FabSwingers.com mobile

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Swingers Chat

is bareback ever right

Jump to newest
 

By *ennythelion OP   Man
over a year ago

Derby

Is bareback ever right for swinging

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Of course!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod

over a year ago

East Sussex

If the people involved agree, yes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If all parties give consent then I don't see why it is wrong

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Adults own their body and ability to consent, so absolutely!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he Queen of TartsWoman
Forum Mod

over a year ago

My Own Little World

For me? No

For others, well it is entirely their choice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

russian roulette.

my answer is yes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *-angel-XWoman
over a year ago

hell

No not for me

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackDMissMorganCouple
over a year ago

Halifax

Its not something we would do with others,but people are adults and can make their own minds up.

Miss

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

if you think about it the most highly transmittable STIs condoms don't protect against them anyway.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *amissCouple
over a year ago

chelmsford


"Is bareback ever right for swinging "

Not for us, personally, but of course it's right for some. Their choice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod

over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

Good god no..... people who do will lined up and shot for their depravity and recklessness

They need shamed on the forums, shamed....

Of course the shamers, might do it but it's a better position being the holier than thous

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *exysuzi and Mr.SCouple
over a year ago

CONISTON .Stoke Suburbia. Staffs. BARMOUTH. The Lakes (Monthly)

Not something we would do personally. Of course we do bareback with each other, but with others, put a jonny on it. Xxxx Suzi

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not for us. Ever.

That said, what consenting adults agree to in this game we call swinging is a matter of personal choice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ornytradesman123Man
over a year ago

southport

It's all about personal choice , bareback is much better but I wouldn't just do it with anyone

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ornytradesman123Man
over a year ago

southport

It's all about personal choice , bareback is much better but I wouldn't just do it with anyone

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iscean MaleMan
over a year ago

Darlaston

Totally wrong (but I suppose in all walks of life) if you are aware you have and sti and have un protected sex without informing the other person.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eavenscentitCouple
over a year ago

barnstaple

Yes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lorious hole bs16Man
over a year ago

Bristol

Of course...as already said with consent..

Now can we finally put this to bed

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *al2001Man
over a year ago

kildare

Yes. Or the human race would die out

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *Devil77Man
over a year ago

West Midlands


"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. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

For me and my other half it is..that's why I got my contraceptive so we don't have to use condoms!

X

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Morality is subjective.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes but only with selected ! personally comes into it too for me ultra clean as I expect the same hygiene ! All adults hear!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Only when your in a relationship with someone

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yup it is here

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *addysdadCouple
over a year ago

southern Cumbria

it is for us.!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes, if borh paryies agree

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *onnie and JohnCouple
over a year ago

andover

personally for us NO way. lov this type of thread

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *vpamelaTV/TS
over a year ago

kinkville

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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

....NO! play safe always....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's not for me, but if all parties involved have consented and understand the risks then no, I wouldn't say it was wrong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adysueandneroCouple
over a year ago

witney


"Is bareback ever right for swinging "

Are you from Sydney University?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *reygorCouple
over a year ago

birmingham

ha many on here will suck cock no protection but want a condom to fuck .so mybe for some its not about the stds [coz you can get them orally] its about not getting preggy j

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otgirl32Woman
over a year ago

Ashton Under Lyne

It's a choice and YES it is right in swinging if you make the choice. For me BB sex is a definite yes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When appropriate....of course it is.

Randomly in a club etc....that's a no no!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *reakbedsnotheartsMan
over a year ago

bedford

bit risky

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is bareback ever right for swinging "

Depends how many babies you want

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ed LipstickWoman
over a year ago

Fucksville

For me it's a definitive no but each to their own x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *unknSoulCouple
over a year ago

dumfries-ish

No err yes no yesssss. Not sure. But each to there own just saying

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Each to their own but it's not something I chose to partake in.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emplarWarriorMan
over a year ago

Nottingham

Pretty sure the human race would twiddle pretty quick if it wasnt for BB sex

Id say it has it plus sides.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky-MinxWoman
over a year ago

Grantham


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not for us but each to there own miss x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

well i would never know what bareback like due to not trying it because I've always be safe

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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 "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes it is, just spin the russian roulette, the house alwais wins

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lwaysup4it69Couple
over a year ago

Kirkby in Ashfield

Good to see no hate comments on this thread.

We only play BB we know the risks

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

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!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Isn't getting checked regularly paramount to closing the stable door after the Horse has bolted?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lwaysup4it69Couple
over a year ago

Kirkby in Ashfield


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *onny MCMan
over a year ago

Crawley

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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *osieWoman
over a year ago

Wembley


"russian roulette.

my answer is yes. "

Damn; someone got in before me

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"russian roulette.

my answer is yes.

Damn; someone got in before me "

i got in before shag did also. am feeling proud.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod

over a year ago

East Sussex


"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?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *haneleviMan
over a year ago

Kidderminster

As long as you're both checked regularly I'd say it's cool

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

i only bareback with my regular guy - condoms at all other times for both of us

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *osieWoman
over a year ago

Wembley


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod

over a year ago

East Sussex


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We always play safe and would never meet anyone who is into it, but at the end of the day it's their choice,

Having said that we were friends with a couple who said they always played safe, and one day ( after meeting them over a two year period ) he turned around and suggested we may want to get checked, as he had been playing away at a gang bang where he had played Bareback and had contracted something.

fortunately we always get regular checks and we were clear, but wonder how many other unsuspecting couples they had played with. Hmmmm

more so when they were regulars of a club.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ixedblkinjectionMan
over a year ago

london

It's right for whoever wants to do it...if you don't: condoms!: really is that simple

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Depends what if women gets pregnant and does not realise it.

Is it the innocent baby that should die because of a night of passion? Yes it's the women's body but it is also the baby Aswell.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *raceytvcdTV/TS
over a year ago

mansfield


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *raceytvcdTV/TS
over a year ago

mansfield


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ateshead dudeMan
over a year ago

durham


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *urexIronBarMan
over a year ago

South Manchester


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *urexIronBarMan
over a year ago

South Manchester


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inful pairCouple
over a year ago

Montrose

Yes feels much nicer x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There's is no right or wrong as long as it's consentual. The question should be is it advisable or non-advisable. Then you do a risk assessment. As with all aspects of life different people will accept different levels of risk. But sex with a condom carries a risk as condoms break. But sex with a condom is a risk that swingers will usually accept, otherwise swinging is kinda difficult. 2 people who are tested clean and trust each, I would say is not an unreasonable risk. Would that be less risky in vanilla life? Do people not ever have casual sex in vanilla life? I don't care to distinguish between vanilla and swinging. I would rather make an individual judgement on a situation.

Mrs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is shooting yourself in the head always right.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inful pairCouple
over a year ago

Montrose


"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. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 14/01/17 07:09:51]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"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!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"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!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's right for some but not me. The risk is too great. If you're not scared of contracting HIV then fill your boots lol.

If I sleep with 5 women bareback who have slept with 5 other men bareback who have slept with 5 other women bareback who have slept with 5 other men bareback........... I could go on and in but I'm sure you get my drift.

There are people on this site from countries where the HIV rate is VERY high (google this and you will see what I mean).

Anyways I'm not meaning to pour scorn on anyone's swinging preference - just providing a little food for thought.

Is it worth the risk ???

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rMrs CumalotCouple
over a year ago

East Mids

With partners (relationship) yes after time

Swinging!! Never!!!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *exatooCouple
over a year ago

Bournemouth/ Fuerteventura


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"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?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irty-milfCouple
over a year ago

edinburgh

We play bareback. It us our decision. Our choice and of course that stands for the people we play with.

Of course we accept and respect that others have a different _iew on this topic.

Thankfully however we live in a place and at a time in history where people are allowed different opinions and others cannot force their opinion on us. And vice versa.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lwaysup4it69Couple
over a year ago

Kirkby in Ashfield


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What on earth is all this crap with loads of people saying it is alright if you are regularly tested!

If you are regularly being tested it is simply to bloody late - if test is positive you will already have it!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"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?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yeah if you test positive it's too late but at least you would be able to do something about it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ryus1908Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

If all parties agree

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lwaysup4it69Couple
over a year ago

Kirkby in Ashfield


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uckslut and MCouple
over a year ago

Poole

Yes! Bear back with my partner. I love a full on, greedy girl meet only to be finished off by a big cream pie bare back. reminds me how good I've been.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"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!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"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!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's soo dirty in swinging but such a turn on

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I only bareback with people that look clean

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"I only bareback with people that look clean "

Surely that's enough ???

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes it's the best way

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *appyplastererMan
over a year ago

birmingham

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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I caught TRICONOMOS from my husband EX now.... can be passed on through condom and men don't get the warning signs ... watch out you men

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"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?!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 15/01/17 09:16:52]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Never, completely 100% irresponsible

Why would you want to put both your health and sexual health in danger ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes if your willing to live with the consequences of what your doing

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I am barebacking tonight with a couple

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ommenhimCouple
over a year ago

wigan


"Yes if your willing to live with the consequences of what your doing"

And the. Consequences of cost to the NHS!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anky_PankyWoman
over a year ago

Filthy Fuckeryville

It's a choice - you do what you want.

I play safe - that's my choice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

A forum search could've saved you the thread too OP. I think someone maybe did one on this subject before.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anky_PankyWoman
over a year ago

Filthy Fuckeryville


"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?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aughtyHOTWifeCouple
over a year ago

Near Bath

Yes, We don't play often but when we do we discuss before hand weather Tina will play bareback, but ultimately its her decision if she allows a guy shoot his load inside her, I trust her judgment and would stand by her decision what ever the result of a 'regular' test.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iss.HoneyWoman
over a year ago

...


"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! "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anky_PankyWoman
over a year ago

Filthy Fuckeryville


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

As a couple for 28 years, we have never used condoms, but when we swing, no condom = no sex

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

As a couple for 28 years, we have never used condoms, but when we swing, no condom = no sex.

I admit it took me a long time to get used to wearing one, after so many years of not having to, but now it's just how it is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *unknSoulCouple
over a year ago

dumfries-ish

Bare back is always right..... But you need condoms when required

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Once had a meet end rather abruptly when she said " oh you don't look like you've got any diseases, you don't have to use a condom" My horn fizzled out in about 3 seconds.

Unless you're 1000% sure please play safe ladies & gents

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is it wrong to think of trying bearback sex due to never trying it I've always played it safe?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

With eachother yes , with anyone else we choose to always use condoms. As with any other aspect of swinging it comes down to personal choice, mutual consent and preference.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adysueandneroCouple
over a year ago

witney


"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!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ndigo40Woman
over a year ago

secret town


"Is bareback ever right for swinging "

No

Have you seen the number one hot pic

Heaving

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lwaysup4it69Couple
over a year ago

Kirkby in Ashfield


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lik and PaulCouple
over a year ago

cahoots

Only with each other

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *exatooCouple
over a year ago

Bournemouth/ Fuerteventura


"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

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes with a select few.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top