Author Topic: Unannounced/unasked attempted BB instigated by WG  (Read 7148 times)

Offline jimbobted

This has happened twice to me now. A RB a couple of years ago where the girl was late, spent 3 hours "getting ready I. The bathroom, then emerged for fun. She was plastered in make up despite me being very specific I like a natural look, and was also heavier than her photos suggested. Anyway we snog a bit, get naked, she sucks me off for a bit then attempts to ride me.
"Whooah, what about a rubber"
"Oh I forgot to bring any, but I do t mind if you don't"
"Yes I do mind actually!"
By this time it was nearly midnight and took late/couldn't be arsed to get any so made do with a blowjob and then went to sleep.

I tell this tale now because I had a RB last week. Girl was lovely and for some reason we started swapping war stories. She asked what my worst pint was, that story popped into my head and she didn't really say much.

A bit later after some fabulous snogging discovering she had a massive pair of lovely pert tits hiding under her clothes as well as a lovely body generally she gives a fantastic blow job. She's wet and very turned on, then proceeds to try to mount me.
"Hold on, you've forgotten the rubber"
"I'd prefer to, but I haven't brought any".
Jesus H Christ. Fortunately I happened to have some, had a pretty good fuck.

I had sensed some hesitation earlier in proceedings and perhaps this was why.

But what are the chances of her pulling the exact same stunt as the tale I'd just told her?! Why didn't she just say "oh now you mention it I think I may have forgotten to pack any, how silly of me" and we could have popped across to the shop literally opposite the hotel to get some before we were both naked.

Anyone else experienced this? Pretty unprofessional IMO. Needless to say she doesn't advertise BB.

Offline alabama1

So, are you going to tell us all who this WG is, so that members here who choose not to see barebackers, can avoid her  :unknown:

Offline Jujy78

I've said it before few SPs offer BB but they won't advertise it. I've gone BB with about 4 SPs in my 25 years of punting life. All instances was just went with the flow there was no discussions or arrangements to go BB. I was young and naive then and just went with it too. Regularly saw them and each time went BB. I kept telling myself next time I see them I will insist on a condom but the dick has its own mind specially when we're young.

Offline Longshot

It happens way more often than we realise.  Despite selecting BB on the "dislike" option Ive been asked several times if i wanted to use condoms or not once in the room.

On a recent visit to a semi regular we were getting well into the flow when i asked for a jonny, she playfully huffed "you and your bloody condoms!!"  If i was inclined i could have banged her raw and creampied her right there.  This girl is now off my hotlist and phone number deleted.

Some years ago i would have gladly taken the option but im too wisened nowadays to let my dick rule me on these matters.  All you can do is cover up and hope for the best.

Offline Mstar86

Does anyone ever put these details in their reviews??

I never see reviews where it’s mentioned that although it’s not advertised, BB was offered. But yet here in this thread people are talking about being offered it or even taking part.

Yes I know that we should assume ALL women, civvy or SP, are BB’ing someone but do feel slightly let down that UKP members don’t share this sort of information to help warn others.

Surely JUST SAY THE BLOODY NAME if you want to be useful!?
« Last Edit: November 02, 2025, 07:58:02 am by Mstar86 »

Online daviemac

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,535
  • Likes: 728
  •  
  • Reviews: 24
This has happened twice to me now.
Without names it's a totally pointless post, your point can be made in 5 words, "some escorts offer UTC bareback".  :unknown:

Offline Mr Garmin

I wonder if she took the mention BB as you testing the water to gauge her response and that you were actually looking for it

Online daviemac

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,535
  • Likes: 728
  •  
  • Reviews: 24
Just to add there's 'bareback avoidance' threads all over the forum so we all know it goes on.

Offline Momodan38

Does anyone ever put these details in their reviews??

I never see reviews where it’s mentioned that although it’s not advertised, BB was offered. But yet here in this thread people are talking about being offered it or even taking part.

Yes I know that we should assume ALL women, civvy or SP, are BB’ing someone but do feel slightly let down that UKP members don’t share this sort of information to help warn others.

Surely JUST SAY THE BLOODY NAME if you want to be useful!?

I don’t know about that. What if it goes the other way and a pissed off punter tries to damage the SPs reputation by making stuff up?

Not to mention some of our resident studmeisters being tempted into adding imaginary scenarios… “she was really turned on by me and wanted me so bad that she begged me to do her raw, but I insisted on safety first”

Honestly, as a forum we have good balance with the way things are.

Offline Wayfarer

Does anyone ever put these details in their reviews??

I never see reviews where it’s mentioned that although it’s not advertised, BB was offered. But yet here in this thread people are talking about being offered it or even taking part.

Yes I know that we should assume ALL women, civvy or SP, are BB’ing someone but do feel slightly let down that UKP members don’t share this sort of information to help warn others.

Surely JUST SAY THE BLOODY NAME if you want to be useful!?
My comment is not in relation to bareback but to fingering. I understand what you are saying and I sympathize. I believe and think all others on this site believe in sharing information so we all benefit.

Now to my anecdote:

In my review of GorgeousVikiLondon https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=436613.0, I understand that it caused her to write on her AW profile that guys attempting fingering on her will have their booking stopped and future bookings denied. She had provided UTC fingering to some punters. She said the reason why she had done this was because she was aware of UKP reviews and the increase in punters booking her and attempting to perform fingering on her. Now she has a blanket no fingering allowed. I do not know for sure, but I cannot help but think it was my review that was referred to.

The advice I received is as follows:

1) Where the services are the enjoys list then these are open for discussion for review.
2) Where the service is discretionary then the one is encouraged to discuss and mention since it helps readers of reviews to understand how often the discretion is allowed or not allowed with more data points.
3) Where the service is not listed as enjoyed or even expressly forbidden then do not mention this at all.

I do not want the same result as what I believed happened with GorgeousVikiLondon. Taking this fingering analogy to apply to UTC bareback is one option.

Also there is the, at times, extreme animosity towards reviewers who mention that they perform bareback can be another reason why its best not to mention the service provided.

Just some thoughts.





Offline macman26

We're all human even wg if you find someone attractive and you get on with them, these things happen. What is the things that is quite worrying is so many women now and not on contraception. Most younger girls <25 I've dated from the sugar daddy sites or dating sites... when you're busy in the throes of everything and you say you've got something from your jacket I think you are getting a vape or something. Just doesn't cross their mind, you want to use a condom!

A few of them I've dated simply do not want to use one and then the meeting gets stopped with that awkwardness or you press ahead. Choice is yours.

Online MLawro93

Pointless thread without naming names.  :unknown:

Offline Coriniumstud

Pointless thread without naming names.  :unknown:

Agree, if he’s not naming then what’s the point

Offline macman26

wish they would but guess might brake the rules of site

Offline Jonestown

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,781
  • Likes: 136
  •  
  • Reviews: 55
OP is probably thinking that if he posts the names of the SPs he is going to unleash a mob of pro-BB weirdos on these unsuspecting girls, who maybe don’t actually offer BB normally, with who knows what negative outcome. Bet he wishes he hadn’t started the thread now.

Offline Mstar86

I don’t know about that. What if it goes the other way and a pissed off punter tries to damage the SPs reputation by making stuff up?

Not to mention some of our resident studmeisters being tempted into adding imaginary scenarios… “she was really turned on by me and wanted me so bad that she begged me to do her raw, but I insisted on safety first”

Honestly, as a forum we have good balance with the way things are.

 :D :D we definitely do not want more of that!! On reflection I do see where you’re coming from and tbh I’d not thought of this.

Having said that, this is an open forum where anyone can sign up and has a right to reply, like this SP here (not about bb):

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=438071.0

I guess I meant more in this case of OP just telling us what was happening without any mention of names.

The advice I received is as follows:

1) Where the services are the enjoys list then these are open for discussion for review.
2) Where the service is discretionary then the one is encouraged to discuss and mention since it helps readers of reviews to understand how often the discretion is allowed or not allowed with more data points.
3) Where the service is not listed as enjoyed or even expressly forbidden then do not mention this at all.

Agree with all of these thoughts and suggestions about mentioning BB if within a review & it’s not offered on profile buttt what if it explicitly says “dont ask, you’ll be blocked” or “No BB” “booking will be cancelled if any mention of BB” etc?
Then is it not false advertising as they’re making out they don’t do this and are equally disgusted by it. Nobody asks them to write this, could just….. not mention BB on your profile.

Still feel on this post names should have been mentioned or just not post but that’s just an opinion and totally get OP may not want to set the BB wolves on her, this is a very good point.

Offline RogerHealey

Years ago remember virtuously telling an SP about declining (true) BB at no extra cost from another WG. She nodded and smiled approvingly before suggesting I spaff inside her so she can watch it dribble out. Go figure.

Online stampjones

OP is probably thinking that if he posts the names of the SPs he is going to unleash a mob of pro-BB weirdos on these unsuspecting girls, who maybe don’t actually offer BB normally, with who knows what negative outcome. Bet he wishes he hadn’t started the thread now.
Interesting point JT. Naming someone who offers utc bb as a service is one thing but in this case its a bit unclear whether she normally does it or just thought fuck it I’ll do it rather than lose the cash. Not saying thats risk free but if this was the only time she did this (or one of a very small number of times) then its not really much different to how anyone might go bare in civvy life which is something you pretty much have to price into any punt anyway. Given the other side to that which you point out then its probably safest for all involved not to name names unless we are sure this is part of the escort’s package of services as a matter of course

Offline LLPunting

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,354
  • Likes: 184
  •  
  • Reviews: 360
If OP isn't going to name names then the thread is idle gossip.  Hopefully this isn't some pious flex in which case what is it?

If he is saying he specifically booked SPs who do not advertise bb on their profiles, or even categorically state no bb ("requesters will be blocked", etc) on their profile or in their comms then he should identify them in the bb warning thread (perhaps best to show Mods that such was true in comms received or on profile) and post screenshot of profile to evidence it's advertised or not (yet proven to Mods).

If he does not want to out them then state why not seeing as he is consciously concealing a risk to other punters.  He may well have already done enough to out himself to the SPs should they read this if their careless "generousity" was a fairly singular situation.
If he intends to see either again then why raise this if it's likely to get him blocked?

Offline alabama1

Let's not hold our breathe, waiting for a response from the OP. He was logged on here last night but decided not to contribute further to his own thread.

Offline jimbobted

Well it was more of a thought experiment. I just wondered if other punters were seeing more of this too, given condoms seem to be falling out of favour more generally in society?
The first one was a couple of years ago and I don't know if she is even active any more. The more recent one was a fairly under the radar girl (never been mentioned on here) who responded to a reverse booking. Has a full time job etc and just does a bit of escorting on the side, so maybe to her it's more a "hook up with benefits" type vibe.
It did surprise me though that she was going to raw dog without hesitation,or even asking my consent.

Online Waterhouse

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,375
  • Likes: 70
  •  
  • Reviews: 23
Well it was more of a thought experiment. I just wondered if other punters were seeing more of this too, given condoms seem to be falling out of favour more generally in society?
The first one was a couple of years ago and I don't know if she is even active any more. The more recent one was a fairly under the radar girl (never been mentioned on here) who responded to a reverse booking. Has a full time job etc and just does a bit of escorting on the side, so maybe to her it's more a "hook up with benefits" type vibe.
It did surprise me though that she was going to raw dog without hesitation,or even asking my consent.
Is this a wind-up reply?

You still haven’t said who the SP(s) are so that other punters can choose to avoid, should they so wish.

Offline jimbobted

Is this a wind-up reply?
Err, no  :unknown:
You still haven’t said who the SP(s) are so that other punters can choose to avoid, should they so wish.
Indeed, and I'm not going to, so cry harder. I believe general discussion is allowed.
Not naming as 1 was over two years ago and not really relevant and the other I don't want to name.

I always assumed the girl is barebacking a boyfriend or whatever anyway, so that's why I use condoms
« Last Edit: November 03, 2025, 01:57:33 pm by jimbobted »

Online Waterhouse

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,375
  • Likes: 70
  •  
  • Reviews: 23
Then as mentioned previously, a pointless and superfluous thread that doesn’t give any info or help other punters. Just noise.

Offline jimbobted

No one forcing you to read it. Your whining is just noise.

Offline alabama1

No one forcing you to read it. Your whining is just noise.
We have to read it to see what its about, then wish we hadn't bothered
« Last Edit: November 03, 2025, 02:33:01 pm by alabama1 »

Online Waterhouse

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,375
  • Likes: 70
  •  
  • Reviews: 23
We have to read it to see what its about, then wish we hadn't bothered
:lol:

Online stampjones

We have to read it to see what its about, then wish we hadn't bothered
You really dont. But even if that was true, and even though you wished you hadn’t bothered, you certainly didnt need to keep reading and commenting. But you did  :dash:

There are hundreds of general threads on here with people describing things that have happened to them with unspecified escorts. On bb ones though, for some reason some, people get their knickers in a twist about it. Sure its probably not “useful” in providing actionable information but it is interesting (to me anyway) so while it’s allowed by the rules of the site I’ll enjoy reading them.

As a suggestion if it bothers people so much, maybe have a new section for threads which dont have actionable information in them and the moaners would never have to read them again.

Offline Mstar86

You really dont. But even if that was true, and even though you wished you hadn’t bothered, you certainly didnt need to keep reading and commenting. But you did  :dash:

There are hundreds of general threads on here with people describing things that have happened to them with unspecified escorts. On bb ones though, for some reason some, people get their knickers in a twist about it. Sure its probably not “useful” in providing actionable information but it is interesting (to me anyway) so while it’s allowed by the rules of the site I’ll enjoy reading them.

As a suggestion if it bothers people so much, maybe have a new section for threads which dont have actionable information in them and the moaners would never have to read them again.

I totally agree with you but it’s his tone and the way he wrote his post, as if there’s a big problem he’s noticed but yet here he is refusing to help people avoid it. It’s stupid.

If he had said “has this ever happened to anyone?” And continued to say it happened once years ago but wondered if others had experienced it, then it would have been taken better by the community.

Offline JontyR

I totally agree with you but it’s his tone and the way he wrote his post, as if there’s a big problem he’s noticed but yet here he is refusing to help people avoid it. It’s stupid.

If he had said “has this ever happened to anyone?” And continued to say it happened once years ago but wondered if others had experienced it, then it would have been taken better by the community.
The OP has previous in this regard.

Offline southern punter

Does anyone ever put these details in their reviews??

I never see reviews where it’s mentioned that although it’s not advertised, BB was offered.

I have seen at least one review with almost identical anecdote as OP, in the SW forum.  I can't find in search though.

Offline myothernameis

Does anyone ever put these details in their reviews??

I think in some of the massage reviews, all though bb wasn't mentioned, the practice of bb was there.   And went something like this; after turning over, the girl began to do a body to body, sliding up and down.   The girl got so excited, I ended up inside of her, bb and we continued

Offline Heph

You really dont. But even if that was true, and even though you wished you hadn’t bothered, you certainly didnt need to keep reading and commenting. But you did  :dash:

There are hundreds of general threads on here with people describing things that have happened to them with unspecified escorts. On bb ones though, for some reason some, people get their knickers in a twist about it. Sure its probably not “useful” in providing actionable information but it is interesting (to me anyway) so while it’s allowed by the rules of the site I’ll enjoy reading them.

As a suggestion if it bothers people so much, maybe have a new section for threads which dont have actionable information in them and the moaners would never have to read them again.

I wholly support stampjones's stance here. If nothing else, reading accounts like this gives us some corroborative sense of our own experiences either way - in encountering tacit offers or not. My own being that a large minority, approaching half of those who expressly don't include such in their advertised services, or who outright taboo it, will act otherwise in camera; and a similar principle applies to advertised 'no-sex' massages.

« Last Edit: November 06, 2025, 03:20:41 am by Heph »

Offline LLPunting

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,354
  • Likes: 184
  •  
  • Reviews: 360
I wholly support stampjones's stance here. If nothing else, reading accounts like this gives us some corroborative sense of our own experiences either way - in encountering tacit offers or not. My own being that a large minority, approaching half of those who expressly don't include such in their advertised services, or who outright taboo it, will act otherwise in camera; and a similar principle applies to advertised 'no-sex' massages.

Depends on how representative the number of different encounters you have is.  How many different SPs?  Parlour girls? Nationality? Independents? Unknowns or already reviewed and you've selected them because you wanted the extras described or hinted at? All manner of choosing criteria bias the outcome and may well not represent the whole pop of SPs working.
Even in my limited searches of many unreporteds I haven't had the proportion of girls going beyond expected bounds that you have.

Online Upsndowns79

 It’s been said on here many times before but in reality ALL SP’s bareback from time to time. Whether that’s with long term partners, regular customers, as a well paid extra, in the heat of the moment urges or even punters removing condoms or condom breaks/accidental removals.

The longer I’ve been on here though and the more experienced I’ve become I think it’s become obvious that BB sex is more common than the SP’s advertised services and documented not an option would have us believe.

It’s all a matter of trying to manage risk and SP’s that advertise it as a service are obviously highest risk, those reported on here frequently the next highest and then those with the odd allegation (can be perceived as a disgruntled ex customer) but I think I’ve learned to realise that when an SP does offer/accept the service or simply get carried away it largely not reported here as the punter may have their reasons for not going public.

That’s my honest assessment. We pay our money and we take our chances.

Offline big-al93

It’s been said on here many times before but in reality ALL SP’s bareback from time to time. Whether that’s with long term partners, regular customers, as a well paid extra, in the heat of the moment urges or even punters removing condoms or condom breaks/accidental removals.

That’s my honest assessment. We pay our money and we take our chances.

I agree with the vast majority of your post, but unfair to say all, most I'd agree with but there are some (and I'm not trying to say it's a large number) who do not BB with partners, don't have partners ect. And I find it a little harsh to include condom breaks/accidental removals. I get that the result is more or less the same but it's not an indicator of risky behaviour imho.

Online Upsndowns79

I agree with the vast majority of your post, but unfair to say all, most I'd agree with but there are some (and I'm not trying to say it's a large number) who do not BB with partners, don't have partners ect. And I find it a little harsh to include condom breaks/accidental removals. I get that the result is more or less the same but it's not an indicator of risky behaviour imho.

I think that was my point…..probably not articulated correctly.

Even SP’s who NEVER BB with punters or partners through choice will by default have likely had a bare cock inside them in the last 3-6 months. As you say the same potential end result.

These SP’s carry the least risk obviously but are impossible to identify from those that do.

Offline Heph

The longer I’ve been on here though and the more experienced I’ve become I think it’s become obvious that BB sex is more common than the SP’s advertised services and documented not an option would have us believe.

It’s all a matter of trying to manage risk and SP’s that advertise it as a service are obviously highest risk, those reported on here frequently the next highest and then those with the odd allegation (can be perceived as a disgruntled ex customer) but I think I’ve learned to realise that when an SP does offer/accept the service or simply get carried away it largely not reported here as the punter may have their reasons for not going public.


This seems broadly right to me.

Depends on how representative the number of different encounters you have is.  How many different SPs?  Parlour girls? Nationality? Independents? Unknowns or already reviewed and you've selected them because you wanted the extras described or hinted at? All manner of choosing criteria bias the outcome and may well not represent the whole pop of SPs working.
Even in my limited searches of many unreporteds I haven't had the proportion of girls going beyond expected bounds that you have.

Several hundred over 2 decades+
Parlour, independent and agencies
Broadly mixed - with some nationalities/ethnicities precluded, because I tend not to do custom with those
Rarely (if ever) unknown - and has included some former darlings-of-the-boards
I've rarely made a booking with an express search for it - or based on adjacent hints

It's hard to put a meaningful % on; but as I suggested above, my general sense is, even amongst those who outwardly decry it, it's a sizeable minority- above a quarter, and approaching half

« Last Edit: November 06, 2025, 01:47:58 pm by Heph »

Online Kimeen


It's hard to put a meaningful % on; but as I suggested above, my general sense is, even amongst those who outwardly decry it, it's a sizeable minority- above a quarter, and approaching half

That’s odd. I recon I have shagged about 200 escorts, mix of 1 offs and longer term regulars. In that time I have had one occasion where I wondered of the SP was about to Bb.  It was a Thai girl and she was doing some major pussy slides and it seemed that she was positioning herself for entry. In the instant I might have got that wrong but anyway I flinched and she got a condom.  Even in this case I am not sure. 


Offline Heph

I don't doubt your account, but that wouldn't make my own odd - it's merely a case of varying experiences

What we're interested in establishing in this thread, so far as I can make out, is some insight into whether we punters find that "unannounced/unasked for" attempts do happen, and, if so, to what degree, allowing for, as LLP suggests, probable selection-biases. My own experience, in neither routinely or actively selecting for it; nor, so far as I can tell, cleaving to any wildly unusual punting pursuits, is that 1/ yes, it does, and 2/ a significant minority of times- and a good deal more than others seem to entertain as possible, or matching their experience.

One obvious prospective blind-spot is that, in my observation, it's on the whole more likely to happen with repeat visits (though there have been exceptions), and so, in the case of one-off visits, we're less likely to encounter it. One-offs account for something like half of those I've seen, which suggests that I might be underweighting its prevalence.


« Last Edit: November 06, 2025, 04:28:28 pm by Heph »

Online southcoastpunter

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,056
  • Likes: 160
  •  
  • Reviews: 27


What we're interested in establishing in this thread, so far as I can make out, is some insight into whether we punters find that "unannounced/unasked for" attempts do happen, and, if so, to what degree, allowing for, as LLP suggests, probable selection-biases.


Personally I think it’s a pointless thread - it goes on! Whether it’s just one escort out of a  total population of 20,000 ( or however many it is) or 10% or 50% we will never know and does it matter? I don’t think so - as this is about something very different to escorts to publicly offer BB!

It’s easy - if it happens to you and you don’t want it - just say “No” ( maybe more nicely than that! ) but how hard is it - unless you don’t trust yourself!!
« Last Edit: November 06, 2025, 04:50:35 pm by southcoastpunter »

Offline Heph

Obvs my quoted remark was only aimed at those who'll find the subject of some interest - rather than those who, a little ironically, can't trust themselves not to respond to a thread they find to be pointless, and so who should perhaps have chosen to turn their attention elsewhere instead   ;)

A lot of punters here do frequently chip-in and remind us that they're keen and careful to de-risk by sticking only to those who eschew or clearly discourage bareback. Our debates then inevitably move on to the various pros and cons of 'naming & shaming'; some evidently requiring this in order protect themselves from harm/'lead themselves not into temptation'; whilst others, more sanguine, remind us that 'nature always finds a way', and not to be so complacent as to conflate 'bareback loudly denounced in AW profile' with 'and so will-not happen with this sex-worker & her punters under any circumstances'. As intimated, I've encountered several who've made an overt point of this but who've nonetheless, mid-tryst, made unbidden moves to 'slip it in'.

So, whether we're actively seeking to reduce our risk exposure or are simply interested in the degree to which our peer-punters might be able to corroborate that unprotected sex might low-key be initiated where it's not been advertised, but most pointedly, where it's been actively discouraged in any given profile's text; this subject is likely to be of interest and of use to some; regardless of their position on it.

My own contribution here is that it happens far more often than I might have supposed from taking both punters & prossies accounts on this very useful website at face value.





 
« Last Edit: November 06, 2025, 05:50:33 pm by Heph »

Offline Jonestown

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,781
  • Likes: 136
  •  
  • Reviews: 55
Put a man and a woman in a room, remove their clothes and any number of unexpected things may happen, of which I’d say spontaneous bareback happens a lot more than people might imagine, even when one of those present is an active SP. Just my opinion. If that disturbs you the answer is as ever, always make sure that you are rubbered up at the critical time.

Online stampjones

My experience aligns with both heph and LLP. I dont see too many escorts so dont have a big sample size there. For massage encounters there have been no more than a handful of encounters over many years where Ive felt bb might happen. Having said that I almost never see the same provider multiple times so perhaps that is the reason. My other source of paid sex is SB sites such as seeking and it is the complete opposite there. The vast majority of encounters there would result in bb sex if I didnt produce my good friend johnny. So like LLP says it is definitely context specific.

Offline Logitech

Happened to me a good 9/10 years ago. I’d been seeing a WG fairly regularly and most times we’d just have oral on each other. We’d got fairly chatty over the years and once I was lay on my back being sucked and she suggested we fuck for the first time as I was close. I agreed and before I knew it she was angling to put it straight in her. I panicked and said what about a condom, she said don’t worry you can finish in me this time. She genuinely didn’t think I meant for our safety, she thought I meant so I don’t jizz in her. I don’t think I saw her again after that. She never came across as someone that would even remotely consider bareback…