Bareback Exposure

Yes it was, but some will try to find loopholes and try to distort the whole true meaning of the comment !

female condoms provide more coverage of feel area.

Poly, you sure do have an eye for fudge packin! Is your favorite straight chocolate or are you leanin more toward the peanut butter pinoche? Uh oh, my bad, that's right you don't go for de fudge.

Hmm, I did reread the original post and it talked about bareback couples, not what flavor those couples liked. But yup, you caught us, flying between these two bareback threads I did think I was in t'other. For shame!

might be a good idea considering my history.. (tongue in cheek)

Mischief.. (which cheek is the question.)

Good Lord Rings!

Another voice in the wilderness. :) I very much enjoy folks who believe, as I do, that the risk I take is just that. THE RISK I TAKE. Responsibility for one's actions is a rare animal. Great posts. Sigh. I know why we swim up stream. We want to counter act the mindless flurry of folks screaming like chicken little. The sky is falling. The sky is falling. When merely rain is predicted.

D&J

I did find data on heterosexual transmission between serodiscordant partners. It was much higher than 1-200. I believe the rate is much higher (>50%) when it involves an active partner (top/inserter) who is HIV+ and a Passive partner (bottom/insertee). Women are always passive. Whoever ends up with the semen has the risk.

I can't remember what I posted..but the conversion rate was very high. These folks did not use condoms religiously. Which I find amazing.

Regarding Mark:

Waves... I think he's very good looking...If I get up that way..we can go paddling..that would be fun. But you have to use a spray skirt!! I don't want anyone to think we kayaked bare back.

smiles.

Mischief

I thought the OP was about whether you check cert's of those you know who bareback to stay away from the couples/singles they play with not on the health risks of going bareback. If your swinging you should already know and be able to make your own decision.

We entered this discussion by posting a study which made quite evident that bareback sex is not a death sentence as some hysterical posters have alleged. The study reported that to transmit the HIV virus through bareback sex between an HIV infected spouse and a non-infected spouse required an average of 200 instances of bareback sex. We asked for and hoped for more real information on the actual risks of bareback sex.

Never did we encourage or recommend bareback sex. The hysterical posters have been fudge masters in attempting to stuff their words down our throats instead of actually reading what we say, and are anal about labeling our call for information an attempt to encourage barebacking.

We'd love this discussion to produce actual information on risks specifically about the topic of this thread (bi anal sex) and specifically about the group that is the subject of that topic. That group is bisexual males, not the wider, larger, higher risk group of MSM. Bisexual men, the subject of this thread, do not include gay men. Great pains have been taken by the hysterical posters to fudge the boundaries of bisexuality to include all MSM (men who have sex with men).

It's not reasonable to expect hysterical people to engage in respectful discussion. But we hope the wider audience of this thead might enjoy whatever real discussion we can inspire. :)

Perhaps reading the last couple of posts might highlight the difference between drunk driving and swinging. Those posts describe choices made to not swing with a particular person or couple. The choice to drive at all and to have sex at all are roughly comparable. In swinging you choose who you swing with and who not to swing with. In driving we don't have that choice of who we meet on the road. In swinging we can choose not to play with those who play at different risk levels. In driving we don't have that choice. In swinging we can play safe just as in driving we can use seat belts and drive defensively. But we can't choose who drives the same roads as we do.

If we could choose those who drive opposite us on the road, if we could make a choice on the driving appearance and competence of those opposite us, if we could rule out driving opposite those who are inebriated, then we could talk about whether barebacking might be in the realm of comparison to drunk driving.

But drunk drivers take away our choices of risk in driving much as some posters here wish to take away our choice of even discussing risk information in this forum.

I'm with you on that chelle. For me its even more terrifying because being in the medical field you are trained to treat every person as if they are infected lol. We had one hubby tell us "we only play bareback, we do it the right way"...I responded with "than I'm wrong as shit because no glove no love my dear". We haven't played with that couple obviously. I mean, if you are in an exclusive relationship with another couple or you have a small group that you are pseudo monogomous with thats one thing. You know who you are playing with. But if you just met this person at the club or over the internet and you want me to exchange body fluids with you....I don't think so Cletus!

Back to the original posting.

I, typically do not check certifications; however, when I do I check, it is to see if the couples they interact with the women are mostly bi. This is a good indicator to me that the e-mail they sent saying f/f is not necessary may not be all the accurate. I digress. I do not know if the cert on a profile of a couple you know bareback is an indicator that all that has cert them go bareback. For instance, some people cert to just to let others know this is a real couple but have not been physical with.

Ring2s your right nothing is safe it seems anymore. Even for some who stay home inside were cars and/or planes crash into there homes and also with home invasions. But if you see someone driving drunk or cross walking into rush hour traffic or trying to walk in front of a train at a crossing, I would hope one would warn them of the dangers as we so-called Poly gang members are doing.

Nine...

Unfortunately or fortunately everyone has the right to make their own choice. We have laws to governed certain behaviors but in the end it is up to the individual to follow it or not. Shoot I see people jay walk (not crossing at the corner) all the time, which is against the law in Michigan. They take a risk every time the do this.

""If I drive and a drunk driver crosses the center line and smacks me headon, I have no choice of whether or not we headon""

You have the choice not to drive you are taking a risk just as stated. Do not be upset or mad at the drunk driver, your speaking of freedom for what people want to do and choose and no one should tell them otherwise .

In NYC (and I'm fairly sure in Jersey too) if you are in a bar or someone's establishment and you are visually drunk, if the bartender/owner allows you to drive that way they are just as responsible.
I personally would STOP a friend who was drunk from leaving my house, in fact I did that yesterday, they are asleep upstair.
According to some here, they'd let their friend drive, after they got drunk in their home."

You are a very good friend and I appreciate that not only for the safety of your friend but the safety of the other drivers as well.

Poly in NJ if a bar or a homeowner let someone leave their place drunk they are liable if that person had an accident.
.

Interesting point, Nine. What is the difference between swinging and driving? In swinging you decide whether to swing or not to swing in the first place. Then you decide who to swing with or not to swing with. Then you decide whether to swing using condoms and other safer sex practices or not. You decide for yourself in each case. You have control over the situation in each case.

If I drive and a drunk driver crosses the center line and smacks me headon, I have no choice of whether or not we headon. In fact I choose not to smack anyone headon, but the drunk driver overrides my choice. He controls my destiny. His choice overrides mine. Very different situation.

What I get from yours and some others posts is that, like the drunk driver, you want to be able to control my and others' decisions on how we choose to swing and what risk levels we wish to expose ourselves to when we swing. Also I get that you and those other posters seem not to take responsibility for your own actions and want to blame others for the risks you take by swinging.

So I get the sense that you want to control my actions and the actions of other swingers AND you want to blame others for the risks you voluntarily take when you swing. To me, you fit the drunk driver's role in wanting to control my actions and in not taking responsibility for your own actions.

To some extent that is true. Every time someone gets in a car there is the potential of crashing. That is why some people decide to walk. But than again there is a certain amount of risk in walking. You could get hit by a car...lol

Once again whether I approve of drunking driving is not the point. Even though we have laws that govern drinking and driving people still drink and drive. Once again it is their decision to do so and pay the consequences. You have a choice not to drive with some drinking and driving or reporting people who do, if you choose to do so.

Well then I assume that people who believe people have choices would not mind either the people who go out and get real drunk and drive. The others that are on the road know the risk they are taking while driving so why be mad a the ones that drive drunk and cause accidents ?

Oh, just in case you want to know if and that is a big if I do have intercourse I use a condom.

As I said before I am a responsible for my own risk to sexual diseases. Not anyone else.

Nine...

"There was a comment implying, at least that is how I took it, that those who supported bareback probably played bareback too and it was good to know to stay away from them. My response to that is we are generally a soft swap; however, when I want dp the guy wears a condom. Although when I give bj's I don't warp it. lol Oh, I do have female condoms too. lol"

This is part of what I wrote in a earilier response

yeah well heard from a person on here that it is in there view only a 1 in 40,000 chance of catching anything ?

Also why do all the people that believe in choice never admit to there choice, you either bareback or don't, not answers like none of your business or if I do is not the issue. If you bareback do not be embarrassed just say so :)

We are all adults here, well at least I hope we are. If you do not know the risks of contracting sexual diseases than maybe you should read up on sexuality transmitted diseases before swinging. Whether I go bareback or not is not the issue. I believe everyone has the right to make that call. I for one do not believe individuals who go bareback are endangering me. But maybe your real concern it that if too many people go bareback you will not have anyone to play with...hmmm

chalk up another one in the IBIB (I believe in Bareback) club, your doing a great job advertising and not letting people know there is a risk at catching and/or passing something along !

DandJ .. Loved your response..lol Climbing any mountain or riding a motors does affects me. My insurance rates go up!!!

I repeat myself again and again. But each to there own. If you do not want to play bareback then don't. If you do you do. You pick the level of risk in swinging.

""We're happy that Poly, Scarp, and Nine don't bareback and don't play with those who bareback,Your service to swingers is above and beyond the call of duty. Thank you.""

Finally you gave in :)

I do think you forgot another thousand plus name on this site that don't bareback or agree with it but hey maybe they took your 1 in 40,000 opinion ?

and the Mount Everest 1 in 10 thing is getting to be old Google another fact