BAREBACK

[James999]

Ok the topic has been done before, and like many I thought perhaps it was a bit of an urban myth and few (if any) girls actually offered it, well the reality is it has now become pretty common, even some attractive girls seem to offer it.

On Niks "some punts at last" the subject of bareback comes up.

Logic makes me assume that anyone who offers bareback must surely be infected allready, otherwise why would they risk catching an infection, I wouldn't even see a barebacker for a BJ as to be honest my mind would be thinking what has she got, HIV, Herpes, Genital warts, Hep B. or some other delight?

[JockStar]

I certainly dont understand why they do it
A small handful would not care about catching giving stds, the rest must be just ignorant.

[softlad]

I wonder though, with all these SP's provideing this service, why aren't we hearing of Punters who have caught stuff ?
And if a punter had caught something off a BB provider would he not have fed it back somewhere, to warn others ?
Or is it as has been suggested before ?
Lot's do seek it, they just don't admit it.....

[James999]

Lot's do seek it, they just don't admit it.....

I don't lnow if I believe lots seek it (pr perhaps I just don't want to believe it)

Perhaps a bit like a new phone thats out, Two clients will go into 10 shops and ask for it, the perception is that 20  people want the phone, when the reality is it's only two people, I think there are a lot of timewasters (males) on AW and fantasists who get off talking about more extreme services to girls.

What I do find shocking is that bareback appears to be the new "OWO" and often they don't charge extra for it. 

[Fatpro$$ie]

Or is it as has been suggested before ?
Lot's do seek it, they just don't admit it.....

You would be very suprised at the number of men who either ask for this or just try to do it during a booking. Some of these are the same guys who on another forum berate anyone who mentions it.

I personally cannot see any logical reason why a sane and intelligent person would ever try this activity with a WG considering a large portion of girls never see the inside of a GUM clinic. I use the clinic at my hospital which is the main one for Derby and they hardly have any working girls who visit them. Unless all these girls are paying to have private checks done which I very much doubt then they are all high risk.
My clinic were also very suprised when I asked for a throat swab as none of the WG's who do visit have ever asked for one. It really goes to show how risky unprotected sex with a prozzie really is.

As for men posting about catching something, again I would be very suprised as all this will do is ensure other girls never allow him to book just incase, as certain infections cannot be cured and can be present without the symptoms showing

[James999]

You would be very suprised at the number of men who either ask for this or just try to do it during a booking. Some of these are the same guys who on another forum berate anyone who mentions it.

Like who?

We can't be wasting time with these pointless "hints" that tar all the guys with the suspicion, who has asked you for bareback?

[Mellow]

Like who?

We can't be wasting time with these pointless "hints" that tar all the guys with the suspicion, who has asked you for bareback?

Oh yeah, she's sure going to grass someone up.

[Fatpro$$ie]

Like who?

We can't be wasting time with these pointless "hints" that tar all the guys with the suspicion, who has asked you for bareback?

I am not hinting at anything, not am I trying to tar all guys with suspicion. I am just stating a fact that some people will deny BB when they do in fact try to indulge in it. Of course I am not going to name anyone as that would not only go against my discretion policy it would also feed your belief just a little more that all prozzies cannot be trusted .

Think about it. If hardly any men were seeking BB why would girls who offer it have such high feedback???

[King Nuts]

Ok the topic has been done before, and like many I thought perhaps it was a bit of an urban myth and few (if any) girls actually offered it, well the reality is it has now become pretty common, even some attractive girls seem to offer it.

On Niks "some punts at last" the subject of bareback comes up.

Logic makes me assume that anyone who offers bareback must surely be infected allready, otherwise why would they risk catching an infection, I wouldn't even see a barebacker for a BJ as to be honest my mind would be thinking what has she got, HIV, Herpes, Genital warts, Hep B. or some other delight?

This debate centres around an assumption that prostitutes are more likely to be infected with an STI than any other group of people, and yet logic and a little bit of thought would dictate that this is not necessarily the case. You're arguing that those girls who offer bareback must be infected. Why must they? What if they're not?

I've spent several periods in my life having random, casual, and condom-free sex with many different women (non-WGs), and the last time was as recently as 2002-4 in my internet dating phase. And I can tell you, I've never caught a damn thing. Not once. Not ever. So, was I lucky?

I agree with the general sentiment here that I would not have BB sex with a prostitute, any more than I would nowadays have BB sex with anyone. But lurking in the back of my mind is the belief, and I accept this may be naievety, that the vast majority of WGs will take vastly more care of their sexual health than the majority of single, civilian women, who in my experience, have an almost similar level of antipathy to condom use as many men.

[Simple]

Too often I've been trawling A/W for a suitable prossie and come across a seemingly decent and promising prossie only to realize that BB is on offer and it is back to the search as I'd never see a BB prossie...

Even though there is meant to be some sort of argument that using a BB enthusiast prossie shouldn't be a problem if protection is used with them quite frankly I would be far too concerned about the possible nasties lurking for even a mere kiss...

Also, can't see why anyone would engage in such a risky activity as surely BB seekers and providers are mixing and exchanging whatever nasties highly increasing the likelihood of catching something altogether unpleasant. IMO these people have little to no regard for their own health if willing to take such an unnecessary risk such unprotected paid sex...

[Mellow]

To be honest, the choices at the head of the thread render this thread as useless banter. I thought that the powers that be didn't want any more of this shite.

[Mancspunter]

I personally think it's pointless posting/discussing the subject, it's been done to death as James has already said.
There are providers that offer it, there are punters that seek it.
What is there to talk about that has not already been covered?

[softlad]

What is there to talk about that has not already been covered?

Quite clever that..... 

[smiths]

Ok the topic has been done before, and like many I thought perhaps it was a bit of an urban myth and few (if any) girls actually offered it, well the reality is it has now become pretty common, even some attractive girls seem to offer it.

On Niks "some punts at last" the subject of bareback comes up.

Logic makes me assume that anyone who offers bareback must surely be infected allready, otherwise why would they risk catching an infection, I wouldn't even see a barebacker for a BJ as to be honest my mind would be thinking what has she got, HIV, Herpes, Genital warts, Hep B. or some other delight?

Definately mental without a doubt and i would guess some WGs and punters are purposely trying to infect others out of revenge or the feeling of power it gives them. Its hard to work their thinking out as it defies all logic.

WGs wouldnt advertise it if there wasnt enough punters wanting it in my opinion, the whole premise is BB feels better than using a condom, i understand that bit, but those that do it  decide this better feeling is worth more to them than the real proven by medical science risks of BB. Weird logic which leads me to think there are a lot of people out there that dont care about the risks and others who are not smart enough to realise.

I have been offered BB out of the blue from a small number of WGs mainly EE who must of offered it to others despite not advertising it, again my logic tells me enough must of taken up the offer or they wouldnt bother offering it.

Overall, those that offer it and those that want it are mentalists of the first order, their logic is always its our choice, this may be so but...........they are a sandwich short of a picnic in my view.

[Mellow]

I personally think it's pointless posting/discussing the subject, it's been done to death as James has already said.
....snip

If he already said it, why the fuck did he start it? Perhaps there's a hidden "target" amongst the board membership that he wants Jimmy to ban. 

[Strawberry]

There is demand, clients do ask for it - not all but some do, and I would guess others would find it difficult to say no if offered. There are also numerous reverse bookings on AW everyday requesting this as an essential.

Appears to be a chicken and egg scenario. Supply or Demand?

[smiths]

This debate centres around an assumption that prostitutes are more likely to be infected with an STI than any other group of people, and yet logic and a little bit of thought would dictate that this is not necessarily the case. You're arguing that those girls who offer bareback must be infected. Why must they? What if they're not?

I've spent several periods in my life having random, casual, and condom-free sex with many different women (non-WGs), and the last time was as recently as 2002-4 in my internet dating phase. And I can tell you, I've never caught a damn thing. Not once. Not ever. So, was I lucky?

I agree with the general sentiment here that I would not have BB sex with a prostitute, any more than I would nowadays have BB sex with anyone. But lurking in the back of my mind is the belief, and I accept this may be naievety, that the vast majority of WGs will take vastly more care of their sexual health than the majority of single, civilian women, who in my experience, have an almost similar level of antipathy to condom use as many men.

I am intrigued by your question "so, was i lucky?" King Nuts, i would say yes but have you another theory or thoughts on why you didnt catch anything?

I havent the proof that WGs really do take more care of their sexual health than other women, some say they do but if they are smart they would say they do in my view. I take no ones word when it comes to this and concentrate on looking after my sexual health. Thing is how does taking care of your sexual health tally with practising BB, surely its a contradiction and is obviously against medical advice that the GUM would give you.

[Mancspunter]

Quite clever that..... 

well spotted

[smiths]

I wonder though, with all these SP's provideing this service, why aren't we hearing of Punters who have caught stuff ?
And if a punter had caught something off a BB provider would he not have fed it back somewhere, to warn others ?
Or is it as has been suggested before ?
Lot's do seek it, they just don't admit it.....

Pure guess work but some/many are not going to admit to doing BB let alone catching something, i wouldnt, i would keep it to myself out of embarrassment, and how many punters actually know about forums like this where this subject is discussed. I think a minute fraction know about forums so that leaves the A/W feedback system as the place to post about catching something, thing is the WGs can fiddle the feedback so perhaps we never get to see it, although i would expect to still see some from someone on occassion. I have also thought A/W might purposely delete comments from any punters who get infected because as they allow WGs to offer BB it isnt good for their business to show punters get infected off those they allow to advertise.

[Jimmyredcab]

There is demand, clients do ask for it - not all but some do, and I would guess others would find it difficult to say no if offered.

I am a pervert and wear my badge with pride but I NEVER   go bareback --------- not even in Thailand where it would be on offer for an extra £5. 

[Prices Slashed]

I suspect all women of child bearing age (and some beyond), wg or not, DO actively engage in bareback. It's a natural thing to do. Thing is do they do it with dozens of strangers for money, or do they do it only with their significant other?  Therein lies the risk me thinks, and even then one can get it wrong. Wgs can be cleaner than other women.

Back in my younger days (80s) I met a wg who enticed me into doing bareback. She wasn't worried, but I was scared shitless afterward (this was during all those high profile AIDs safe-sex campaigns). I tested clear then and six months down the line however, to a great deal of relief, and haven't done bareback since with a wg.  But I later met a girl whom I thought was squeeky clean (recently separated, not a sex worker) and started a relationship. I quickly came down with the clap and had to endure two sore buttocks full of penicillin and another six months of suspense. I got through that one ok also.

Gents, just assume she (whoever she is) does BB and always wear adequate protection until you know she's clean, better safe than sorry.

 

[enzio]

If you have had BB sex with more than one WG how do you know which one you caught an infection from and then  pass the blame to her in a field report?  Bear in mind that many STD/I's can remain undetectable for months.  Even if you have been covered, there are STD's you could catch which are not detectable or are not routinely screened for.

I get fed up with reading "I've done this for 20 years and haven't caught anything"; how do you know?  You could have had a viral/ bacterial infection, been tested every three months, had no symptoms and they may never have detected anything.  Doesn't mean you are virus free and tomorrow some symptom or the other will not crop up; just means that so far you have been lucky.

To me having sex with people who's sexual history you can not be sure about carries risks (whether you and they have always been protected or not).  To punt safer is about limiting those risks.  I just assume (rightly or wrongly) that those WG's who use protection are more likely to take care of their sexual health (and possibly the health of their customers), be more educated about sexual health as a whole, stop working for a bit (well till the symptoms disappear) if they are diagnosed with an STD/I and are less likely to pass anything on to me if there is an accident.  They are also less likely in my view to be a junkie or mentally unstable (but that may well be a prejudice that I hold).

[smiths]

If you have had BB sex with more than one WG how do you know which one you caught an infection from and then  pass the blame to her in a field report?  Bear in mind that many STD/I's can remain undetectable for months.  Even if you have been covered, there are STD's you could catch which are not detectable or are not routinely screened for.

I get fed up with reading "I've done this for 20 years and haven't caught anything"; how do you know?  You could have had a viral/ bacterial infection, been tested every three months, had no symptoms and they may never have detected anything.  Doesn't mean you are virus free and tomorrow some symptom or the other will not crop up; just means that so far you have been lucky.

To me having sex with people who's sexual history you can not be sure about carries risks (whether you and they have always been protected or not).  To punt safer is about limiting those risks.  I just assume (rightly or wrongly) that those WG's who use protection are more likely to take care of their sexual health (and possibly the health of their customers), be more educated about sexual health as a whole, stop working for a bit (well till the symptoms disappear) if they are diagnosed with an STD/I and are less likely to pass anything on to me if there is an accident.  They are also less likely in my view to be a junkie or mentally unstable (but that may well be a prejudice that I hold).

Very good thought provoking post.

[King Nuts]

I get fed up with reading "I've done this for 20 years and haven't caught anything"; how do you know?

How do I know? Over the last few years, I've been tested for every possible disease or infection. Several times. Including some fairly esoteric chromosome stuff that I didn't fully understand. And I came up negative on every count, every time.

[Matium]

I don't understand this constant preoccupation with bareback. It is the natural way to have sex.

Of course, it's simple common sense not to have bareback with prostitutes because they're mine, yours, his, sometimes hers, anybody's, as long as they get paid for it. That's why prostitutes have very little self-esteem.

But with a wife or a girlfriend, bareback is natural and desirable. They would react with horror if you tried to suggest using a condom since condom use is associated with prostitutes. In fact, you'd cop it, because the way a woman's suspicious mind works, she'd think that because you suggested condom that that must mean you're using prostitutes.

It's only in the prostitution world that bareback is to be avoided, in the real world, it is natural and desirable.

[King Nuts]

I am intrigued by your question "so, was i lucky?" King Nuts, i would say yes but have you another theory or thoughts on why you didnt catch anything?

It was sort of rhetorical. Perhaps I was lucky. Then again, there's no such thing as luck. In the early 1980s, I was in a band, and we went all over the world, shagging anything we could. I don't think I used a condom once, and - sorry if this seems immodest, but it's true - I must have shagged something between 300 and 400 women, though at the time, I wasn't keeping count. Then, in the mid 80s I settled down with a girl and stopped all that. Fast forward to 2002 and I was once again single, and went on something of a sex bender all over again. This time, condoms were present, but used maybe once in a while.

So I reckon, in my life, I've shagged hundreds of women without a condom. In writing, it sounds awful. It makes me sounds like some kind of irresponsible braggard, but at the time.... you know how it is. You've had a nice evening. She seems like a nice girl. You weren't necessarily anticipating sex, but you're suddenly back at your/her place, there's a lot of panting going on. What are you going to do?

So was I lucky? I don't know. I may well have dodged several bullets. I know that in the cold light of day, I wouldn't have supported anyone else doing what I did. Perhaps that makes me a hypocrit. But in the mid 80s, the AIDS paranoia got to me as much as the next guy. And it turned out to be....not quite as everyone said it was. One million people in the UK did not die of AIDS. AIDS has not infected the white, non-drug using, hetero population in the UK. It just hasn't. And perhaps we all got complacent about that.

[smiths]

It was sort of rhetorical. Perhaps I was lucky. Then again, there's no such thing as luck. In the early 1980s, I was in a band, and we went all over the world, shagging anything we could. I don't think I used a condom once, and - sorry if this seems immodest, but it's true - I must have shagged something between 300 and 400 women, though at the time, I wasn't keeping count. Then, in the mid 80s I settled down with a girl and stopped all that. Fast forward to 2002 and I was once again single, and went on something of a sex bender all over again. This time, condoms were present, but used maybe once in a while.

So I reckon, in my life, I've shagged hundreds of women without a condom. In writing, it sounds awful. It makes me sounds like some kind of irresponsible braggard, but at the time.... you know how it is. You've had a nice evening. She seems like a nice girl. You weren't necessarily anticipating sex, but you're suddenly back at your/her place, there's a lot of panting going on. What are you going to do?

So was I lucky? I don't know. I may well have dodged several bullets. I know that in the cold light of day, I wouldn't have supported anyone else doing what I did. Perhaps that makes me a hypocrit. But in the mid 80s, the AIDS paranoia got to me as much as the next guy. And it turned out to be....not quite as everyone said it was. One million people in the UK did not die of AIDS. AIDS has not infected the white, non-drug using, hetero population in the UK. It just hasn't. And perhaps we all got complacent about that.

Sounds great fun to me.   I started punting at the height of the first AIDS campaign so this has coloured  my thinking about BB no doubt about that. I would certainly be worried about catching something which would spoil my punting vibe, having a condom rip was bad enough. I virtually always have condoms on me in case of getting lucky.

[enzio]

How do I know? Over the last few years, I've been tested for every possible disease or infection. Several times. Including some fairly esoteric chromosome stuff that I didn't fully understand. And I came up negative on every count, every time.

Not to split hairs but its pretty difficult (if not impossible) to test for every possible disease or infection.  In terms of STD's alone, are you sure you have been tested for HSV2 (or 1 for that matter) which has nothing to do with your chromosomes?  Usually you would only be tested once sores appear.  To test before sores appear would require a spinal tap and that test is usually unreliable (hence not very common).

What about HPV?  Rarely are men tested for HPV, particularly in the UK, so why were you?

Just because you have had a problem which required you to have your chromosomes checked or because you went to the GUM regularly does not mean that you have been checked for every possible STD.  Additionally, even if you have been tested regularly there is always false negative test results.  I appreciate false negative results are rare but they do happen.

If you have slept with anyone since you were tested then you may have picked up something recently and not know.

In the event, that you are some statistical miracle of science and you have been tested recently for everything and picked up nothing then my hat of to you.  We should be studying you 

I don't understand this constant preoccupation with bareback. It is the natural way to have sex.

Of course, it's simple common sense not to have bareback with prostitutes because they're mine, yours, his, sometimes hers, anybody's, as long as they get paid for it. That's why prostitutes have very little self-esteem.

But with a wife or a girlfriend, bareback is natural and desirable. They would react with horror if you tried to suggest using a condom since condom use is associated with prostitutes. In fact, you'd cop it, because the way a woman's suspicious mind works, she'd think that because you suggested condom that that must mean you're using prostitutes.

It's only in the prostitution world that bareback is to be avoided, in the real world, it is natural and desirable.

I actually prefer sex with a condom (a lot cleaner and more comfortable).  I used condoms with my wife (except when trying for babies) before I saw any WG and continue to do so on the odd occasion we have sex.  So far as I am aware she doesn't suspect a thing.

[King Nuts]

Not to split hairs but its pretty difficult (if not impossible) to test for every possible disease or infection.  In terms of STD's alone, are you sure you have been tested for HSV2 (or 1 for that matter) which has nothing to do with your chromosomes?  Usually you would only be tested once sores appear.  To test before sores appear would require a spinal tap and that test is usually unreliable (hence not very common).

What about HPV?  Rarely are men tested for HPV, particularly in the UK, so why were you?

Just because you have had a problem which required you to have your chromosomes checked or because you went to the GUM regularly does not mean that you have been checked for every possible STD.  Additionally, even if you have been tested regularly there is always false negative test results.  I appreciate false negative results are rare but they do happen.

If you have slept with anyone since you were tested then you may have picked up something recently and not know.

In the event, that you are some statistical miracle of science and you have been tested recently for everything and picked up nothing then my hat of to you.  We should be studying you 

I actually prefer sex with a condom (a lot cleaner and more comfortable).  I used condoms with my wife (except when trying for babies) before I saw any WG and continue to do so on the odd occasion we have sex.  So far as I am aware she doesn't suspect a thing.

I am not a doctor, so I don't claim to be any kind of an expert. But I have had two medical issues to deal with in recent times. One is fertility, and my GF and I underwent several courses of IVF, in more than one country, a few years ago. As part of this, I got tested for what I thought was every possible disease, ailment or condition. Or at least, that's what I was told. And I know these fuckers are extremely thorough. Came through clear, and am now a parent of two lovely children.

The second was what turned out to be a prostate disorder, and again, as a part of that treatment, I've had innumerable tests, in three different hospitals by several different doctors and specialists, for everything. Again, got the all clear.

You seem like a guy who wants me to have caught a nasty, so I'm sorry to have disappointed you.

[Shade]

But with a wife or a girlfriend, bareback is natural and desirable. They would react with horror if you tried to suggest using a condom since condom use is associated with prostitutes. In fact, you'd cop it, because the way a woman's suspicious mind works, she'd think that because you suggested condom that that must mean you're using prostitutes.

I really don't think that applies to all women. I've had girlfriends in the past who have insisted on condom use as they don't want to risk pregnancy and the pill is never 100%. And some just want to stay safe - until you can both be tested six months after your relationship began (and I so don't know how to have that conversation!) you can never be completely certain that the other doesn't have anything, and neither can they.

I also know a married couple who always use condoms - she's on the pill too, but they've already got two screaming monsters and definitely don't want a third!

That all said, I love bareback with longterm partners. And because I love it so much, I'd never risk never being able to have it again by having bareback sex with a working girl who offered such a service.

[enzio]

Truly no; I don't wish you to have caught any "nasties" but the likelihood of you having slept with "300 to 400" women and not caught anything is statistically slim particularly when you consider that it is estimated that 80% of the population have an HPV virus of some sort and  25% have the HSV virus.  Many people will not know that they have these viruses.  I just find the comment that you have been doing this for "20 years and not caught anything" to be misleading, particularly to those who may be considering their first punt and trying to appreciate the risks they are taking.  In effect, I am as likely as you to have caught some sexually transmitted nasties that I am unaware of at present but have only slept with say 25 to 30 women.

Bear in mind that when they say they are testing you for "every possible disease, ailment or condition" they are probably talking about every possible "disease, ailment or condition" that relates to your fertility issues or prostate problems.  That is not the same as every sexually transmitted disease or infection.

But in any event, I'm not trying to worry you.  Given that you have not had any symptoms in the past 20 years from any STD/I's probably means that your immune system is pretty good and that you have a fairly healthy body in other respects.  You may never get any symptoms.  All I am saying is that the statement that "I've been doing this for 20 years and not caught anything" is misleading and suggests that punting is less risky than it actually is.

[Strawberry]

This has just raised something of vague relevance, quite a number of people do go around under the impression that their yearly health check with their GP, involving routine bloods would include testing for STIs too.

I'm not questioning King Nuts situation, have no wish too and I'm sure he knows what's what. I have however been told most routine, general health checks do not cover STIs. They must be specified by the patient, who might well then be referred to the GUM.

[workinallweek]

jf you give blood are you tested then?

[Strawberry]

jf you give blood are you tested then?

All donated blood is screened, it has to be. Just had a quick read on the National Blood Service website, on the STI front they test for HIV, Hep B, Hep C and Syphillis. They do notify you if you do test positive. By the way the National Blood service do say you should not give blood for 12 months if you have had sex with a prostitute, and never again if you have ever been paid for sex.

[Fatbrian]

my view on paid unprotected sex is as follows:

A girl who is genuinely offering bareback sex is nearly aways going to be a smack head and probably a street worker. Or and most probably 'as well'  is infected with AIDS/HIV or Hep C, nasty STD's.

However I think a lot of girls on AdultWork who offer Bareback do so to either generate hits on their profiles hoping to attract business and with no intention of actually providing a bareback service.

The other thing I think also happens is that some girls on AW don't understand what bareback means and think that sucking a bare cock (OWO or BBBJ) is involving barebacking and so think that is what bareback means.

Finally the other thing where I think bareback is being ticked on Aw profiles is when the girl is offering to make professional pornos, and so ticks the bareback option as in a professional film the sex would be bareback.

I personally am never going any where near a prozzie who is offering unprotected sexual services, my health is far to important!

[SteveNova]

If the WG and the punter always use a condom for sex it is no greater risk  in terms of HIV to see that WG, even if she offers bareback.  Having said that I would feel less comfortable with someone who offered BB sex and would avoid them, as their general sexual health would be dubious. 

[King Nuts]

Truly no; I don't wish you to have caught any "nasties" but the likelihood of you having slept with "300 to 400" women and not caught anything is statistically slim particularly when you consider that it is estimated that 80% of the population have an HPV virus of some sort and  25% have the HSV virus.  Many people will not know that they have these viruses.  I just find the comment that you have been doing this for "20 years and not caught anything" to be misleading, particularly to those who may be considering their first punt and trying to appreciate the risks they are taking.  In effect, I am as likely as you to have caught some sexually transmitted nasties that I am unaware of at present but have only slept with say 25 to 30 women.

Bear in mind that when they say they are testing you for "every possible disease, ailment or condition" they are probably talking about every possible "disease, ailment or condition" that relates to your fertility issues or prostate problems.  That is not the same as every sexually transmitted disease or infection.

But in any event, I'm not trying to worry you.  Given that you have not had any symptoms in the past 20 years from any STD/I's probably means that your immune system is pretty good and that you have a fairly healthy body in other respects.  You may never get any symptoms.  All I am saying is that the statement that "I've been doing this for 20 years and not caught anything" is misleading and suggests that punting is less risky than it actually is.

What are you, a doctor or something? You clearly didn't read my post properly and have jumped to two false conclusions. For a start, I never said 'I've been doing this for twenty years'. I said there have been two short-ish bursts of unrestrained sexual activity in my life - one in the early 1980s and ther other in the mid 2000s - where condom use ended up being negligible. When not on one of these sexual benders, I've always been either celibate or in a committed relationship (other than occasional visits to WGs where full rig has always been worn).

As regards the testing, it seems you've not been through the fertility and prostate thing yourself. If you did, you'd know that they DO test you for STIs, including HIV, as a matter of course. Now because I've ended up being in and out of doctors' surgeries, clinics and hospitals a fair old bit in the last few years (and for good measure, I've also visited a GUM clinic and had the full monty in there) it's all been a bit of a blur and I couldn't give you a comprehensive list of every damn thing I've been tested for, but I'm pretty sure it was everything known to man.

Perhaps I do have good immunity. I know I rarely get ill. But that's sort of beside the point. The way I look at it is like this: take Elton John. Here's a guy who in his wild heyday, was far worse than me, or any of us. He shagged anything that moved - men and women - and took whatever marching powder, booze and Lord knows what else he could get his hands on. And in the 70s and up to the mid 80s, let's face it, people didn't use condoms. And look at him now.

Being gay and promiscious doesn't automatically equal HIV. Being hetero and promiscious doesn't automatically mean you're going to get diseased either. I am certainly not condoning condom-free sex, and I fully admit I've been irresponsible in the past and as I said in another post, I may well have dodged several bullets. I was just trying to shed a bit of light on a debate that usually never rises above panic- and fear-driven assertions and 'theories' that anyone who might dare have hetero sex without a condom is some sort of weirdo or pariah.

The fear that we're going to get some sort of disease from having sex with women is a very ancient one. I think Germaine Greer said something profound about this in her book 'The Whole Woman' but I can't find the quote for now. But it's a recurring theme in history, borne out in part by men's ambivalent attitude to prostitution. We totally accept and praise WGs who offer us condoms and despise those who don't. Why? Not for their sake, that's for sure. But for ours.

[Mellow]

Everything is about risk management and mitigating risk.

I absolutely hate condoms, so to minimise my risk of contracting infections I choose bareback oral sex. Even BBO has it's risks but as the years creep me by, that risk albeit still there, becomes less influential in my decisions. By my own reckoning, when I reach the age of 75, I should be in the position of not caring too much for my well-being 

[workinallweek]

So how good are certificates ??

[Mellow]

So how good are certificates ??

I knew of a few wgs that used cerificates from other non-wgs and penned out the names to make them look realistic. They would still kick up a fuss with the client if he dared to ask to see it.

[Strawberry]

Certificates are only a snapshot of that exact time the samples were taken, only way they are valid is if the bearer has not had sexual contact since the tests. Oh and HIV can take up to 3 months to be detected, so in that respect a certificate is only reliable as per 3 months before testing date.

[Jimmyredcab]

I don't understand this constant preoccupation with bareback. It is the natural way to have sex.

Yes, of course it is natural with your wife or girlfriend.
It is not natural for a woman to have bareback  with dozens of men week in week out, sooner or later she will pick up an infection --------- that is a racing certainty.   

[Jimmyredcab]

Certificates are only a snapshot of that exact time the samples were taken, only way they are valid is if the bearer has not had sexual contact since the tests. Oh and HIV can take up to 3 months to be detected, so in that respect a certificate is only reliable as per 3 months before testing date.

Certificates are totally worthless.
A woman could get a certificate at 11am, see a client at 1pm and pick up herpes or genital warts ------- or worse. 

[Mellow]

Pubic lice (crabs) would hardly take a minute or two to hop across. Warning to all punters with beards, don't try to lick her out, you may be sorry 

[smiths]

Certificates are totally worthless.
A woman could get a certificate at 11am, see a client at 1pm and pick up herpes or genital warts ------- or worse. 

100% correct, unless you have the WG under 24/7 survellience you cant know what she is really getting up to once she has left the GUM.

[James999]

Shame this ones a barebacker 

External Link/Members Only

Ok face not much but what an ass 

[Daffodil]

I have never done bb with a whore but have done on numerous occasions with non-whores. There's certainly a distinction between the two but it can be something of a grey area. The same arguments apply to bb whoever it's with, it is more a perception of risk.

There are plenty of risky activities people engage in without the same stigmata as those who fuck prossies bb. Somebody who breaks their back whilst rockclimbing will have all the sympathy in the world, somebody who contracts HIV from bb will be persecuted.

[Wayang]

I have never done bb with a whore but have done on numerous occasions with non-whores. There's certainly a distinction between the two but it can be something of a grey area. The same arguments apply to bb whoever it's with, it is more a perception of risk.

You probably ran more risk with the non-WGs.  The spread of STIs today is not among WGs where, apart from crack addicts and the like, the risk of catching an STI is minimal, but among the free flowing young.
I bet none of the non-WGs you f*ck*d knew what GUM clinic was for.

[munterhunter]

As I said in an earlier post I searched for BB on AW and got a shock at the number of women offering it. I also noted that an increasing number of them are of Eastern European origin as is the lady James referred to in his post.  There were about half a dozen Eastern Europeans in Nottingham a few weeks ago, no feedback offering an £80/hr full service! After a week or two they decamped to Northampton, then to Southampton, then back to Leicester and are now in Croydon.

Sounds like a fairly organised set up to me transporting 4 or 5 girls to different towns. I took an interest in the group because they all appeared close together in the search and I had my eye on one lovely looking brunette who wasn't adverising BB at the time (she is now though!). I tried calling her but got no answer (probably a lucky escape).

I'm aware of the risks and the debate the subject provokes. Fact is guys want it (that's their choice) so ladies offer it. It's not a choice I'd make but each to his/her own!

[enzio]

What are you, a doctor or something? You clearly didn't read my post properly and have jumped to two false conclusions. For a start, I never said 'I've been doing this for twenty years'. I said there have been two short-ish bursts of unrestrained sexual activity in my life - one in the early 1980s and ther other in the mid 2000s - where condom use ended up being negligible. When not on one of these sexual benders, I've always been either celibate or in a committed relationship (other than occasional visits to WGs where full rig has always been worn).

As regards the testing, it seems you've not been through the fertility and prostate thing yourself. If you did, you'd know that they DO test you for STIs, including HIV, as a matter of course. Now because I've ended up being in and out of doctors' surgeries, clinics and hospitals a fair old bit in the last few years (and for good measure, I've also visited a GUM clinic and had the full monty in there) it's all been a bit of a blur and I couldn't give you a comprehensive list of every damn thing I've been tested for, but I'm pretty sure it was everything known to man.

Perhaps I do have good immunity. I know I rarely get ill. But that's sort of beside the point. The way I look at it is like this: take Elton John. Here's a guy who in his wild heyday, was far worse than me, or any of us. He shagged anything that moved - men and women - and took whatever marching powder, booze and Lord knows what else he could get his hands on. And in the 70s and up to the mid 80s, let's face it, people didn't use condoms. And look at him now.

Being gay and promiscious doesn't automatically equal HIV. Being hetero and promiscious doesn't automatically mean you're going to get diseased either. I am certainly not condoning condom-free sex, and I fully admit I've been irresponsible in the past and as I said in another post, I may well have dodged several bullets. I was just trying to shed a bit of light on a debate that usually never rises above panic- and fear-driven assertions and 'theories' that anyone who might dare have hetero sex without a condom is some sort of weirdo or pariah.

The fear that we're going to get some sort of disease from having sex with women is a very ancient one. I think Germaine Greer said something profound about this in her book 'The Whole Woman' but I can't find the quote for now. But it's a recurring theme in history, borne out in part by men's ambivalent attitude to prostitution. We totally accept and praise WGs who offer us condoms and despise those who don't. Why? Not for their sake, that's for sure. But for ours.

What you actually said was:

"I've spent several periods in my life having random, casual, and condom-free sex with many different women (non-WGs), and the last time was as recently as 2002-4 in my internet dating phase. And I can tell you, I've never caught a damn thing. Not once. Not ever. So, was I lucky?"

"Several" being more than two; so to be fair both of us read your original post incorrectly.

Yes they probably do test you for STI's and D's but only the ones that are likely to affect your fertility or prostate.  That's not every STD or I that exists just as the GUM don't test you for every STD/I.  I, therefore, doubt its everything known to man.

As for Elton John; how do you know what he has got or has not got?  Just because he may not have HIV (why are people so obsessed with HIV as though it is the only STI??? - and how do you know Elton John doesn't have it?) does not mean that he has not caught other STI/D's.  He may have STD/I's and not know about the same.  That is the point I am trying to make.
 
So far as I am concerned having some of these STD/I's is not so bad for you to take it so personally.  We all carry hundreds of bacteria/ virus's on us or in our body which have nothing to do with us having sex with anybody.  We catch them by touching other people/ objects other people have touched or even the air we breathe.  Does that make you weird or some sort of Pariah?  A wart can grow on your finger after you have shook hands with someone who has a wart on their finger.  Does that mean you would never shake hands with anyone?  STD/I's are only passed to us when we have sex with someone.  The number of STD's and the risk of contracting STI's increases significantly when you have unprotected sex.  Holding up people who may not have contracted many or significant STD/I's from having unprotected sex to show that unprotected sex is not risky is like saying "my great aunt smoked her whole life until she was 90, therefore, smoking is not that bad"; you are talking about the minor exceptions and not the reality.

I accept that you are as likely (actually probably more likely)  to catch an STD/ I if you sleep with people who's sexual history you are not sure about as much as if you sleep with a prostitute.  What I find misleading is to say that you have slept with numerous people who's sexual history you are not sure of and you know for sure that you have not caught anything.  That's not slagging of heterosexuality or promiscuity in any way.

And no ... I am not a doctor so do not take anything I say as gospel ... check it yourself if you want to be sure.  However, I like to think to myself that I have properly explored the risks of punting when embarking on a punt.  I am happy to be enlightened where I may be wrong.