The Swingers Board - View Single Post - Double standard on oral sex: use of condoms for oral but not dental dams

PaulKing · 05-29-2003, 07:44 PM

As I read it what regular Guy is saying is that in view of: -

'Author Michael Fumento, in his book The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, offers substantial evidence that white, middle-class, non IV drug abuser heterosexuals are in less danger of contracting AIDS thru non anal,
sexual intercourse than they are of dying from shark attacks, being hit by lightning, or accidentally drowning in the bathtub. The
book is very well referenced and documented.

The book was reviewed by the Journal of the American Medical Assn as "the best single source available to enable heterosexual persons to assess their personal risk."

http://www.fumento.com/pozaids.html

...why is the risk considered great enough to warrant condoms. The risk of a drive-by shooting is far greater than that of sex but we do not walk around wearing body armor. No one says it is better to be safe than sorry in that situation, or thousands of others, where the risk is far greater than sex.

I don't think anyone can deny that in terms of statistics, the allergy risk from condoms is greater than the threat tcondoms are erroneously meant to protect against.

Hope I have your point of view stated correctly.

Very best wishes,

Paul

05-29-2003, 07:44 PM	#13 (permalink)
PaulKing Swingers Board Addict Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 344 Location: LA Status: Single Male	As I read it what regular Guy is saying is that in view of: - 'Author Michael Fumento, in his book The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, offers substantial evidence that white, middle-class, non IV drug abuser heterosexuals are in less danger of contracting AIDS thru non anal, sexual intercourse than they are of dying from shark attacks, being hit by lightning, or accidentally drowning in the bathtub. The book is very well referenced and documented. The book was reviewed by the Journal of the American Medical Assn as "the best single source available to enable heterosexual persons to assess their personal risk." http://www.fumento.com/pozaids.html ...why is the risk considered great enough to warrant condoms. The risk of a drive-by shooting is far greater than that of sex but we do not walk around wearing body armor. No one says it is better to be safe than sorry in that situation, or thousands of others, where the risk is far greater than sex. I don't think anyone can deny that in terms of statistics, the allergy risk from condoms is greater than the threat tcondoms are erroneously meant to protect against. Hope I have your point of view stated correctly. Very best wishes, Paul