Oral Sex with Condoms?

Hi,

My girlfriend and I are newbies but will be attending our first party this weekend.

What is the usual protocol for a woman or man giving oral sex to another? Are condoms and dental dams really used a lot? That seems a little clinical...

Thanks.

[DragonsLair]

I haven't seen this done at the clubs we've been to. Best to ask what the couple/single you're with prefers.

Have fun. Come back and register on the board. We love getting new members. And be sure to share your experience with us.

DragonsLair

He is T. I am A.

[fun_pairTX]

We haven't ever seen any in use in any of the on-premise clubs we have attended. Come to think of it we haven't heard of it being done anywhere we have been.

[ATAK]

I do know that they manufacture flavored condoms, but in all honesty, I've never known anyone to ever give a blowjob to any man wearing one, in a swinging environment or not. Why would anyone wanna suck on rubber or latex? yuk.

[OhioCouple]

We have never seen them in use for oral sex, but many have asked questions about them. For the most part all we have ever seen are condoms for sex involving vaginal/anal penetration. We have yet to see a dental dam.

Lori

[LadyandLordAro]

With a condom or dental dam. Either to the licker of the lickeee.

[Ashley]

Nope...I've only been to three clubs but I've never seen it. I was concerned at first but then I did some reading on the statistical probabilities of getting an STD from oral sex. The incidence is very low....not non-existent but very low. For my part though I would be reluctant to let a swing partner come in my mouth.

[Brit_Pair]

Top Ten Condom Advert Slogans


10. "Never ever deck her with an unwraped pecker."

9. "Don't be a fool, vulcanize your tool."

8. "The right selection is to protect your erection."

7. "Wrap it in foil, before checking her oil."

6. "A crank with armor will never harm her."

5. "If you really love her, wear a cover."

4. "Don't make a mistake - cover your snake."

3. "Sex is cleaner with a packaged wiener."

2. "If you can't shield your rocket, leave it in your pocket."

1. "No glove, No love."

[ciscosv]

We have not seen a condom or dental dam used for oral at parties. That's not say they are not used. STD transmission may be low statistically. Condoms are used for vaginal sex. I believe that it is up to the individual to ask or tell what is preferred.

The ONLY major concern I would have is getting a cold sore from you know what. (Playing Devil's Advocate)

[Flori_DAMAN]

I used a rubber during oral sex once (actually two of them, one inside the other). I filled it up with ice water and it made a hell of a dildo. The trick I found is to freeze it but not completely. The absolute cold can be reduced by running warm water over it after your popsickle is very hard.

Then while she fucks it it gets softer. This way she could suck me while having a totally unique experience at the same time.

When it turns into water you can manipulate the condom to do some really great stuff. If you squeeze it just right it bulges and the sensation of the coldness with the variance in size was apparently very intense.

I highly recommend using condoms during oral sex.

john

[PartyCouple2003]

I have used a flavored condom one time it wasnt that bad actually maybe becase it was mint flavored though....

That was one of the first time i ever gave head i did that.....

Now i really dont care when i give head to my hubby....he enjoys it greatly now too especially now since i have a tongue ring...hehhee

Jenn

[naughty A]

condoms with bubble wrap inside them.

apparently if you have really been doing your Kegals (sp?) you can pop the bubbles.

I can't do it - can you?

on the other hand? now everytime hubby sees bubble wrap he gets excited.

Naughty A.

P.S. I've never used condoms/dental dams for oral sex either

[PaulKing]

After twenty years that still has never been a confirmed case of AIDS attributed to oral sex. Also remember condoms contain 41 toxins (FDA list) and three confirmed carcinogens. LIDS, in particular Type 3 (fatal) latex allergy now affects 17 million Americans up from ZERO in 1983.

Condoms have been shown by almost every stufy (Mariposa Institute/Durex, US Naval Institute, Jones and Forrest, Pysicians Consortium to name a few) to provide no protection against a virus and only about 50% protection against some std's.

Condoms are promoted for political not sexual health reasons.

[Roxysbayou]

The estimated annual number of AIDS-related deaths in the United States fell approximately 70 percent from 1995 to 2001, from 51,670 deaths in 1995 to 15,603 deaths in 2001.(5)

Of new infections among men in the United States, CDC estimates that approximately 60 percent of men were infected through homosexual sex, 25 percent through injection drug use, and 15 percent through heterosexual sex. Of newly infected men, approximately 50 percent are black, 30 percent are white, 20 percent are Hispanic, and a small percentage are members of other racial/ethnic groups.(4)

Of new infections among women in the United States, CDC estimates that approximately 75 percent of women were infected through heterosexual sex and 25 percent through injection drug use. Of newly infected women, approximately 64 percent are black, 18 percent are white, 18 percent are Hispanic, and a small percentage are members of other racial/ethnic groups.(4)

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, MD 20892

Oral sex is a risk for any person having direct contact with risky fluids (saliva is not one of them) and not a risk for the person who does not have such contact. So, if you are receiving oral sex and are coming into contact only with saliva, then you are not at risk for HIV. However, if you are performing oral sex and are coming into direct contact with blood, semen, pre-ejaculatory fluid, or vaginal secretions, then you are at risk. As with any sexual contact, the use of barrier protection is strongly advised.

2-1-1 Big Bend, Inc.
(formerly Telephone Counseling and Referral Service, Inc.)
Post Office Box 10950 Tallahassee, Florida 32302-2950
Counseling & Referrals: 2-1-1 or 850-224-6333
Administrative Phone: (850) 681-9131

*** I don't know...I have never used a condom during oral sex, and I understand your point of view as far as condoms go. But the way I see it, I'd rather be safe than sorry. If I still contract AIDS after using a condom, then at least I tried.

[PaulKing]

I found you quotes very interesting. The odd thing is the figures published by Local Health Authorities show a very different picture. The CDC say they obtain their stats from the local athorities but somehow the figures seem to change in transit.

Here are a few figures to really confuse you.


Oklahoma statistics: -
http://www.health.state.ok.us/progra...epi/1202_4.pdf

HIV POSITIVE CUMLATIVE FIGURES

121 deaths in 19 years (approx 6 per year).
Pediatric deaths - ONE

Hardly an epidemic in Oklahoma

(No breakdown of hetero percentage available).


MONTANA

Total teenage cases since 1985 - 2 (TWO)
Heterosexual cases (male and female) since 1985 - 67 (SIXTY SEVEN)
Children one to seven in age since 1985 - 4 (FOUR)



http://www.dphhs.state.mt.us/hpsd/pu...f/aids1200.pdf

___

The New York State Quarterly AIDS Report (table 4A) reported: -

In the first half of 2000 there was not one single caucasian teenage female AIDS case attributed to heterosexual sex.
In the first half of 2000 there was not one single teenage male AIDS case (of any race) attributed to heterosexual sex.

____



AVERAGE PERCENTAGE OF HETEROSEXUAL AIDS TAKEN FROM THE 32 STATES THAT PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION

9.42%
Lowest figure 1%
Highest figure 26%

INDIA


Excerpted from United News of India:

CIA Report on HIV/AIDS Baseless
by Annapurna Jha
November 10, 2002


''Mr Gates interest in HIV/AIDS projects in India is not meant for charity,
as it appears. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation contributing funds to
fight AIDS is to protect his billions of dollars of investments in
pharmaceutical companies interested in conducting field trials in India,''
Mr Mulloli said.

Health Minister Shatrughan Sinha has already rejected the CIA report, and
the National Intelligence Council clearly stated the CIA estimates to be
'highly exaggerated' and not based on surveillance data collected in India.

Mr Gates has reportedly funded the controversial report and also made huge
investments in companies involved in AIDS drug research.

Charging that the CIA's direct and unwarranted involvement in Indian public
health issues amounted to direct intervention in its domestic affairs and a
challenge to its soverignity, Mr Mulloli questioned the basis on which the
CIA said that 310,000 people had died in India due to AIDS in 1999 alone.

The Indian Parliament talked of a mere 114 AIDS related deaths in 1999.

--------------------------------------------

Excerpted from Pioneer News Service, New Delhi:

Sinha Rejects US Report on AIDS
November 10, 2002

India has rejected an US intelligence agency report which projects that the
country will have over 25 million people suffering with AIDS by 2010 even as
an NGO charged that the report was aimed at exploiting Indian market for
AIDS drugs and vaccines.



----------------------------------------

Excerpted from the Daily Pioneer:

Mysterious Malaise
by Purushottaman Mulloli of JackIndia
November 17, 2002


The CIA says India will have 25 million infected people by 2010, the maximum
in any country. But India has recorded only 287 AIDS deaths in 1997, 217 in
1998, and 114 in 1999. In whose interest is it to push up these figures?

_______



Simple maths?

We are told by the CDC : -

"The HIV/AIDS crisis at home remains tragic as precious lives continue to be lost to the disease. Each year 40,000
Americans are infected with HIV. Currently, an estimated 900,000 Americans are HIV positive and evidence indicates those numbers are increasing,
not declining or even holding steady."

What is startling is that this is the same line we've been told for years now. We supposedly have this increasing
number of "HIV converts" (40,000 per year), yet that number, 40,000 remains the same year after year. Weird. It like, 40,000, 40,000, 40,000, 40,000,
40,000 and on and on and we have 'evidence' for increasing seroconversions. Lame.

And that number, 900,000. Someone at the CDC just completely pulled that number from their ass.

In 1990 the CDC retroactively revised downward the estimates of HlV-infected persons for the period of 1985-89 (in the US). It went from 1.2
million to 0.75 million. The number for 1990 itself was said to be about I million (CDC, 1990). Then, in 1996, the CDC retrospectively revised
downward the 1992 estimate to yet another figure of 650,000. By 1996, the number of people said to be infected was between 650,000 and 900,000.

So there's that number 900,000 being used in 1996. Yet now in 2003 we supposedely still have 900,000
ESTIMATED infected people according to the SGN article (they use the word 'currently'). However, in 1999, to further confuse matters, the CDC
estimated HIV incidence as approximately 40,000 infections per year and the number of persons living with HIV at about 800,000 to 900,000
(MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999). So if you're head isn't just spinning quite yet, consider this; if, in 1996, they had an estimated 650,000 to
900,000 HIV 'poz' folk, in 1999 they had 800,000 to 900,000 'poz' folk. Why only increase the lower estimate? Do we now only have ONE estimate
and not a range? If we take the 1996 estimate of 900,000 and add 40,000 new cases per year until the end of 2001, we really should have 1,140,000
'poz' people. If we go back to 1992, when
the number was said to be a firm 650,000 and add 40,000 cases per year until 2002, we come up with 1,050,000 cases. So where they get this
40,000 number and 900,000 is beyond me. Perhaps they revised the numbers down without really telling anyone.

I hope you are all completely and utterly confused, because frankly, I think the CDC, with all their numerous PhD heads running around, are as equally confused.

Seems you can pick any figure you like and no two sources ever agree with each other or even themselves.


At least there is something for everyone.