Bareback rule of thumb?

[Flori_DAMAN 24]

Swinging 25 years without anyone ever getting a STD that I know means something to me. It means that the risk factor is very fucking low.

 

To hear people actually attack others for their personal decisions means much more though. It means that unless we have thought police we are incapable of using judgment. That smacks of the very thought pattern that would demise the lifestyle in general.

 

If you need to use your rubbers then read the directions and put them on properly.

 

If you aren't going to get pregnant or impregnate anyone then it is just a matter of STD's. Having witnessed thousands of swinging partners engage in most types of behavior for so many years without catching a cold leads me to believe that I really resent anyone telling me what to do. Yeah I may use them, but please don't tell me to. You are really out of line suggesting how another person or couple manages their lifestyle.

 

I find it appalling that anyone would have the balls to suggest that if consenting adults choose to engage in sex without rubbers they are bad people. It's kinda like the asshole that screws around on his wife, is a pastor, and talks about monogamy.

 

Who the fuck are you telling me what to do anyhow....and a swinger to boot. What possesses some people? If you wanna use rubbers use them. If you don't then don't. But for crying out loud this is not a good platform for practicing safe sex talk. Swingers are usually married and over 15. How very insulting and laughable at the same time.

 

John

[windsor4fun2 128]

Quote

Originally posted by Tom & Bonnie

The biggest danger nowadays, as was pointed out in an earlier post, is Latex Toxicity. That's serious and fatal to some!

 

Latex toxicity is definitely a growing problem but not just with condoms. Gloves, paints, medical supplies, toys...the list goes on. What many don't realize is that the protein in latex that causes the sensitivity is also present in many fruits such as bananas. Unless you walk around wearing a condom 24/7, condoms are not likely to be your greatest source of latex.

 

Fortunately there is a test to determine if you are latex sensitive. If you have a reaction to latex of any kind you should be tested.

[Flori_DAMAN 24]

The biggest problem I see is people living a life without fun.

 

If I had a Harley FUCK the helmet. When they put the seat belt signs on the airplane i say WHY? When the road is straight and the weather is clear and no one is on the road WHY GO 65? GO 120! You may get a ticket but do it anyhow. Make sure you are driving a good Escort with at least two matching tires though! Never take unnecessary chances!

 

People actually think that eating good food is dangerous. I don't just eat a good steak, I eat the fat. I put butter on peanut butter and make a sandwich.

 

I plan on dying someday. I deal with people that are in their 90's all the time. I don't plan on getting there. I know one thing. There is no STD that will or could affect me. IF I get one then it is OK man. It beats say, cancer of the eyeball. Shit happens.

 

OK I'M DONE

 

John

[PaulKing 18]

Great post John. Really great!

 

Best wishes to an old friend.

 

Paul

[PaulKing 18]

"What many don't realize is that the protein in latex that causes the sensitivity is also present in many fruits such as bananas. Unless you walk around wearing a condom 24/7, condoms are not likely to be your greatest source of latex. "

 

Latex proteins are only one of a great many problems with latex. These include 41 toxins, 3 carcinogens, 2 suspected carcinogens and at least one known teratogen. Latex condoms have more toxic agents then any other product used internally by a substantial factor.

 

CONDOM INDUSTRY QUOTES

 

"...... new concerns are arising regarding allergic or other toxic reactions to various components of latex condoms such as vulcanization accelerators, latex proteins, spermicides and finishing powders."

 

"* Studies are needed to evaluate the best lubricants to use in the manufacture of condoms. Evidence suggests that the right quantity, type and placement of lubricant is important for condom functionality, acceptability and safety. In addition, the added value and risk presented by spermicidal lubricants and by dry finishing powders (e.g. talc or cornstarch) should be critically examined."

 

"Since the late 1980s the reported incidence

of allergy to natural rubber latex has increased dramatically, as much as 12 -fold."

 

"Latex allergy is incurable, although the symptoms, such as itching, soreness, painful blistering, runny noses, swollen eyes, asthma symptoms and anaphylaxis can be ameliorated.

Everyone who has contact wi th natural rubber latex is potentially at risk from sensitisation. Both patients and health care workers can be at risk from allergic reactions to natural rubber latex. Over the past decade, allergic reactions to natural

rubber latex have become a major public health concern."

 

" Once a person has developed latex allergy, however mild, they are “sensitised” to latex and are at risk from severe allergic reactions."

 

"Delayed cell-mediated reactions are the most common form of hypersensitivity reaction to natural rubber latex. These reactions are to individual chemical residues from the production process such as accelerants used in the vulcanization process which is required to strengthen the product. The residual chemicals may blot on the surface of the products and can be absorbed through the skin upon contact."

 

Condoms contain compounds known to cause cancer and serious birth defects in substantial quantities

 

SOURCE. Condom Industry web site and Beacon Pharmaceuticals, July 2001

 

Hope this information helps.

 

Very best wishes,

 

Paul

[Flori_DAMAN 24]

Ya know.

 

If I really wanted to have sex with someone it wouldn't matter. I'd take my chances. I'd put on a latex Superman suit. But just don't judge me for it.

 

John

[PaulKing 18]

Very fair comment.

[BiloxiCouple 694]

There appears to be a silent majority out there that doesn't use condoms. I only read 2 pages of the threads here and most want to use condoms with no exceptions.

 

Another sampling said something about knowing someone for a while before not using a condom

 

Another sampling talked about closed groups.

 

I feel these two samplings are very ineffective. Knowing someone is not going to keep things from being passed.

 

Closed groups? Who is the monitor of this group to make sure they don't stray? And if you allow a new member to "enter" who is going to take responsibility for this new member?

 

Go bareback, have some fun and use common sense. That was for the silent majority/minority.

 

The wife has physical reactions to condoms that may last for days.

 

Another thread on here mentioned that if this issue is a big enough problem for you, you may want to consider another form of entertainment/leisure/recreational sex.

 

How much bodily fluid does it take to transmit an STD? Thought that might make an interesting topic. Never thought of it until now.

 

Another interesting thought I have brought up before. Some people here might be concerned with a couple who goes bareback. How close are you to having sex with that couple if this type of issue concerns you? If we have sex with one couple bareback and later you have protected sex with that couple......How much bodily fluid is exchanged between all these couples?

 

Did you do a pre-sex interview/checklist with these couples? Were they honest?

 

You can call this lifestyle all kinds of different things and shade it different ways. You can have friends or not even know their names or just hate their guts. The bottom line is you want to have sex/fuck/blow a load/orgasm/penetration or anything else you want to call it. Everything else leads up to the sex act.

 

I know I covered a lot of different subjects here but I feel they all sort of intertwine and maybe even a little contention.

[Flori_DAMAN 24]

You can call this lifestyle all kinds of different things and shade it different ways. You can have friends or not even know their names or just hate their guts. The bottom line is you want to have sex/fuck/blow a load/orgasm/penetration or anything else you want to call it. Everything else leads up to the sex act.

 

I know I covered a lot of different subjects here but I feel they all sort of intertwine and maybe even a little contention.

 

Whoa....everything else? What is the bottom line again? I'm horribly confused.

 

A little contention? What do you mean?

 

I read your post several times and just can't get a grip on it.

 

John

[JacobSky 17]

Alura said:

I think you've pretty much nailed it here, Misty. I'm sure we could have a lot more experiences if we were willing to go to clubs and have sex with strangers. The risks are too big, in our opinion, and probably not diminished enough with the use of condoms.

 

We can also reduce our risks by not playing with bisexual males or any single males for that matter. There are lots of reasons for this policy other than STDs.

 

Judging from the article linked by Tanman, we could also reduce our risk by not playing with anyone from New York, California or Florida.

 

We'll stick with married couples, preferably Hick Okies, who, like ourselves, "don't get around much anymore..."

 

I really liked this post! Good taste and sense.

[Alura 2,766]

Thank you, JacobSky! What a nice compliment!

 

Mr. Alura

[MrNorthIndyCpl 15]

Wow. What a conversation. Very interesting read. Here is my thought:

 

Overall, I guess we each do what makes us and our partner(s) comfortable and happy. Personally I think condoms suck. But so does dying.

 

Wow! I brought all kinds of value to this discussion....

[Jeok 3]

Boy, be out of touch a few years & this is the new reality. Back in the 70s, 80s, & even to mid 90s, everyone we knew went bareback. Women knew when their periods arrived, no one shaved, just trimmed to be sexier; we used land mail, polaroids, telephone conversations, really checked one another out before getting it on. Men actually pulled out-we were ignorant of accidents-before ejaculation; and, of course, there was no HIV-AIDS scare. But, we had the "clap", syphilis, all kinds of STDs that were irritating, if not equally deadly; there was the douche, before & after-fun in itself, if an assistant. Oh well, I still would like to return to the lifestyle & would do whatever makes those with whom I share so they could be relaxed & comfortable, which is the essence of FUN. Jeok-ism

[jessicat78 21]

Depends on who we are swinging with.

[Lascivious L&L 865]

The question that seems to be ignored here is the actual safety factor of condoms? The feeling I have from reading this thread is that this discussion is more about the feeling of safety using condoms as "safe" sex.

 

Virtually all here agree that condoms reduce the feel and intimacy of sex, because virtually all have bareback sex with their spouses, demonstrating that bareback sex is more intimate and pleasurable.

 

So "safe" swinging is about accepting less than the best. Some here simply don't see the point in swinging if you are going to accept less than the best. If you have great sex with your partner, is variety so important that you'll accept second best just to swing?

 

Just How much safety is involved in that trade off? How much is gained through the use of condoms? Here are our basic assumptions:

 

1. HIV is the bad boy. Yet among swingers HIV prevalence is very small. There is simply no risk of HIV if those swinging are HIV free. And all but a tiny percentage of swingers are HIV free. If you actually did have intercourse with an HIV infected person, what are the risks of transmission? Studies I've seen demonstrate it is not 100% or 50% or 10%. 1 in 200 is the best figure I've found. That's half a percent. So the actual risk of HIV transmission is half a percent risk of a very small risk of actually meeting an HIV infected swinger.

 

2. Herpes: The CDC studies say 58% of adults have herpes simplex 1, oral herpes, and 20% have herpes simplex 2, or genital herpes. Either one can be transmitted orally or genitally. Some adults have both. Understand what this means...most adults have herpes. Not some, not a minority, but most. That means you if you're an adult. Condoms do not effectively prevent herpes because sucking a cock, kissing, and skin to skin contact can transmit it. Condoms only cover a small area of skin.

 

3. HPV is similar to herpes but even more difficult to test for effectively. Most researchers assume most sexually active adults have at least one variety of HPV. That means we swingers. We have it. Again, condoms are not very effective in preventing transmission.

 

Condoms do make people FEEL safer. But their efficacy does not match that feeling of safety many get from condoms.

[Pleaseher6 1]

I think it depends on ones comfort level whether to go bare or not.

 

First and foremost if I ever thought that someone I was considering to have sex might have any STD...I would run. I avoid anyone who is an illicit drug user. Sex whether "gloved" or not is not a consideration in that case.

 

I tend to like being with Married Couples in their late thirties to early fifties, where the husband is straight, and have children. They have no reason to lie about birth control and as parents are concerned about the welfare of their children.

 

I make it a point to tell women who I am with that I am not "Surgically Safe". I usually ask whether they are Surgically Safe or if on Birth Control, and what they use for protection. Keep in mind that condoms have a 5% failure rate with women in their childbearing years. Also keep in mind that women who are 45 and older, suffer primary infertility with only 10% getting pregnant after a year of trying. The rate of miscarriage goes up exponentially for women in their forties and older.

 

On one occasion I went bareback with a good looking wife in her late thirties using only Natural Family Planning after she "forgot" her diaphragm at home with her husband's approval. I think it's important to understand that they had three children together, and successfully used NFP together for nine years after their youngest was born without even a late period. We went bare twice in one night, I did not pull out. That night everyone had a great time. Importantly she did not get pregnant.

[Guest Aching]

Our thinking is that sex with condoms is like masturbating into a bag. Just not a lot of fun, so why bother?

 

But, we're not stupid either. Therefore, we're not going to a club, or some swing resort, or on a swing only cruise and have indiscriminate sex with anyone with whom we have a mutual attraction.

 

We haven't even "done it" yet, with anyone, but would if we found the right couple. For us, that will be a "long time" (10+ years) couple that is still in love with each other, and that is looking for the same things we are--the "thrill" of enjoying sex with another person, and the equally exciting "thrill" of discussing it later as we have "reclaiming" sex with each other.

 

Since we're brand new at this, we think the perfect fit would be someone that has been in the lifestyle and is comfortable with talking to us "newbies." And we know they will have played with other couples, but we will need to know that they have limited their exposure to a close group of like people that they trust. We believe there are those types out there--trusting couples with limited partners, and some years of experience without worry about disease.

 

We both want to feel free to completely relax and enjoy the experience in all it's natural beauty and with all it's natural feeling.

 

Now if we can just find someone to "break us in".....

[Coupleerotic22 1,417]

I will say this, neither of us like using condoms but we like AIDS/HEP et al even less, so we use them. I am in constant search for a condom that feels natural, some are better than others, but at times it seem tantamount to looking for the fountain of youth.

 

That said I have been extremely surprised at the number of people that are ambivalent to condom use once the sparks start flying. On more than one occasion I have heard "don't worry about it," or "you don't need to wear one," when I make a break for the condom box. I just smile and suit up unless I know them WELL.

[MrsPandMe 150]

Admittedly I have jumped into the middle of this thread, but I think I get the gist of it. Couple of points, here.

 

Condoms are like seat belts in airplanes. If you have a rough landing they can help keep you from breaking a bone. If you fly into the ground at 500 miles per hour all it will do is keep the bits of you and the bits of your seat in closer proximity to one another. Now considering how often the former happens in relation to the latter, condoms have some merit to preventing "pedestrian" infections, say like chlamydia. They are also very good at stopping the bad boy of STD's, HIV, but as said previously, HIV in the swinging community is considerably small. You're more likely to die hitting your head on the wall whilst vigorously fucking. They also do a reasonable job stopping HPV, but chances are exceedingly high you already have it so that point is probably moot.

 

Anyway, a couple of corrections. HPV is NOT like HSV, except to say they are both viruses. HSV will go away when you do. HPV will run its course in about 2 years. Then you'll catch it again. Rinse, repeat.

 

And speaking of HSV, don't discount the value of condom use in the prevention of asymptomatic shedding of HSV-2.

 

Though I know it's not the thrust of this thread, one must also consider the psychological impact of condom use. Using the aforementioned seat belt analogy, regardless of the effectiveness of the seat belt, the act of wearing it makes flying "easier", and we men all know if your mind isn't in the game, your dick won't be either. Many swingers also use condoms as a sort of "physical psychological" barrier to separate their playmates from their spouse, especially swingers who are new.

 

Mr. P.

[Just Passing By 140]

Just to be different : I didn't really mind the actual use of condoms for intercourse. Factor 1 was that it was mentally link to the anticipation of variety. Factor two is slight difference in sensation either made no particular difference, or sometimes it worked out that I could keep going extra long time. The downside is the having to break the natural rhythm of thing to install and remove.

 

Not withstanding those threats which are either very unlikely, or already prevalent in the general population, Chlamydia, syphilis, antibiotic resistant gonorrhea, hepatitis, and pregnancy are better avoided than not.

 

I have a metaphor even better suited than the airplane and seatbelt, but I don't think it is ready for prime time.

[mde 4764 15]

Well we only not use a condom if we know the person we are with and if it is somebody we totally trust. Condoms is a rule until we know the person for a while.

 

We have only went bareback once so far but soon it will happen again and I am looking forward to it. We do get tested every 6 months and do not make it a habit of going without one.

 

I think you're deluding yourself if you think you really know somebody.

[mde 4764 15]

i never insist on bareback, but i do prefer it. i chatted with a guy the other day, he seemed obsessed with the aids thing, ranting about the dangers, multiple sex partners, and swinging in general. i placed him on my ignore list. if a partner is that worried about infection, he should think about another type of entertainment.

 

I certainly agree with finding another type of entertainment if you are that worried. When I was part of a couple, we decided that if we felt we needed to use a condom with a couple in order to feel safe with them, we didn't need to be playing with them at all. We never had a problem in the many years we played.

[Pleaseher6 1]

mde 4764 said:

I certainly agree with finding another type of entertainment if you are that worried. When I was part of a couple, we decided that if we felt we needed to use a condom with a couple in order to feel safe with them, we didn't need to be playing with them at all. We never had a problem in the many years we played.

Exactly!!!

[machiavel55 80]

I am absolutely baffled by what I read in this thread. Most STDs we get rid of with antibiotics. HIV is a quite different animal. Maybe some of the people posting here live in rural areas where HIV is not as prevalent, but if you have multiple partners, not using condoms is beyond foolish.

[funcoupledayton 2,707]

machiavel55 said:

I am absolutely baffled by what I read in this thread. Most STDs we get rid of with antibiotics. HIV is a quite different animal. Maybe some of the people posting here live in rural areas where HIV is not as prevalent, but if you have multiple partners, not using condoms is beyond foolish.

 

I didn't read the whole thread since it is more than 12 years old, but I will say rural areas can be very high risk for hiv. Indiana community's HIV outbreak a warning to rural America

[bedwarrior2016 17]

I'd say... HELL NO.

[machiavel55 80]

funcoupledayton said:

I didn't read the whole thread since it is more than 12 years old, but I will say rural areas can be very high risk for hiv. Indiana community's HIV outbreak a warning to rural America

 

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info.

[BabeAndApe 70]

Hard rule: condoms for penetrative sex. Would we play with others who didn't have that rule and did play bareback on occasion? In general, no. I'd have to ask some pointed questions and decide based on the answers and my estimation of their honesty. As for oral without barrier protection, it depends on who we're dealing with.

[SW_PA_Couple 4,019]

. . . be ready to show playmates your "papers".

Papers? What papers? My wife has had prescriptions for tests from her OB/GYN and I from from my primary care when I have described symptoms. On no occasion has anybody offered or supplied papers. Results of tests are conveyed verbally.

[njbm 2,728]

There is no HPV test for males. Along with HSV, probably the most transmitted infections. Condoms not totally effective. If you play, you should know this.

[njbm 2,728]

We get tested privately. We do have written results. No one has ever asked to see them.

[Fi86 78]

If I already know them then I'll always go bareback.

 

Otherwise I'll only go unprotected if I'm confident they're trustworthy. For example I'd make a single 18 year old "wanna fuck anything" type guy use a condom, but a well presented, polite, married man with his wife who probably has a family I'd be a lot more trusting of, and would probably go bareback with if he wanted to.

[Eddiem 139]

Unregistered said:

Anyone got a rule of thumb about when to go bareback with another couple?

If we know them well enough and I mean their pasts, are comfortable with them etc... and they with us. We, the few times we have ... use condoms. Our first 3 with a friend (kind of just happened) my friend actually went bareback with my SO and she approved in the heat of the moment. Very erotic seeing his unprotected cock enter her and when he came. Otherwise use protection...

[Shore2Please 533]

Common sense tells you there is the right time to have sex with someone without protection. That’s common sense. Unfortunately common sense doesn’t come into play in the heat of the moment. Even after our first swap and it was with a couple we just met we swore we would never risk this again, until we risked it again. I blame those times on that it was spontaneous and we didn’t have condoms. I don’t have an answer for the reason I just had a night with someone I didn’t know and we didn’t use protection.

[Eddiem 139]

Always play protected unless you really really really know the other person / people well. Our first threesome was with an old friend and I knew his sexual past. My SO was ok with him and wanted him finishing in her.

[njbm 2,728]

The sad thing about HSV and HPV is that people that you know well and like very much can get it. We won’t play with known HSV carriers even with condoms. If a friend gets HPV, we think of non-intercourse activities until they clear it. The problem is that most people who have these viruses don’t know it or won’t tell you.