe? Only if the person is not a swinger Because only swingers are capable of contracting STD's? This reply baffled me to be honest. " I like to reply with non sense when the bare back topic comes up.... please take it with a grain of salt | |||
"Is it wrong to think of trying bearback sex due to never trying it I've always played it safe? Only if the person is not a swinger Because only swingers are capable of contracting STD's? This reply baffled me to be honest. " The probable truth is real swingers tend to get tested regularly so show up on statistics as more likely to have a STI. The promiscuous 17 year old girl who fucks half her college and never gets tested but passes STIs on to everyone else is not counted. I believe for real swingers the greatest risk of infection lies with the casual swinger who trusts condoms and/or lack of symptoms implicitly and consequently never gets tested because, after all, only those stupid enough to play bareback are at risk.  | |||
| |||
"Is it wrong to think of trying bearback sex due to never trying it I've always played it safe? Only if the person is not a swinger Because only swingers are capable of contracting STD's? This reply baffled me to be honest. I like to reply with non sense when the bare back topic comes up.... please take it with a grain of salt " Tbh we stopped bareback when she had a scare after sleeping with a black guy. 9 months later I'm not sure how I'd of explained that one lol | |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging "If it's what you're into, then it's right for you. We don't give a shit what anyone else thinks! | |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging "No Have you seen the number one hot pic Heaving | |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging
No
Have you seen the number one hot pic
Heaving "It's a matter of choice and we think it's a great pic | |||
| |||
"Is bareback ever right for swinging
No
Have you seen the number one hot pic
Heaving "(Mrs) I think it looks like she has a pair of balls but I think the cum is horny | |||
| |||
