Safe vs. bare

[LivingnLA]

Also hpv, easily transmitted even with condoms, can lead to anal cancer. Have had a few anal Pap smears, not pleasant , but better to know

 

An important clarification: HPV does not spread through an intact latex condom. But, like all of the skin contact spreadable STIs, HPV can easily spread from skin contact. If you suck an infected cock without a condom, it's possible to be infected with all known STIs though infection rates vary from very easy for something like HPV to pretty hard for something like HIV.

 

Consider this scenario: think about jacking off an infected cock and then touching your cock, boom! You've transmitted some infectious agents that might colonize your cock. Herpes and HPV can spread easily via touch. Syphilis is also spreadable by touch if there's an open sore. Molluscum contagiosum is too. So too are scabies and pubic lice (crabs) though completely hairless guys are not attractive to lice.

 

Good comprehensive STI testing for men who have sex with men includes throat and anal swabs because some STIs can colonize the throat or rectum and not show up on blood and urine tests. Life is full of risks. Educate yourself and live accordingly.

[studchaser]

Uhmm just in to say anyone having bare sex with a professional sex worker is looney tunes. Thats all folks. The end.

[leanbtm]

An important clarification: HPV does not spread through an intact latex condom. But, like all of the skin contact spreadable STIs, HPV can easily spread from skin contact. If you suck an infected cock without a condom, it's possible to be infected with all known STIs though infection rates vary from very easy for something like HPV to pretty hard for something like HIV.

 

Consider this scenario: think about jacking off an infected cock and then touching your cock, boom! You've transmitted some infectious agents that might colonize your cock. Herpes and HPV can spread easily via touch. Syphilis is also spreadable by touch if there's an open sore. Molluscum contagiosum is too. So too are scabies and pubic lice (crabs) though completely hairless guys are not attractive to lice.

 

Good comprehensive STI testing for men who have sex with men includes throat and anal swabs because some STIs can colonize the throat or rectum and not show up on blood and urine tests. Life is full of risks. Educate yourself and live accordingly.

 

 

As was explained to me by one of the few MD's in NYC that performed anal Pap smears: a condom , while covering the head and most of the shaft, may not cover the entire shaft therefore there can be skin to skin contact depending on extent of penetration.

[MidwestCoastal]

This whole topic gives me pause.... Big head vs little head.... and also makes me want a BF in the worst way.

 

For me, BB sex is a total fetish.... The act of getting bred.... totally a mental fuck...

 

I have a regular provider for over 3 years and we have only engaged in BB sex. I trust him, but I know with the majority of his clients, he is barebacking.... video on his ad shows him fucking raw. We're both PreP and tested regularly.

 

I have also BB'ed with a few other providers.

 

The whole topic ultimately depresses me because I wish I had a BB BF. I also feel people are 'judging' those of us who choose to BB. And let me reiterate... 'FEEL'.... its in my own head.... and my own nagging concerns that I may be taking unnecessary risk.

[LivingnLA]

As was explained to me by one of the few MD's in NYC that performed anal Pap smears: a condom , while covering the head and most of the shaft, may not cover the entire shaft therefore there can be skin to skin contact depending on extent of penetration.

 

Yes, it's important to make sure the condom fully covers the entire shaft if the entire shaft is coming into contact. I've seen amateur porn where some tops only partially unroll. I don't know if they're trying to get the condom to slip off or if they want to feel part of their shaft go in bare, but yes, in those situations, the chances of infections for many different STIs are the same as condomless sex because for those parts of skin, it is condomless.

[LivingnLA]

This whole topic gives me pause.... Big head vs little head.... and also makes me want a BF in the worst way.

 

For me, BB sex is a total fetish.... The act of getting bred.... totally a mental fuck...

 

I have a regular provider for over 3 years and we have only engaged in BB sex. I trust him, but I know with the majority of his clients, he is barebacking.... video on his ad shows him fucking raw. We're both PreP and tested regularly.

 

I have also BB'ed with a few other providers.

 

The whole topic ultimately depresses me because I wish I had a BB BF. I also feel people are 'judging' those of us who choose to BB. And let me reiterate... 'FEEL'.... its in my own head.... and my own nagging concerns that I may be taking unnecessary risk.

 

Much of sex is mental. Many of the guys who go limp with condoms are mentally destroying their erection because they've convinced themselves that they can't stay hard while wearing a condom. It's like many guys with ED. Do not misunderstand me here. I am not saying there are not serious physical issues for some men with ED. Many guys do have physical issues to tackle. But, our culture tends to obsess about the physical and ignore the psychological. It's physiologically possible for every healthy human male to have and keep an erection while wearing a condom. Is sensation different? Yes! But, with the right condom and the right mood/mindset, it's entirely possible.

 

I do not judge barebackers. I don't use condoms with my wife and haven't since college. I know what condomless sex with her feels like and I love it. In the past, I have had very trusted buddies who I've fucked without a condom. As I said above, being a mature adult means being honest about life and the risks all around us. If you want to bareback with an escort, that is your choice and the escort's choice. I hope you've educated yourself and you're tested regularly, because escorts and porn actors are a high risk demographic and men who have sex with men are too. So, probabilities are fairly high that you may catch something one day. If you are responsible, you are getting anal and throat swabs along with other STI testing at least quarterly since you're on PrEP. You should know the incubation periods for STIs, the potential symptoms, and understand that men are often asymptomatic. None of that is judgement. The only time I judge barebackers is when they show ignorance for all the things they should know to actually make an informed decision about the risks they are taking every time they take or give raw dick. Life is full of risk and risk can be exciting. A responsible man understands that, educates himself, and tries to be honest with himself and those he interacts with as he lives according to his choices.

[hypothetically]

Who knew bareback sex could trigger the philosopher, physician and beacon of virtue in us all.

Edited November 19, 2019 by hypothetically

[Ghadd]

Who knew bareback sex could trigger the philosopher, physician and beacon of virtue in us all.

Well, it's well known that everyone on the internet is an expert!

[mike carey]

Well, it's well known that everyone on the internet is an expert!

My problem is I haven't yet worked out what I am an expert in!

[LivingnLA]

My problem is I haven't yet worked out what I am an expert in!

 

[adventurous old guy]

This whole topic gives me pause.... Big head vs little head.... and also makes me want a BF in the worst way.

 

For me, BB sex is a total fetish.... The act of getting bred.... totally a mental fuck...

 

I have a regular provider for over 3 years and we have only engaged in BB sex. I trust him, but I know with the majority of his clients, he is barebacking.... video on his ad shows him fucking raw. We're both PreP and tested regularly.

 

I have also BB'ed with a few other providers.

 

The whole topic ultimately depresses me because I wish I had a BB BF. I also feel people are 'judging' those of us who choose to BB. And let me reiterate... 'FEEL'.... its in my own head.... and my own nagging concerns that I may be taking unnecessary risk.

 

Just want to say that I resonate and totally appreciate your candor. Made me recall my college philosophy courses. Sarte wrote some really thought provoking stuff on fetish/perversion. I'm bastardizing, but the gist is that sex is a profound act of human to human communication. Fetishs no matter how exteme are not perversion as long as some real person to person exchange is going on, whereas banging it out in the hetero missionary position is perversion if its rote, routine and objectifying. Talking about those ideas in class at the age of 21 as I was coming to terms with the reality that I was attracted to boys much more than girls changed my life.

Edited November 22, 2019 by adventurous old guy

[LivingnLA]

Just want to say that I resonate and totally appreciate your candor. Made me recall my college philosophy courses. Sarte wrote some really thought provoking stuff on fetish/perverish. I'm bastardizing, but the gist is that sex is a profound act of human to human communication. Fetishs no matter how exteme are not perversion as long as some real person to person exchange is going on, whereas banging it out in the hetero missionary position is perversion if its rote, routine and objectifying. Talking about those ideas in class at the age of 21 as I was coming to terms with the reality that I was attracted to boys much more than girls changed my life.

 

Sartre is good for challenging and opening minds. Foucault is too. After opening minds with the classics, bring in current ideas and research to build on what was right and correct what was wrong.

[former lurker]

Sartre is good for challenging and opening minds. Foucault is too. After opening minds with the classics, bring in current ideas and research to build on what was right and correct what was wrong.

 

You've just articulated the raison d'etre of a liberal arts education.

[LivingnLA]

You've just articulated the raison d'etre of a liberal arts education.

[studchaser]

not totally correct... Herpes is skin to skin... Syphillis can be transmitted skin to skin... sooooo those throwing stones about BB sex anally such look at their own actions about oral sex and then decide if they really want to throw stones about people having anal sex bareback....

and PS, I got chlamydia in the throat without anyone ejaculating in me mouth... so that's not a 100% valid point.

 

Im not sure what your advocating. Everyone should practice safe sex the safer the better but some things are much worse than others. Unprotected bareback anal is as worse as it gets and while nowadays ppl can use prep I still have a holdover disdain for the many people who needlessly jeopardized themselves and others when it didnt have to be.

[MassageAdam]

Im not sure what your advocating. Everyone should practice safe sex the safer the better but some things are much worse than others. Unprotected bareback anal is as worse as it gets and while nowadays ppl can use prep I still have a holdover disdain for the many people who needlessly jeopardized themselves and others when it didnt have to be.

so I was just saying, the people who judge people for having raw bareback sex, but then have oral sex without condoms shouldn't throw stones... granted HIV is rare for oral sex but you can get everything else.... so I want them to think about their behavior before talking about anal bareback sex if they are having oral sex without a condom.... that's all... very simple.. I don't care what people do.. everybody has the right to decide for themselves...

[former lurker]

That's not how your posts read. It sounds like you've got an unstated concern about people who engage in unprotected BB sex with multiple partners facing stigma from others. That's what's really behind all the talk about who is judging whom. There is a stigma associated with having unprotected BB anal sex. And trading charges about judging one another won't change that stigma. The stigma is a consequence of the behavior, and living with the stigma is just another risk that practitioners of BB sex take. And I'm not going to get worked up over whether the stigma is fair or not unless it results in unfair treatment in matters unrelated to sex (i.e., discrimination in housing, employment, provision of health care coverage, participation in groups open to the public, etc.)

[adventurous old guy]

Sartre is good for challenging and opening minds. Foucault is too. After opening minds with the classics, bring in current ideas and research to build on what was right and correct what was wrong.

Amen. And Foucault was in our club!

[studchaser]

so I was just saying, the people who judge people for having raw bareback sex, but then have oral sex without condoms shouldn't throw stones... granted HIV is rare for oral sex but you can get everything else.... so I want them to think about their behavior before talking about anal bareback sex if they are having oral sex without a condom.... that's all... very simple.. I don't care what people do.. everybody has the right to decide for themselves...

 

I actually dont find your position as helpful as you would like to think. You are completely right for pointing out the risks of oral sex but it still seems your falsely equivocating and/or putting them in the same boat. Almost every std will be easier to transmit via anal and yes the big one hiv is almost always transferred that way as it pertains to sex. That for me matters and as i said before there has been a long tradition of reckless self destructive behavior amongst gay men that still bewilders me to this day. Gay men were literally having unprotected anal sex during an era when they knew what caused hiv/aids and it was a death sentence. I know this is a touchy subject but it evokes anger in me because it affected alot of ppl. With a few degrees of separation its easy to see how alot of communities outside the gay community(women, children) could have been infected unknowingly. Lets also not forget from time to tike we hear about strains of hiv that are resistant to prep and resistant to medication. No one should be having bareback sex with a provider who is having bareback sex unless you guys are both infected and have reached a point where a few moments of pleasure is the paramount concern in your life.

[LivingnLA]

Amen. And Foucault was in our club!

 

Thanks. I'm not sure which club you're referring to above, is there a secret handshake that I don't know?

 

Foucault was in many clubs. That's one of the fascinating aspects of his work.

Edited November 23, 2019 by LivingnLA

[adventurous old guy]

Thanks. I'm not sure which club you're referring to above, is there a secret handshake that I don't know?

 

Foucault was in many clubs. That's one the fascinating aspects of his work.

Lol, I meant that he was gay of course. But I see your point, and like it. We're more than our sexual preferences, yes?

Edited November 23, 2019 by adventurous old guy

[buttlvr99]

I have only used condoms for topping since the the beginning. I guess I am used to it now so going bare would seem odd. One thing I want to point out is that some people can be susceptible to a urethra infection, happened once to me along time ago not from topping but you get the point. I guess for me condoms are just cleaner for entry. I have had a couple of experiences where the bottom was not totally clean and I was happy I had a condom on. Anyway just my two cents, perhaps I will try bare if the right situation comes along in the future.

[Strafe13]

I understand your emotional reaction to this topic but that doesn't imbue your posts with more validity than anyone else's, particularly with respect to the empirical statements you've offered with no citation to authority. We all do that from time to time and for things that are within realm of common knowledge and generally undisputed, that's usually fine. I'm not sure that your stated belief, which appears to be the main thrust of your argument, is correct:

 

"Almost every std will be easier to transmit via anal and yes the big one hiv is almost always transferred that way as it pertains to sex."

 

It's pretty bold to assert that HIV is almost always transmitted by anal sex. Based on what I think you're trying to articulate (as opposed to your literal words), I wouldn't say you're necessarily or 100% wrong, but there's so much context lacking here that your statement borders on irresponsible. As a quick example, since male-female vaginal intercourse is the leading cause of HIV infections in women, particularly in certain regions like sub-Saharan Africa, your point carries significantly less heft than you intended, unless you're willing to paint these women with the same broad brush as you do gay men, with respect to decreeing how, when, and with whom they should be allowed to have sex. Moreover, the reason that anal sex is such an effective means of transmission for HIV is because it's more likely to cause tears and bleeding, making it easier for HIV (which doesn't survive long outside of bodily fluids) to enter the bloodstream. In other words, anal sex just happens to be an excellent vehicle for HIV because it neutralizes one of the virus's more unique vulnerabilities. It's not because anal sex is generally great for almost all STIs.

 

I think the point of the forum member to whom you were responding was that for those who are on PrEP, which minimizes HIV infection risk to near zero if used consistently and correctly, their risk of contracting other STIs (which don't share HIV's unique transmission properties) is far more comparable to other forms of sex. That's why, contrary to your assertion, analogizing PrEP-adherent anal sex BBers to oral sex BBers is not a false equivalency. An analogy doesn't require the situations to be identical, only that they be sufficiently similar with respect to the specific issue for which the comparison is being made. That's easily satisfied here.

 

Hence, those who engage in other kinds of sex acts without using condoms are in no position to pass judgment (are any of us, really?), particularly when you consider that so many guys are incredibly and stubbornly adamant about refusing condoms in certain of those scenarios, particularly for oral sex. In real life and on this forum I've seen guys mock and disparage those who insisted on using condoms for oral sex. I fail to see how that's much different than taking down to PrEP-adherent anal sex BBers. I can't speak for @MassageAdam, but my intention in raising the analogy was not to disparage oral sex BBers. Rather it was to help illustrate the irrationality behind what some folks assume about the efficacy of varying types of safer sex practices, as well as the different risks relating to STI transmission generally.

 

Your last sentence is particularly troublesome, and I hope you reconsider how it could come across as particularly obnoxious and offensive:

 

"No one should be having bareback sex with a provider who is having bareback sex unless you guys are both infected and have reached a point where a few moments of pleasure is the paramount concern in your life."

 

Gay men are far from the only group of people with a long history of engaging in behavior that could be seen (fairly, or not) as high-risk or even self-destructive. Heck, the pervasiveness of that trait throughout all demographics is probably what keeps everyone's therapists and counselors in business! Why should we face a higher level of condemnation than others, particularly from our own brethren? If I may draw another analogy, this strikes me as very similar to the "respectability politics" often seen in the black community. As a lifelong member of both communities, my considered opinion is that I don't think it really helps either one, irrespective of the typically non-bad faith intentions of those who employ it.

I actually dont find your position as helpful as you would like to think. You are completely right for pointing out the risks of oral sex but it still seems your falsely equivocating and/or putting them in the same boat. Almost every std will be easier to transmit via anal and yes the big one hiv is almost always transferred that way as it pertains to sex. That for me matters and as i said before there has been a long tradition of reckless self destructive behavior amongst gay men that still bewilders me to this day. Gay men were literally having unprotected anal sex during an era when they knew what caused hiv/aids and it was a death sentence. I know this is a touchy subject but it evokes anger in me because it affected alot of ppl. With a few degrees of separation its easy to see how alot of communities outside the gay community(women, children) could have been infected unknowingly. Lets also not forget from time to tike we hear about strains of hiv that are resistant to prep and resistant to medication. No one should be having bareback sex with a provider who is having bareback sex unless you guys are both infected and have reached a point where a few moments of pleasure is the paramount concern in your life.

[+ ITakeItDeep]

"I now feel that insisting on a condom greatly reduces the number of available escorts and disappoints most of the others "..only you can really weigh that trade off...

[studchaser]

I understand your emotional reaction to this topic but that doesn't imbue your posts with more validity than anyone else's, particularly with respect to the empirical statements you've offered with no citation to authority. We all do that from time to time and for things that are within realm of common knowledge and generally undisputed, that's usually fine. I'm not sure that your stated belief, which appears to be the main thrust of your argument, is correct:

 

"Almost every std will be easier to transmit via anal and yes the big one hiv is almost always transferred that way as it pertains to sex."

 

It's pretty bold to assert that HIV is almost always transmitted by anal sex. Based on what I think you're trying to articulate (as opposed to your literal words), I wouldn't say you're necessarily or 100% wrong, but there's so much context lacking here that your statement borders on irresponsible. As a quick example, since male-female vaginal intercourse is the leading cause of HIV infections in women, particularly in certain regions like sub-Saharan Africa, your point carries significantly less heft than you intended, unless you're willing to paint these women with the same broad brush as you do gay men, with respect to decreeing how, when, and with whom they should be allowed to have sex. Moreover, the reason that anal sex is such an effective means of transmission for HIV is because it's more likely to cause tears and bleeding, making it easier for HIV (which doesn't survive long outside of bodily fluids) to enter the bloodstream. In other words, anal sex just happens to be an excellent vehicle for HIV because it neutralizes one of the virus's more unique vulnerabilities. It's not because anal sex is generally great for almost all STIs.

 

I think the point of the forum member to whom you were responding was that for those who are on PrEP, which minimizes HIV infection risk to near zero if used consistently and correctly, their risk of contracting other STIs (which don't share HIV's unique transmission properties) is far more comparable to other forms of sex. That's why, contrary to your assertion, analogizing PrEP-adherent anal sex BBers to oral sex BBers is not a false equivalency. An analogy doesn't require the situations to be identical, only that they be sufficiently similar with respect to the specific issue for which the comparison is being made. That's easily satisfied here.

 

Hence, those who engage in other kinds of sex acts without using condoms are in no position to pass judgment (are any of us, really?), particularly when you consider that so many guys are incredibly and stubbornly adamant about refusing condoms in certain of those scenarios, particularly for oral sex. In real life and on this forum I've seen guys mock and disparage those who insisted on using condoms for oral sex. I fail to see how that's much different than taking down to PrEP-adherent anal sex BBers. I can't speak for @MassageAdam, but my intention in raising the analogy was not to disparage oral sex BBers. Rather it was to help illustrate the irrationality behind what some folks assume about the efficacy of varying types of safer sex practices, as well as the different risks relating to STI transmission generally.

 

Your last sentence is particularly troublesome, and I hope you reconsider how it could come across as particularly obnoxious and offensive:

 

"No one should be having bareback sex with a provider who is having bareback sex unless you guys are both infected and have reached a point where a few moments of pleasure is the paramount concern in your life."

 

Gay men are far from the only group of people with a long history of engaging in behavior that could be seen (fairly, or not) as high-risk or even self-destructive. Heck, the pervasiveness of that trait throughout all demographics is probably what keeps everyone's therapists and counselors in business! Why should we face a higher level of condemnation than others, particularly from our own brethren? If I may draw another analogy, this strikes me as very similar to the "respectability politics" often seen in the black community. As a lifelong member of both communities, my considered opinion is that I don't think it really helps either one, irrespective of the typically non-bad faith intentions of those who employ it.

 

Strafe,

 

I have heard all the fancy intellectual sounding equivocating arguments that amount to do as you please and live and let live. They have been around since the days aids was killing gay men. I would have been a baby then.

 

Yes i modulated the original conversation slightly to interject a poignant peripheral point. With all the intelligence within the gay community historically it has not been exercised when it came to sexual practices. I think the calamity of days gone by are my xitations for that assertion.

 

You proved my point precisely then added a whole bunch of fancy shiny well decorated pieces of nothing. We are not discussing heterosexual sex as no one on here is taking prep so they can slay the kitty kat of the vixen next door. Yes it is the mechanics of anal sex and the tears it creates that make it the most dangerous and the paryicipants most susceotible. In the grand scheme of things hiv is still "the big one" and is the only disease to have killed an entire segment of the population en masse. I am sure all those ppl who died on their death bed wished someone would have told them straight "protect your fuc*kin self" and they had listened!