Question to all you Bare Back only folks: Swingers Discussion 11760310881

165
Question to all you Bare Back only folks: Swingers Discussion 11760310881

Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

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 ... 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94

Start

881 to 890 of 932

End

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 (14584 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.
Brookhaven MS			Username hidden (153 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	For a minute I thought I was going to have to get my calculator out to follow this thread. Statistics. UGH!!! The only way to be "safe" without a condom is to be in a monogomus relationship. Please raise your hand if you fall into that category. :)
Lake Wylie SC			Username hidden (610 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	"Oh, I AM right in what I say. SOME people can be safe. " That's wrong. Nobody in the lifestyle is SAFE. Barebackers are less safe then most condom users.
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14584 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Oh, I AM right in what I say. SOME people can be safe. If you can not comprehend or acknowledge how that is then you are probably not to be one of those people, are you? Sorry for the repetition, but perhaps you didn't read my previous post carefully enough.
Brookhaven MS			Username hidden (153 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Thanks so much for pointing that out, Seduction. That's the sort of argumentative wild card my kids used till they grew up -- and I didn't say SOME swingers, so I already implied the group trait for all. You know when every post someone makes is about someone else's authority it is hard to keep a mind on another subject. Sometimes I feel like that is the intent -- of course all internet talk boards tend to show the same traits as folks try for a stilted sort of ego dominance. Difference is I think that on swinger sites a lot of people think their sex life will benefit if they do that -- what an incentive to show out! Balloon popping, social one-upsmanship, being cute, and relating to others aside, people CAN be safe without condoms.
Brookhaven MS			Username hidden (153 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Only an idiot would think they can be as safe without a condom as with one while being in the lifestyle. If you want to accept higher risk than that's your choice. You ARE at a higher risk of getting an STD. No amount of rationalizing will change it.
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14584 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	Yeah it's a shame D+J makes sense. It's so much easier to take something they said once and use that as an excuse not to validate what they are saying now. It requires less thinking. Anybody ever notice how swingers tend to think they get to pick what is true and what is not like they were at a Chinese restaurant? One from column A and two from column B -- and their choice is as good as any and they will fight all the way to Hell to assert that. If you want to make a deity of risk -- you won't be swinging. It's the people who see how to do things that are competent at doing them. People who feel condoms are the only solution should use them -- not because nobody can be safe without them -- but because the people who CAN be safe without them spend their time doing what it takes to make that possible -- the other guys are still stressing how right they are. My advice is don't do sex without condoms if you think they are essential to safety. When you want to deal with the details of safety without condoms then you will be approaching things differently in your swinging.
Brookhaven MS			Username hidden (153 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	"The question for some of us is whether that risk is greater or less than other everyday risks we take and hardly think about, such as driving. I do a fair amount of driving and have had a number of close calls. The risk of driving is very real to me." lol. Driving is generally a necessity. Do you wear a seatbelt? Do you have a car with airbags? Maybe you don't. Do you drive with your headlights off at night? a crack in your windshield? OR do you minimize your risks of being harmed. You can, and do, rationalize your actions. That's fine with me. Just don't pretend there is logic in it. Just be honest and say you like barebacking better and you'll take your chances.
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14584 post)

User Details are only visible to members.	DandJ I don't know where you learned statistics but you're teacher should be fired or possibley even shot as you appear to be clueless in this area. For the average person condoms do not fail once in each 10 uses. That's the equivalent of saying a 3 digit lottery number hits once every 1000 days.....it just ain't so. Some stupid ass, small dicked moron who buys cheap condoms could have a failure everytime. Some intelligent, large dicked considerate person that buys quality may NEVER have a failure. "The chance of a barebacker getting infected from one instance of intercourse with an HIV infected person is one in two hundred or 0.5%, not 2%, if we use the figures from the study I mentioned previously." And the chance of a condom user is STILL 90% LESS. I never claimed to know the actual rate. I used numbers that would hopefully be easiy understood by those not mathematically inclined. I guess I didn't succeed.
Pittsburgh PA			Username hidden (14584 post)

GoTo Page: Less ... 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94

Start

881 to 890 of 932

End

TOPIC: Question to all you Bare Back only folks