Question to all you Bare Back only folks: Swingers Discussion 11760310871

SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

TOPIC: Question to all you Bare Back only folks

GoTo Page: Less ... 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 ... More

Start

871 to 880 of 930

End

User Details are only visible to members.	Awwwww Licks, you hurt my feelings, baby! What a nice lecture about your rights, too. How cute!
Zachary LA			Username hidden (154 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Seduction, you claimed radiant heat was much more efficient than forced air. In my several posts I took care to point out that neither held an edge in efficiency and that the only study to directly compare the two systems found forced air had a slight, insignificant edge in that study. I didn't say it, it was the study which did. Perfect, you've called me clueless, and have put down my ability with statistics several times. Getting personal has nothing to do with logic. It was you who made the mistake calling a 1 in 200 risk a 2% risk. Why do you claim I ever said that barebacking is as safe as using a condom??? I've repeatedly said that condoms reduce the risk 90%, a figure I got from a study, not my figure. You've been putting me down for that figure...it's not mine! Logic is dealing with the statistics, not spitting out personal put downs. If that 90% risk reduction statistic is correct, if you fuck 10 times as many people as I do using condoms that reduce that risk by a factor of ten, we each have the same risk load. That was the point I initially made.
Enosburg Falls VT			Username hidden (969 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Now perfect, aren't you a piece of work! Why do want to gum up this person's post with your troll game? They specifically asked your category of poster not to comment in the fashion you are. They wanted input from people who were advocates of a particular way of thinking and they specifically asked folks like you NOT to degrade this discussion. And you're going to get tyrannical asserting your UBER-rightness and do it anyway? Wow that sure makes ME wet! Last post or two you aren't into logic and not even answering questions. Why pretend you are -- it's easy to see that it is stomping in a superiority conclusion through insults that is your tack. At least I bother to put out a string of thought AS REQUESTED BY THE THREADMASTER. And Lick. Do you fit the category of poster that hotwife requested? Is it possible to ask you folks to STFU as per instructions at the top of the page and still be an OK person? Or do I have to agree with you about everything before that happens?
Zachary LA			Username hidden (154 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Is this what you do when you can't debate an issue logically?
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14772 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	He,he! I think I understand you entirely. I have a good friend -- a very smart and articulate fellow -- who once looked at me as if he was serious and said to me with a straight face: " You know there are two types of people in this world -- people who put people in one of two categories and people who don't." Then he was silent as he loved to make people wonder for a minute. At least I gave three categories below for us all -- including you -- maybe you didn't read the post carefully. Check out that last category I listed. And while we are paying attention, did you notice the first paragraph of what hotwife requested in putting up this thread? Does understanding that escape you, too?
Zachary LA			Username hidden (154 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Ya, the reality catagory. You might want to give it a try sometime.
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14772 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	We see which category you fall into don't we?
Zachary LA			Username hidden (154 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	"The most dangerous way to have any kind of sex is to not screen your partners sufficiently and end up having sex with infected people. Condom or not." Wrong again. The most dangerous would be to not screen your partners AND not wear a condom.
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14772 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	"Take this further explanation as an exercise in pure logic" That's the fucking funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14772 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	I swear to God you folks must have been the folks Bill Clinton was talking to with making an issue out of the definition of the word "is". Take this further explanation as an exercise in pure logic -- we actually often use condoms or insist on them if we are with someone we don't know. But what I say below is STILL TRUE. The most dangerous way to have any kind of sex is to not screen your partners sufficiently and end up having sex with infected people. Condom or not. Psychological pathologies and agents of contagion are both removed through this selection process. To some people, their intellect, their social skills, their desire to get it on quickly and their brevity prevent them from knowing their partners as well as others might. The more challenged one is in these areas the more needed a condom is for that swinger. God still loves these people -- they just need some extra help from the hardware to be as safe as folks think they need to be. But... The creepy crawlies that go around a condom, the ones that get in there when the condom slips or breaks mean if you are having sex with infected folks, you stand to be infected. Condom sex is NOT safe in an absolute sense only a relative sense. If you are not having sex with infected folks by virtue of your medical expertise, your intimacy, or your knowledge of human communication and your ability to parse logic, then you are not ever going to get infected from that sex you do have. That is true anywhere in this physical universe. People who do not have the ability to determine these things often feel that nobody has these abilities, but they are wrong about that and the payoff is their ego. In their mind, they can chop everyone's abilities down to their size in order to prevail. Now there are going to be some folks out there who say "Oh no WAY!" Give me a condom, you can't trust (my kind of) sex without a condom. I want to have sex with too many people to know them that well -- it takes the fun out of it." These folks who have sex with folks they know less ARE a greater risk. But God still loves them and we can too. Then there are going to be people who say "Yes that is true, so I recognize the principle if I just wanted a partner or two and I was deeply honest and inquisitive then I could have that. If I want to deviate from that I can always slip on a glove. Since a glove is not as safe as knowing your partners are not infected, I could tell my "safe" partners about what I did and if that was a deal killer for them then so be it." This is the thinking of a reasonable person. Then some people usually also in group one will say " You are fucking CRAZY saying that anyone could come up with screening that is worth it or as effective as you claim. You are NOT being safe because I cannot relate to a world in which you could do what you are claiming. Therefore YOU are full of SHIT." These are the people who make poor sex partners for psychological reasons, unless you think exactly like them, or unless you avoid discourse. Ego and them being right can become more important than sharing anything with them, and the facts just get in the way. Because of this, not in spite of it, they are also a greater risk of contagion as their outreach is challenged by issues of ego and credibility. We are in a loop fellows. Choose your category above.
Zachary LA			Username hidden (154 post)

GoTo Page: Less ... 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 ... More

Start

871 to 880 of 930

End

TOPIC: Question to all you Bare Back only folks

		HELP
FORUMS: General Discussions: Safe Sex: Question to all you Bare Back only folks