Warning: Another Bareback Full Service Ad!

[Sexismyreligion]

I am not sure if this is the right section to post this warning. I just found out this ad on ers:

778-***-9408
BBFS (+ $40)

I wonder if erslist allows such kind of ads on the website. Greek was also +$40 which sounds to me that HIV was definitely on the menu, although it was not advertised!

My main concern is advertising of BBFS on erslist. I think a popular website such as erslist should not permit such kind of ads to be posted.

 

[bcdefg]

Why a warning?

Everybody can read, but by posting a warning you only draw more attention to it.

My 2 cents.

 

[lenny]

Call her up & show her the error of her ways. I doubt she`ll see your post here.
Or refer her to something like this:

https://perb.cc/vbulletin/archive/index.php/t-8431.html

 

[BIGOZZIE]

I''ve picked up babes in bars and never gave second thought to not riding bareback, if they''re not a drug user they''re ok, it's drug users you have to watch for, unless you''re gay then it's everyone
P

 

[Georgieboy69]

I''ve picked up babes in bars and never gave second thought to not riding bareback, if they''re not a drug user they''re ok, it's drug users you have to watch for, unless you''re gay then it's everyone
P

Wow does someone ever need an education!!!

 

[Sexismyreligion]

Why a warning?

Everybody can read, but by posting a warning you only draw more attention to it.

My 2 cents.

The warning was about what erslist has done. I think a popular website such as erslist should not permit such kind of ads to be posted.

 

[jesuschrist]

The warning was about what erslist has done. I think a popular website such as erslist should not permit such kind of ads to be posted.

Maybe they're not serious and it's just a sales leader.

 

[Sexismyreligion]

Maybe they're not serious and it's just a sales leader.

I am pretty sure they are not serious. I think Perb members should ask erslist to not permit posting of these ads.

 

[vancity_cowboy]

I''ve picked up babes in bars and never gave second thought to not riding bareback, if they''re not a drug user they''re ok, it's drug users you have to watch for, unless you''re gay then it's everyone
P

Wow does someone ever need an education!!!

ahhh... education... yes, and here are some facts quoted by health canada...

According to Summary: Estimates of HIV Prevalence and Incidence in Canada, 2008, men who have sex with men continue to be the group most affected by HIV/AIDS in Canada. Estimates were classified according to the following exposure categories for new infections:
•44% were men who have sex with men;
•17% were people who use injection drugs;
•3% were men who have sex with men and use injection drugs;
•36% were heterosexuals.

taken from an article here:

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/iyh-vsv/diseases-maladies/hiv-vih-eng.php

so bigozzie, you're 'sorta' right, in that the risk of exposure is definitely lower if you eliminate homosexual men and needle users from your diet, but you're not completely safe in that 36% of HIV/AIDS carriers in Canada are heterosexual

this is the first reputable site that I've seen that dared to break the statistics down in the manner that they did (must be the conservative influence, lol)

 

[TML4EVER]

Why a warning?

Everybody can read, but by posting a warning you only draw more attention to it.

My 2 cents.

My 2 cents - Not all of their ads offer bbfs, so someone (not everyone) may go there unaware of this.
Things can happen fast in the heat of the moment.
With all the bait n switch..who knows which of the girls are actually offering bbfs.
Some will see it as a warning..while others won't.
If she really likes you, is she just going to hop right on before you could say no?
Personally, now that i'm aware of the ad, i wont be calling that number.

 

[Sexismyreligion]

And I think people like you should go back under the rock you're currently living under, and let the adults make their own adult decisions, for themselves.

Sure. Adults can definitely make their own adult decisions, but as long as the consequences are just for themselves. BBFS is considered as a high-risk action which can rapidly spread HIV and other STDs; and so it has the potential of affecting "many people". It is like driving, every one should obey the traffic rules to make the streets safe for everyone.

And so: No posts should be permitted to advertise BBFS!

 

[lenny]

Sure. Adults can definitely make their own adult decisions, but as long as the consequences are just for themselves. BBFS is considered as a high-risk action which can rapidly spread HIV and other STDs; and so it has the potential of affecting "many people". It is like driving, every one should obey the traffic rules to make the streets safe for everyone.

And so: No posts should be permitted to advertise BBFS!

The hole in that is if she wants to do it or advertize it, how is censoring her ad on erslist going to stop it?

A lady can still advertize it by word of mouth when guys phone/email to inquire about her services.

She can also advertize it in person to clients who see her.

But by advertizing it publicly she saves those looking for it the trouble of asking her & possibly many others.

She may be saving a number of ladies who don't offer BBFS indiscriminately, or at all, the bother of having to answer callers requesting said service.

As regards covered Greek, it is about as risky re HIV as BBFS, so why don't you protest against the many ads for that as well?

Moreover these aren't the only services that have the "potential of affecting many people" with STIs.

 

[Vancityads]

This is something we do not allow on VCA. Any ads with BBFS are either edited or removed. This is something that all pooners need to stay away from. Having protect sex should always be your practice, It only takes one Gal and your life will change forever.

Also on another note verification cannot be paid for on VCA as seen on other sites lately and you can not pay to spam

VCA is committed to keeping advertising for SP's free to keep the cost of pooning down

Cheers

Van W

 

[Pillowtalk]

It's an asian micro, with low rates, high turnover, an older sp out of Asia, where it is a 50/50 chance she does it on a regular basis at home. Considering sex workers in China high rate of HIV and syphillis, etc, what are the chances she doesn't have an untreated std with this also being advertised?

Just common sense, she isn't a m4m, she isn't an IV drug user probably, but she (going on the assumption the ad is only for one person, as opposed to B&S) is definitely in the category of high risk heterosexual category.

It's unlikely that she doesn't have an std, in other words. Could be a treatable one, but the chance she has ever even been tested is slim to none. Micro owners are not motivated to provide a tested sp, when they are probably telling the women they can't get anything anyway. Give them a multi vitamin and tell them they are safe from catching anything.





http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19323011

The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence and risk factors for syphilis infection among female sex workers (FSWs) in Liuzhou City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, southern China. A cross-sectional study recruited FSWs using a venue-based method and subsequent snowball sampling with mapping strategies. Questionnaire-based interviews were conducted to collect demographic and behavioral information.

Blood was tested for syphilis (RPR with TPPA confirmation) and HIV (EIA with Western blot confirmation) infections. Of the 362 eligible participants, 81.7% were non-local residents (60.5% from other parts of Guangxi and 21.2% were non-Guangxi residents); 58.0% belonged to non-Han minority ethnic groups;

37.5% reported inconsistent condom use with their clients and 71.2% reported inconsistent condom use with their regular sex partners during the past month. Nearly 10% reported having had sex with drug users.

The prevalence rates for HIV and syphilis infections were 2.3% and 11.0%, respectively.

Almost half (46.6%) of participants reported having had STD symptoms.

Inconsistent condom use with clients in the past month (AOR = 5.0; 95% CI = 1.8-13.8), less education (OR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.1-7.4), and HIV infection (AOR = 8.1; 95% CI = 1.1-68.5) were independently associated with syphilis infection.

 

[blazejowski]

Only ONE lenny post on this thread so far?

Colour me shocked...

 

[lenny]

Only ONE lenny post on this thread so far?

Colour me shocked...

I'm guessing math wasn't your best subject in school.

I expect there would be more, but PT is giving me the "silent treatment" lately.

From a 2010 forum thread:

View Poll Results: BBFS with a professional sex worker?

I do (or would) go BBFS everytime I get the chance, as long as the girl looks healthy. 45 20.45%

I might go BBFS if I were worked up enough, but it's not generally something I do. 77 35.00%

I cannot imagine myself ever going BBFS with a professional sex worker. 98 44.55%

search: View Poll Results Have you been offered BBFS?

 

[blazejowski]

I'm guessing math wasn't your best subject in school.

I expect there would be more, but PT is giving me the "silent treatment" lately.

My bad... I am not used to you posting without 15 different website links...

 

[Sexismyreligion]

The hole in that is if she wants to do it or advertize it, how is censoring her ad on erslist going to stop it?

Censoring her ad cannot stop offering BBFS, but surly can “reduce” it.

A lady can still advertize it by word of mouth when guys phone/email to inquire about her services.
She can also advertize it in person to clients who see her.

And if the client thinks similar to me, he will review that SP on this board, and warn other members.

But by advertizing it publicly she saves those looking for it the trouble of asking her & possibly many others.

Great! This is the main purpose of censoring her ad: To make in trouble those who are looking for BBFS. I think at the end of the day, these kinds of troubles will reduce BBFS, and increase the safety of all people in this industry.

She may be saving a number of ladies who don't offer BBFS indiscriminately, or at all, the bother of having to answer callers requesting said service

I think SPs have a board on Perb that allows reporting dangerous clients to each other. So again, who are looking for BBFS will get in trouble.

As regards covered Greek, it is about as risky re HIV as BBFS, so why don't you protest against the many ads for that as well?

No. Protected vaginal and anal sex both are considered as low-risk; while unprotected sex (vaginal & anal) is high risk. You can read more about it here (The new website of the ex Health Nurse):
http://smartsexresource.com/about-stis/my-chances

Moreover these aren't the only services that have the "potential of affecting many people" with STIs.

Ok, but it does not mean that I should not take any action to reduce the risk of “some services” that have that potentiality.

 

[Har-Don]

Considering sex workers in China high rate of HIV and syphillis, etc, what are the chances she doesn't have an untreated std with this also being advertised?

According to the article you quoted it's:

97.7% chance she doesn't have HIV
89% chance she doesn't have syphillis.

The prevalence rates for HIV and syphilis infections were 2.3% and 11.0%, respectively.

This is assuming of course that she's one of the 362 eligible participants from Liuzhou City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, southern China. Anything other than that is pure speculation.

 

[lenny]

Censoring her ad cannot stop offering BBFS, but surly can “reduce” it.

There are many sites & ways to advertize. With the market for BBFS i expect she`ll be
flooded already with business. If she gets lucky, some white knight will try to educate
or save her.

And if the client thinks similar to me, he will review that SP on this board, and warn other members.

Then she`d have even more free advertising through people such as you.

No. Protected vaginal and anal sex both are considered as low-risk; while unprotected sex (vaginal & anal) is high risk. You can read more about it here (The new website of the ex Health Nurse):
http://smartsexresource.com/about-stis/my-chances

Actually anal sex is many times riskier than vaginal sex. About 10 times riskier. That`s why when you
cover it up for anal sex, you`re only about as safe as BBFS. Because the lack of a condom in BBFS
increases the risk by about a factor of 10, thereby making them of almost equal risk for HIV. Why do
you think there`s such an epidemic of HIV amongst homosexuals & gay sex workers, much more so
than the heterosexual populations?

As for the website you refer to, i doubt it even addreses this issue. The Health Nurse did once
answer a similar query, but danced around speaking about the comparitive risk for HIV between
covered Greek and BBFS, without really tackling the issue of what the statistics say head on, or
apparently having any knowledge about research into condom failure rates, here:

https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...m-risks&p=1242344&highlight=greek#post1242344

Ok, but it does not mean that I should not take any action to reduce the risk of “some services” that have that potentiality.

How about educating people with the truth about safer sex?