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?