A bit to add
She's certainly right on many counts. The vagina is both internal and it comes equipped with its own cleansing system. Were it not for the impacts of sexual partners, it would be the cleanest place on or about the human body.
Furthermore, it is particularly difficult for genital herpes to take root in a place where oral herpes already exists, and with most people already having oral herpes, it is low-risk to "munch on unprotected box" for the munch-ER.
Unprotected oral sex on a male is downright dangerous in terms of STD's going both ways, and the world's oldest profession would probably do well to evolve to take that into consideration.
As stated before, the good news in that, for the one performing oral on a woman, is that it is extremely difficult for Symplex II herpes to take root in a mouth already affected with Symplex I.
Clinically, the only known risk for females allowing unprotected oral sex on themselves is "Herpes", and that is indeed far less a risk than are the multitude of risks in performing unprotected oral sex on a male.
On one of my few previous posts at this board, is a link to the San Francisco board of health which has a great chart listing the various risks involved in these unprotected sexual activities. (for anyone who cares to do a search)
Lolita said:Why is "lesbian sex" considered the safest method of sex? This is not a promotion to munch on unprotected box given the opportunity, BUT the vagina hosts an anti-bacterial fluid called lactobacilli that protects the vagina from diseases, the vagina cleans itself not much different from the self-cleaning oven. The penis does not clean itself. There, I said it. There is the reason why so many SPs are open to DATY, and even better if they generally practice safe sex (no bb anything).
She's certainly right on many counts. The vagina is both internal and it comes equipped with its own cleansing system. Were it not for the impacts of sexual partners, it would be the cleanest place on or about the human body.
Furthermore, it is particularly difficult for genital herpes to take root in a place where oral herpes already exists, and with most people already having oral herpes, it is low-risk to "munch on unprotected box" for the munch-ER.
Sweet_Stacy said:Some people should really stop and think about what questions they are asking before they post...
Even if I were a male, I wouldn't even want an escort giving me a bbbj, my health and safety are much more important then any blow. Use your head people!!
Unprotected oral sex on a male is downright dangerous in terms of STD's going both ways, and the world's oldest profession would probably do well to evolve to take that into consideration.
This, clearly, doesn't relate to the statement she made.Avarice said:So then you don't allow DATY then Stacy?
Except for the part where she seems to ignore that most humans already have "herpes" in their mouths, she's right on target with most of this.Lolita said:BJ and DATY are two very different things.
There is more risk for the SP giving head than her receiving oral. I've already stated the differences.
-The good SPs ... don't engage in BBBJ, BBFS, CIM. They are still considered good, reputable, safe even if they partake in DATY. ... Pooners who are already in a relationship who happen to seek the company of an SP will most likely not stay faithful to the SP. A little herpes here, pass it on unknowingly to another SP there via BBBJ.
Are we getting a better understanding of this?
-Though most STDs have very noticable symptoms, many are still transmittable with very few symptoms (flat, flesh coloured lesions indicative to herpes), now you're utterly fucked when you get herpes in your mouth.
Avarice, you should know better.
Lustingasians, check your sources again, HIV/AIDS isn't the only concern, syphillis is on the rise amongst sex trade workers. Gee, I wonder why?
As stated before, the good news in that, for the one performing oral on a woman, is that it is extremely difficult for Symplex II herpes to take root in a mouth already affected with Symplex I.
Clinically, the only known risk for females allowing unprotected oral sex on themselves is "Herpes", and that is indeed far less a risk than are the multitude of risks in performing unprotected oral sex on a male.
On one of my few previous posts at this board, is a link to the San Francisco board of health which has a great chart listing the various risks involved in these unprotected sexual activities. (for anyone who cares to do a search)