Bareback {no condom} sex article

PlayfulAlex said:

And you know this (with certainty) how...? I can't believe you even said this...but I see I'm not alone! I wonder how many of you think that you're the ONLY ONE!


Anyway, reading this thread is exhausting...I'm glad I have better things to do with my day...ttfn

Click to expand...

Well, sherlock, if you've ever watched any of the Sherlock Holmes films, you might realize that some people have excellent skills
at determining what's going on in the world and with other people, while others have NO CLUE about the sexual practices of their
sexual partners.

But as i can see you're here just to cherry pick and criticize - hit and run - rather than get discuss or acknowledge the overall point,
have a good life.

PlayfulAlex said:

Au contraire, sir (the real Sherlock), my posting history would indicate that I do enjoy engaging in the conversations and, yes, to some degree, we all cherry pick...that's one of the great things about this site.

However when posts become super long-winded, like almost 1000 words in some cases, I have this thing to do call leading my life, so I just can't find the time to engage those opinions...no offence meant, none taken...and yes, I have a great life, thank you...but I do like checking in on the perb community when I have a few minutes!

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Although by "here" i was not referring to your "posting history" but this thread. And by "overall point" i was not speaking
of "1000 word" articles but the brief comment that you cherry picked from.

JennyBear said:

i don't like pro bbfs people... usually these are the type that will pester you non stop to do it with them.. or if they can't take no for an answer force it on them or sneakily tear the condoms or not put them on right so they "slip off" when your in doggy style... or just removed them and have sex with you anyway when your not looking

Click to expand...

Sorry to hear your experiences have not been pleasant. I assume you are an SP. The things you pointed out are, of course, all wrong ways
for a client interested in BB services to go about seeking it.

What i recommend is a safe or safer bareback sex {SBBFS) which may include such things as the following, for a few examples:

1. Both parties recently STD tested, negative on all tests, sharing the results with each other

2. The guy does not finish inside the SP

3. One or both are fixed as far as making babies is concerned, or at least she's on the pill

4. Seeing a low mileage SP, one with few (or no other) customers

5. Seeing an SP/client who shows evidence that he/she does BBFS with few (if any others) besides you

6. Being circumcised, which may reduce risk for HIV by up to 70%, compared to condoms at about 85%

7. Don't partake in very high risk areas like the drug addicted IDU low track in Vancouver

This is not a complete list. I'm sure some of us can think of others.

I am responding to the following comments on BBFS from another thread discussing pregnancy,
since the comments appeared off topic there & more suited to this thread about BBFS.

Pillowtalk said:

And why would you decide using Thailand and PI sps as examples of sps who `trick` clients into getting them pregnant, when you among many others, are there to coerce them into having bbfs with them?

Click to expand...

I can`t speak for other "clients", but i take exception to the accusation that i "coerce"
ladies into having BBFS with me. What i do is inquire if it`s on their menu. If it`s not,
then it doesn`t happen. In some cases it`s only on the menu under one or more of
the following conditions:

(1) an extra fee
(2) if coitus interrupus is promised (the girls i associate with knowing i am a master at this)
(3) they are told about my negative STI results or see the papers.

PT, as i see it your use of "coercion" here is not much less inappropriate as when accusing
another member of "forcing" his SO into sex acts:

My favorite pooner in the world—who`s yours?
https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...—who-s-yours&p=1271626&viewfull=1#post1271626

to compel by force, intimidation, or authority, especially without regard for individual desire or volition: They coerced him into signing the document.
2. to bring about through the use of force or other forms of compulsion; exact: to coerce obedience.
3. to dominate or control, especially by exploiting fear, anxiety, etc.: The state is based on successfully coercing the individual.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coerce

Coercion ( /koʊˈɜrʃən/) is the practice of forcing another party to behave in an involuntary manner (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats or intimidation or some other form of pressure or force. In law, coercion is codified as the duress crime. Such actions are used as leverage, to force the victim to act in the desired way. Coercion may involve the actual infliction of physical pain/injury or psychological harm in order to enhance the credibility of a threat. The threat of further harm may lead to the cooperation or obedience of the person being coerced. Torture is one of the most extreme examples of coercion i.e. severe pain is inflicted until the victim provides the desired information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion

Click to expand...

Moreover, BTW, since i am circumcised i have the invisible `circumcision condom` on me
24/7/365, granting me "protected sex" (as you call it) against HIV & STIs. So, since the
vast majority of pooners are not circumcised, especially those of the non Muslim world,
i have that advantage over most who use latex for CFS. Additionally i practice other
safe sex methods that those who engage in both BBFS & CFS seldom do, such as HIV
and STI testing of my partners.

Pillowtalk said:

And why in your own little delusional world would you try to prove to anyone that the acronym as defined on an escort review site is an appropriate term for use when referring to unprotected sex between a BF and GF, or husband and wife, or anything other than, yes that`s right, an ESCORT and CLIENT, who are pretty much the ONLY sexual encounters that are being described on an escort review site.

Click to expand...

I prefer the acronyn BBFS here for general usage because:

(1) it is briefer than typing out `bareback vaginal or anal genital insertive/receptive intercourse` everytime.

(2) it is both clearer & briefer than other options like your "unprotected sex" which is ambiguous since it could be speaking of other things besides BBFS, e.g. DATY, BBBJ.

(3) Moreover BBFS should not be contrasted with "protected sex" since BBFS may also be "protected" sex in various ways & degrees, some of which i`ve mentioned in this post & others in this thread.

(4) If by "protected sex" you mean sex with a condom or condom sex, why not just say so, rather than promoting the self hypnotizing delusion that people are "protected" when they use a condom, as if nothing could go wrong. Condom sex is not "safe sex", but "safer sex" relative to unsafe BBFS. OTOH safe BBFS, or SBBFS, can be even safer than CFS, whether it involves a sex worker or not.

(5) If you know what CFS means, then you should have no trouble understanding what BBFS means, whether i apply it to P4P, SO`s, FWB, monkeys, tomcats or poodles doing it doggysytle (as distinct from leg or pillow humping).

Pillowtalk said:

FULL SERVICE is a sex worker/client term, not a husband/wife term. If it was, how long would it take anyone`s SO to get fed up and walk out if they were always being asked to have BBFS with their SO.

Click to expand...

Then stick with saying to your SO, "Honey, lets have bareback vaginal or anal genital insertive/receptive intercourse". Personally, i`d prefer to say nothing, make out & stick it in. Do you think i say to P4P gals, "can we have BBFS now"?

Pillowtalk said:

And lenny, for the final time, people do not engage in BBFS with SOs. FS is something that ONLY occurs between sex workers and clients. PEOPLE have unprotected sex with SOs.

Click to expand...

Besides the reasons given above why i think BBFS is appropiate for general use,
IMO the following sources do not confine it to the P4P (client/SP) business "ONLY":

FS = Full Service = Intercourse

Bareback = sex without a condom
BBBJ = Bare Back Blow Job = Blow Job without condom
BB - 1.) Without covering

BBFS = bare back sex

Click to expand...

https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?53-Some-Common-Abbreviations

"An acronym for Bareback Full Service. A term generally used within online escort/prostitution communities to refer to unprotected (condomless) vaginal sex with a prostitute. The term also encompasses unprotected anal sex, and is sometimes used to describe non-prostitute (civilian) sexual encounters as well. Considered the holy grail by some Johns(customers), and frowned upon (at least publicy) by others. Most mongers (another word for John) are guilty of bbfs
at least several times in their lives."

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bbfs

The following quote is from a forum that concerns both P4P (pay for play) & non paid sex.
Nothing is stated about BBFS only being applicable to P4P.

"BBFS Bare Back Full Service (sex)"
"CFS Covered Full Service (sex with condom) "

Click to expand...

http://www.internationalsexguide.info/forum/custompages.php?pageid=custompages_abbreviations

Pillowtalk said:

SPs and clients are PEOPLE and are likely to have unprotected sex with their SOs, and no one should feel guilty or less safe because of that. What we should be doing is having protected sex and protected oral sex with strangers, with FWBs, with all casual encounters, and with clients/sex workers. And what we should stop doing it trying to justify and rationalize doing anything other than protected sex with anyone other than SOs.

Click to expand...

And there you have it, boys; the sex gospel according to PT. Enjoy your "unprotected sex" with your SO & feelings of not being "less safe" doing that, PT/SP`s. I`ll pray there`s no cheating or FS condom failures & regular STI testing.

BTW, for my next trip to Thailand the plan is to take one lady only for SBBFS monogamy (hopefully she won`t cheat on me) & as many other SP`s as i like doing other things besides BBFS. I probably won`t be having as many sex sessions or partners as SP`s do, and considering i am also abstinent half the year, that would probably mean that i`d be having safer sex per year than a PT or other SP with an SO they are doing BBFS with. Of course my SBBFS lady will be tested for STI`s once or twice a month & i may consider at least some tests for another regular or two.

P.S. The Health Nurse`s comment from the BBFS thread:

https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...to-BBFS-WTF!&p=1269167&viewfull=1#post1269167

For guys who are engaging in BBFS, you should do so safely & monogamously, not with ladies or SP's who are advertising it or doing it with many people, because that makes it far more dangerous.

But if you are clean & have BB vaginal sex with a woman who has just tested negative for STIs & HIV using (1) antibody and (2) NAT and/or p24 antigen, your chances of HIV infection are very low.

"In 2009 blood screened for HIV in Greater Accra, Ghana amounted to 33, 294 units of blood, of which 3. 68 percent was found to be HIV positive. 45 Ghana tests 100 percent of its blood donations, however this is done using only antibody tests. Therefore the window period remains a significant interval, which suggests some units may continue to pass through screening undetected.

"In October 2005, South Africa introduced NAT testing and as a result there were no cases of HIV transmission by blood transfusion reported to the haemovigilance programme, a transfusion surveillance system. 46 47

"The availability of nucleic acid tests (NAT) , which reduces the window period and makes testing much more accurate, helped to support the argument for a change in the ban against MSM donating. These tests have been found to almost eliminate the possibility that HIV infected blood will pass through the testing stage, even in countries with high prevalence. 33"

"If a person receives a blood transfusion with HIV-infected blood, there is a 95 percent risk they will become infected with the virus. 4 However the chances of becoming infected with HIV through a blood transfusion varies between countries depending on the level of safety precautions in place, and there is a notable difference between high and low-income countries. In the UK, the risk is now 1 in 5 million. 5"

http://www.avert.org/blood-safety-hiv.htm

One in 5 million. This gives some idea of the HIV risk in having one act of bareback sex with an individual (aged 17 to 65) who has just had this NAT test & donated blood. Note also that recieving HIV in blood from a donor will almost surely infect you (95 percent of the time, as stated) , whereas one act of BB vaginal sex with an infected lady is unlikely to cause you harm (maybe 1 in 2000 chance of getting HIV). Which means the risk level for vaginal BBFS with a random blood donor in the UK would be more like 1 in 5 million X 1900 = 1 in 9,750,000,000, or 1 in about 10 billion. I'd expect much the same would apply in Canada.

What a silly comment, blazejowski.

It does not take genius or Sherlock Holmes brilliance to comprehend a remark on the level of average intelligence or teenage sex ed.

Although many online posters need to hear that kind of thing, since they fail to compehend the basics, like the difference between BBBJ & BBFS, or think BBFS is like Russian Roulette or a death sentence.

Considering the body of evidence i've posted via hundreds of words re SBBFS & SBBFS monogamy, that no one has refuted it, that the principles are in harmony with very highly regarded safe sex advocates, and that the Health Nurse did not disagree, you could have come up with a more objective comment.

Maybe you'ld like to try for more than 3 words next time.