Letting swing partners cum inside the ladies

[BoxerCouple 15]

Just wondering who here allows their swing partners cum inside either yourself (if you're the woman), or your wife/girlfriend/fiancee?

[MikeandDawn 59]

Just wondering who here allows their swing partners cum inside either yourself (if you're the woman), or your wife/girlfriend/fiancee?

 

I anticipate that will be happening to Dawn in just a few hours.

[Mr. Hump alot 15]

I don't think I could deal with that. That's why we utilize condoms to stop that sort of thing.

[DBL D 120]

I leave that up to Fem D...but I don't have a problem with it.

[Sweet_Candy 54]

We prefer to cum in our partners with condoms of course.

[nice_cpl_n_bama 24]

Years ago we were swapping with friends we'd known since childhood. We knew their sexual history and felt safe with them. It was always bareback with creampie with them, but they were special. It's condoms for everyone else. With a condom it doesn't matter where they cum.

[ShellyM 0]

Just wondering who here allows their swing partners cum inside either yourself (if you're the woman), or your wife/girlfriend/fiancee?

 

Well, this is jmo. Jay and I have a steadfast no condom no play rule. Now, we are new to this lifestyle. If we were to meet a couple we trust and are monogomous with, we may modify this rule. But with a couple that we barely know, or have just met? No way. I can't get pregnant, but tubal ligation does not stop std's....of course, a condom is not 100% perfect. We have friends in the lifestyle who are exclusive with another couple, and they trust each other. In that case I would say possibly yes...but they still use condoms (she is trying to get pregnant from her husband, of course) every time. But with a couple we meet at the club? No way.

[Pepper & Drew 384]

We have one friend that we've gone condomless with, just because we trust him. Other than him, it's condoms all around.

[Amanda69 24]

In a condom yes.

[Spoomonkey 421]

We have one friend that we've gone condomless with, just because we trust him. Other than him, it's condoms all around.

 

We are the same. We are a "condom only" couple - but we allow ourselves to bend the rules with the right friends.

 

That is a very rare exception.

[Alura 2,773]

Ah, for the old days when AIDS was unknown, the pill had released women from the fear of pregnancy, and the worst venereal disease could be cured with a shot or two. Is it any wonder that "free love" reigned supreme in the Sixties and Seventies?

 

The female half of our playcouple, Karen (seems like a good name... we've never played with a "Karen." ) had a cute little fetish. She found it enormously sexy to have fresh sperm from two different men in her body at the same time. It would have been sad not to have indulged her.

[good times 991]

We do.

[SW_PA_Couple 4,023]

Just wondering who here allows their swing partners cum inside either yourself (if you're the woman), or your wife/girlfriend/fiancee?

 

Sue Johansen (Sp?) recommends protection but has also told us all that there is no method or device that is 100% effective. From other authoritative sources, we learned much less that 100%. So why bother with the protection? We know that we are taking chances but that's that. From another philosophical angle, we're mid-fifties and have few no responsibilities. So this does not constitute dereliction of duty.

 

Sue also says that most men leak a fluid before ejaculation. Simply sticking it in essentially the same as having the messy end. So why not have the messy end. JoAnn enjoys the feel of cum dripping from inside of her.

 

Footnote: Neither of us are medical professionals and would not pretend to give medical advice.

[ShellyM 0]

Sue Johansen (Sp?) recommends protection but has also told us all that there is no method or device that is 100% effective. From other authorative sources, we learned much less that 100%. So why bother with the protection? We know that we are taking chances but that's that. From another philsophical angle, we're mid-fifties and have few no responsibilities. So this does not constitute dereliction of duty.

 

I think ya'll are great people, but I have to give my opinion on this. I think it is not good to in a way tell people not to use protection. I'm sorry, and I am NOT meaning to offend you in any way, or imply that you have poor judgement. BUT there are people who read these posts. You have every right to your opinion, and every right to determine what you do with your body within your comfort zone. AND I know that there is no 100% effective protection other than abstinence. But I do think that people should be careful in saying that its okay not to use a condom, when people can read this and say "well, they don't use one, so we won't either." Now, this is completely jmo. And again, please forgive me if I offend. But condoms, although not 100% safe, definately are safer than not using one at all.

[sbjr3 17]

Originally quoted by ShellyM:

 

I think ya'll are great people, but I have to give my opinion on this. I think it is not good to in a way tell people not to use protection. I'm sorry, and I am NOT meaning to offend you in any way, or imply that you have poor judgement. BUT there are people who read these posts. You have every right to your opinion, and every right to determine what you do with your body within your comfort zone. AND I know that there is no 100% effective protection other than abstinence. But I do think that people should be careful in saying that its okay not to use a condom, when people can read this and say "well, they don't use one, so we won't either." Now, this is completely jmo. And again, please forgive me if I offend. But condoms, although not 100% safe, definately are safer than not using one at all.

 

Dito from another newbie

 

Originally quoted by SW_PA_Couple:

 

Sue Johansen (Sp?) recommends protection but has also told us all that there is no method or device that is 100% effective. From other authoritative sources, we learned much less that 100%. So why bother with the protection? We know that we are taking chances but that's that. From another philosophical angle, we're mid-fifties and have few no responsibilities. So this does not constitute dereliction of duty.

 

This statement scares me. I may have misinterpreted your meaning and I completely apologize in advance, but why would you not "bother with protection"? Whether the risk with protection is 1%, 10%, or 50%, I would much rather have the least risk versus 100% risk. Knowing that you are “taking chances but that’s that” in my mind means you are also willing to put your future partners and their future partners at risk. You may have "few or no responsibilities" but your future partners may and that to me is dangerous and makes me nervous knowing that there are people out there willing to put me in harms way. Again, I may have misunderstood your intentions in what you are saying and if so, please accept my apologies.

[myspaceguru 15]

We don't allow it. At least not yet. Maybe in the future but for now we don't feel that we know who we can and can't trust. I guess we will take our chances with the pre-cum but not the come (with condoms of course.) We realize that some people don't like to pull out and some women like to pull the male in to feel their steaming hot bodies tense up.(a comment from another post).

 

If my play partner wants me to come into the condom with her I'll fulfill her needs. As long as she is on birth control as a backup. My fiance' doesn't want anyone coming in the condom that is in her. She is on a really low dose of birth control and we are not comfortable enough with anyone "yet" to let them do this. Yes if we find the right people and the comfort level is there we will reconsider.

[Greg & Sheryl 368]

We do.

So do we, although Sheryl's prefers to have her playmates cum in her mouth.

[Chris&Suzanne 204]

We have in some situations. Depends on how well we know the other couple.

[prettylady 221]

I want to feel my playmate cum inside me. But the condom would need to be used. Perhaps if Dog and I make a good relationship with a couple then without would be especially nice, but for now inside the condom inside me.

 

Yes, I like that.

[Relaxed_n_Fun 15]

We haven't had an opportunity to yet, but we plan to let him finish in her. Assuming, before we play, we got to know him and trusted him and his background. In a situation where we didn't know or just met a playmate, we would use condoms (goes for both of us).

[WildMiCouple 325]

We have gone without condoms twice with couples we've known a while. But of the 2 times, I didn't cum one of the times and pulled out and came on her tummy the other (at her request). Both times Tam's playmates came inside her. So, when we choose to play natural.....we don't mind where the finish is

[good times 991]

I think ya'll are great people, but I have to give my opinion on this. I think it is not good to in a way tell people not to use protection. I'm sorry, and I am NOT meaning to offend you in any way, or imply that you have poor judgement. BUT there are people who read these posts. You have every right to your opinion, and every right to determine what you do with your body within your comfort zone. AND I know that there is no 100% effective protection other than abstinence. But I do think that people should be careful in saying that its okay not to use a condom, when people can read this and say "well, they don't use one, so we won't either." Now, this is completely jmo. And again, please forgive me if I offend. But condoms, although not 100% safe, definately are safer than not using one at all.

I have to respectfully disagree with you here, saying that "condoms are definitely safer than not using one at all." is just not true with the STD's one is most likely to encounter. If it makes one feel better to believe this that is fine by me, but this belief is not supported by reputable studies. For example studies of HPV transmission rates with or without a condom show no measurable difference and studies of herpes transmission rates that show a difference, show only a slight difference, and these are the two most common incurable STD's one is likely to encounter. Therefore, I don't see any problem with someone stating whether they use condoms or not, or even giving there opinion of whether they think others should use them or not, as it really boils down to each individuals determination of the risks involved and how much protection, if any, they believe condoms will provide. I just do not see where anyone is better served by people censoring their posts to perpetuate the politically correct myth that all swingers use, or should use condoms because it is a personal decision and many do not. As for people who might say, "Well, they don't use one, so we won't either.", if that is their decision, then I don’t see the problem, because it is only a matter of time before they meet up with other swingers that prefer not to use condoms or even those that out right refuse to, so they will then have to decide anyway. I find it interesting that in the swinging community you run into as many people who are as baffled by the people that think condoms will protect them as people bewildered by those that chose not to use them.

[ShellyM 0]

Hey,

you have every right to your opinion, and perhaps I am wrong. But I won't be screwing anybody other than my husband unless he is wearing a condom, no other options will be accepted. I have a relative that died from AIDS, and I will not even think about it. If he doesn't put a condom on he can have sex with his wife, or any other woman in the room, but it will not be with me.

[good times 991]

Hey,

you have every right to your opinion, and perhaps I am wrong. But I won't be screwing anybody other than my husband unless he is wearing a condom, no other options will be accepted. I have a relative that died from AIDS, and I will not even think about it. If he doesn't put a condom on he can have sex with his wife, or any other woman in the room, but it will not be with me.

I hope you don't get me wrong on this Shelly, I fully support you in your decision as I do SW_PA_Couple in theirs, nor would I even think of saying either one of you is wrong in the choice you have made. The only thing I have a problem with, and maybe it is not how you meant it, but it seems so, is the idea that people shouldn't give their opinion here if it differs from yours on this subject. As I said before, there are people who swing that cannot believe that people would swing without condoms and others that cannot imagine why anyone would use them. I have no problem with either view on a personal level, I have done the research and made my decision on our use of condoms, so what others think is only important when the time comes to make the decision to play with them or not. The only thing that bothered me about your post is the idea that we should all be policed in what we say if we believe differently than the supporters of condom use. If we did that, we wouldn't be giving a very accurate picture of what the real swinging world is like, and if that standard of politically correctness were carried to all subjects here, it would make the sight pretty useless, in my opinion.

[Swing*8701 887]

Susan here--If you have ten people infected with Non HIV STD's, here are the stats: Two people gave it to the remaining eight. 50% of the time they did so knowing they could infect another person. The other 50% did not know they were infected and could infect others. I don't know which 50 is worse. But play as smartly as you can.

[couplewanting50 65]

To say that you cum inside a woman and you are wearing a condom does not seem like cumming inside the woman. Maybe this is just my slant on the language, but to say that you cum inside of someone says to me that you are bare.

[Spoomonkey 421]

Maybe this is just my slant on the language, but to say that you cum inside of someone says to me that you are bare.

 

I think it is a language slant...

 

If you are inside a woman and have an orgasm, you have cum inside her - even if you are wrapped in rubber, plastic or the stuff they used for mummies...

 

I had a woman I played with once tell me that I couldn't cum inside her (even though we were playing with condoms). I had to pull out and finish on her. No problem - we were hot for each other and the visual is kind of sexy. But in her mind - even with the condom, I was cumming in her.

 

Personally, when I am really into it with a playmate, a condom - at the time of orgasm - kind of disappears (mentally) and I feel like I am finishing deep inside. Kooky, I know, but with the right playmate, it is incredible no matter what.

[bimickie26 15]

Condoms all the way here, aren't you barebackers worried about STDs?

[2jersey 16]

According to Planned Parenthood: Latex condoms offer very good protection against HIV. In fact, the risk of HIV transmission with a condom is reduced as much as 10,000 times. They also reduce the risk of other sexually transmitted infections, including chlamydia, gonorrhea, herpes, HPV (human papilloma virus), PID (pelvic inflammatory disease), syphilis, and trichomoniasis.

 

Furthermore: Condoms not only reduce the risk of infection, they are also helpful in reducing the effects of existing HPV infections. Recent studies from the Netherlands show that condom use leads to a faster disappearance of changes caused by HPV in the skin of the penis or in the cervix.

[SW_PA_Couple 4,023]

please forgive me if I offend. But condoms,

 

No offense taken, of course. This is simply a discussion on a bulletin board. JoAnn and I have both used and not used protection, according to the situation or according to expressed wishes. Yes, others do read what I write. So for all of you reading this, it is risky behavior and we know it.

 

To the point made by couplewanting50, "cum inside their wives" I definitely took as implying "no protection used".

[good times 991]

According to Planned Parenthood: Latex condoms offer very good protection against HIV. In fact, the risk of HIV transmission with a condom is reduced as much as 10,000 times. They also reduce the risk of other sexually transmitted infections, including chlamydia, gonorrhea, herpes, HPV (human papilloma virus), PID (pelvic inflammatory disease), syphilis, and trichomoniasis.

 

Furthermore: Condoms not only reduce the risk of infection, they are also helpful in reducing the effects of existing HPV infections. Recent studies from the Netherlands show that condom use leads to a faster disappearance of changes caused by HPV in the skin of the penis or in the cervix.

This is the biggest disappointment to me on this whole STD problem. STD's are a very real problem that we are all rightly concerned about, unfortunately, accurate information about them, and how to reduce their risks, is not easily obtainable. This is an excellent example, the information you cited is very common when obtained from sources like Planned Parenthood, who have an agenda. The problem with it is that I have yet to see a real study that even comes close to supporting their claims. Having read as many studies as I have been able to find on the subject, I cannot possibly image were they come up with this stuff. It doesn’t bother me at all that some swingers chose to use condoms with others. What bothers me, is how many of them believe that they are being protected far more than the research would indicate is possible by using them. I just hate to see so many people making decisions based on false information.

 

If the Netherlands study you are referring to is the Amsterdam study of 200 college woman conducted over 22 months, you will likely find upon further investigation of it that it isn't a very highly regarded study by experts, and it's conclusions are not supported by other more extensive studies. In fact, I found this particular study recently when it was given as an example of the point that you can probably find a study to prove any statistic you would like to make up. One of the problems with studies is being able to separate the ones that are legitimate rigorous studies to further the knowledge base on a subject, and those that were done to prove a researchers preconceived beliefs. Funny how the later type always seem to prove what they intended to when they started the study.

[2jersey 16]

From the World Health Organization:

 

1) Laboratory studies have found that viruses (including HIV) do not pass through intact latex condoms even when devices are stretched or stressed.

 

2) In Thailand, the promotion by the government of 100% condom use by commercial sex workers led to a dramatic increase in the use of condoms (from 14% in 1990 to 94% in 1994); an equally dramatic decline in the nation-wide numbers of bacterial STD cases (from 410,406 cases in 1997 to 27,362 cases in 1994); and reduced HIV prevalence in Thai soldiers.

 

3) The most convincing data on the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV infection has been generated by prospective studies undertaken on serodiscordant couples, when one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not. These studies show that, with consistent condom use, the HIV infection rate among uninfected partners was less than 1 percent per year. Also, in situations where one partner is definitely infected, inconsistent condom use can be as risky as not using condoms at all.

[2jersey 16]

According to AVERT (an AIDS charity based in the UK):

 

Studies have shown that if a latex condom is used correctly every time you have sex, this is highly effective in providing protection against HIV.

 

The evidence for this is clearest in studies of couples in which one person is infected with HIV and the other not. i.e. "discordant couples". In a study of discordant couples in Europe, among 123 couples who reported consistent condom use, none of the uninfected partners became infected. In contrast, among the 122 couples who used condoms inconsistently, 12 of the uninfected partners became infected.

 

Citation for the "discordant couples" study:

De Vincenzi I. (1994) 'A longitudinal study of human immunodeficiency virus transmission by heterosexual partners', the New England Journal of Medicine; 331:341-346

[MRandMRS 15]

We are new to swinging and have decided to be exclusive with another couple. We know our histories etc and are choosing to go bareback as long as things remain exclusive. If we, or they were to have sex with others, we'd start to require condoms. Hubby is not allowed to cum inside her w/o a condom. The other male is allowed (and encouraged ) to cum in me since he is fixed.

[ShellyM 0]

The only thing I have a problem with, and maybe it is not how you meant it, but it seems so, is the idea that people shouldn't give their opinion here if it differs from yours on this subject.

 

Hey Good, I apologize for seeming that way. I truly value your opinion, especially as someone who has been out here for awhile. See, let me tell you from my viewpoint. I am a new swinger, very naive in the lifestyle. Not as a woman, but as a swinger. Okay? So, when a person who has been swinging for, say years, tells me something it holds weight with me, because you have been around this lifestyle. Okay? So, and I'm just talking hypothetically and not literally, for you to say that it is okay to not use a condom to me, is in a way irresponsible. Thats all I'm saying. People who are more experienced have some responsibility when talking with people who are new....do you understand my point? If you are a group of experienced swingers, everyone been around the block, you talk a certain way. I know you do. But, when newbies are around, especially when they may not be very educated in the transmission of disease, people should be mindful of what they say. Thats all I'm saying. I think you are all GREAT people. All of you. I think you have every right to your opinion, and I respect you for that. I just wanted to try and help you to see where I'm coming from when I say that.

[ShellyM 0]

No offense taken, of course.

 

Thank you, I appreciate you being so wonderful.

[kenora_guy 16]

It depends on who it is and how well we know each other and their sexual history... I for one want a guy to fill me and hopefully someday her.

[2jersey 16]

Hey Good, I apologize for seeming that way. I truly value your opinion, especially as someone who has been out here for awhile. See, let me tell you from my viewpoint. I am a new swinger, very naive in the lifestyle. Not as a woman, but as a swinger. Okay? So, when a person who has been swinging for, say years, tells me something it holds weight with me, because you have been around this lifestyle. Okay? So, and I'm just talking hypothetically and not literally, for you to say that it is okay to not use a condom to me, is in a way irresponsible. Thats all I'm saying. People who are more experienced have some responsibility when talking with people who are new....do you understand my point? If you are a group of experienced swingers, everyone been around the block, you talk a certain way. I know you do. But, when newbies are around, especially when they may not be very educated in the transmission of disease, people should be mindful of what they say. Thats all I'm saying. I think you are all GREAT people. All of you. I think you have every right to your opinion, and I respect you for that. I just wanted to try and help you to see where I'm coming from when I say that.

 

ShellyM, fortunately the veteran swingers who practice and advocate "safer" sex heavily outnumber the few who prefer to ignore the medical reality. Your point, however, is well taken. It is irresponsible to advocate condomless sex on this board.

[good times 991]

ShellyM and 2jersey, I do understand what you are saying; I guess I just see the whole condom issue differently than you. I think it is irresponsible to tell people that condoms will protect them, when the evidence presented by the many research studies on the subject clearly indicate that they do not provide anywhere near the protection that the pro-condom advocates claim or imply. In fact, if you read the actual studies and not the heavily propagandized summaries commonly seen on the internet, condoms have only been shown to provide a significant amount of protection for very few STD's. For example, current wisdom is that they provide statistically significant protection from the AIDS virus and that is important if you are at risk of encountering HIV infected people, or you engage in activities that put you at risk for AIDS. Thing is, we (my wife and I) don't, we are in such a low risk demographic group for AIDS that it really is a non-issue for us. We instead look at the incurable diseases we truly are at risk for, like herpes and HPV. The problem is, for these STD's, condoms are so ineffective as to not be useful at all, and reducing my risk of transmission by 2% or so just isn't a significant difference to me. Certainly not enough to warrant using condoms as my primary means of protection. Nevertheless, how many people do we all know that think when they slip that condom on that they have significantly reduced their risk of contracting these incurable diseases? Most condom users that I know think exactly that. Furthermore, how many swingers do you know that have educated themselves enough to recognize the signs and symptoms of these diseases? If you answer almost none to that question, your experience is the same as mine.

[Greg & Sheryl 368]

So, and I'm just talking hypothetically and not literally, for you to say that it is okay to not use a condom to me, is in a way irresponsible.

It is irresponsible to advocate condomless sex on this board.

I think it is irresponsible to tell people that condoms will protect them, when the evidence presented by the many research studies on the subject clearly indicate that they do not provide anywhere near the protection that the pro-condom advocates claim or imply.

We are not quite sure that responsibility (or irresponsibility) is a legitimate issue in this debate. The responsible thing for each poster on this board is to advocate what he/she believes in. Opinions differ in regard to the effectiveness of condoms, and that's that. Ultimately, it is up to each person in this lifestyle to create a condom policy based whatever criteria he/she chooses.

[mrs good times 73]

We are not quite sure that responsibility (or irresponsibility) is a legitimate issue in this debate. The responsible thing for each poster on this board is to advocate what he/she believes in. Opinions differ in regard to the effectiveness of condoms, and that's that. Ultimately, it is up to each person in this lifestyle to create a condom policy based whatever criteria he/she chooses.

 

Dito The OP's question was whether or not you let a man cum inside your wife or girlfriend and we answered accordingly. The fact is that there are bareback swingers in the lifestyle so why would we not answer the OP's question accurately. Being PC on this issue is not in the best interest of anyone. This is a valid question and something most swingers will encounter at some point so they need to know that yes, there are swingers that do not require condoms.

[93tiger 15]

Condoms only unless we know you really really well.

 

Before you start saying condoms don't seriously reduce your risk I suggest reading the statistics and scientific background listed at the Center of Disease Control.

 

Sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV:

Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. In addition, correct and consistent use of latex condoms can reduce the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including discharge and genital ulcer diseases. While the effect of condoms in preventing human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is unknown, condom use has been associated with a lower rate of cervical cancer, an HPV-associated disease.

 

HIV, the virus that causes AIDS:

Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing the sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

AIDS is, by far, the most deadly sexually transmitted disease, and considerably more scientific evidence exists regarding condom effectiveness for prevention of HIV infection than for other STDs. The body of research on the effectiveness of latex condoms in preventing sexual transmission of HIV is both comprehensive and conclusive. In fact, the ability of latex condoms to prevent transmission of HIV has been scientifically established in “real-life” studies of sexually active couples as well as in laboratory studies.

 

Discharge Diseases, Including:

Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and Trichomoniasis

 

Discharge diseases, other than HIV:

Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, can reduce the risk of transmission of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and trichomoniasis.

 

Gonorrhea, chlamydia, and trichomoniasis are termed discharge diseases because they are sexually transmitted by genital secretions, such as semen or vaginal fluids. HIV is also transmitted by genital secretions.

 

Genital Ulcer Diseases and Human Papillomavirus:

 

Genital ulcer diseases and HPV infections can occur in both male or female genital areas that are covered or protected by a latex condom, as well as in areas that are not covered. Correct and consistent use of latex condoms can reduce the risk of genital herpes, syphilis, and chancroid only when the infected area or site of potential exposure is protected. While the effect of condoms in preventing human papillomavirus infection is unknown, condom use has been associated with a lower rate of cervical cancer, an HPV-associated disease.

 

 

Genital ulcer diseases include genital herpes, syphilis, and chancroid. These diseases are transmitted primarily through “skin-to-skin” contact from sores/ulcers or infected skin that looks normal. HPV infections are transmitted through contact with infected genital skin or mucosal surfaces/fluids. Genital ulcer diseases and HPV infection can occur in male or female genital areas that are, or are not, covered (protected by the condom).

 

Conclusion - condoms properly used are significant protection against most incurable or serious STD's other than Herpes which is transmitted skin to skin. That's not to say however that condoms don't decrease skin to skin transmitted diseases. Unfortunately Herpes is one of the more common diseases out there.

 

Take your risks as you will, but if you don't usually use condoms at least have the courtesy of telling your partners that much. Especially if they do use them. You are significantly increasing their risks.

[Alura 2,773]

93Tiger wrote:

 

Take your risks as you will, but if you don't usually use condoms at least have the courtesy of telling your partners that much. Especially if they do use them. You are significantly increasing their risks

 

We believe the best way to avoid STDs is to not have sex with anyone who has STDs. Of course, 100% safety is hard to attain even with "condoms used correctly."

 

We've found that restricting our activity to long-term married couples works for us. At least we can say we've not contracted any STDs in the past twenty-five years. I don't think condoms would have improved on that record and I don't think we would be increasing anyone's risk.

 

We think far riskier behavior would be to have sex with strangers... even if condoms are used.

[Mistral Wind 54]

No brainer, condom is a must these days!

[twobears 16]

Yes, it is very confusing to see so many different outlooks at this. I have not had sex with anyone other than my hubby for 20 yrs, so it is OK for you to have unprotected sex with me, I don't think so. People will tell themselves that this couple is different, it does not change the fact that swinging period is a risk, it feels better without a sock, LOL.

 

This was a big deal for us for a long time, my husband felt that there were low risk couples, not me. I was even hurt some, what that he wants to experience sex with others with out a condom, NO! Would you not want your mate to be safe and not to put her at risk, for what you feel?? It is as common to talk yourself into something that is easier to. This is not a issue of believing what is told to us, this is an issue of health, most people can talk themselves into about anything when they want they way, does not make it any less true that the day of unprotected sex is OK.

 

I do not want to take pleasure away from my husband, in fact I am very turned on by his pleasure with another woman. I wanted him to think of me, to realize we need to take care of each other first. I tried to be comfortable with the fact that he was not going to wear a rubber and my comfort zone as we say is not there. It is not a problem nor do we let it be a problem. A man to be so self-centered to think of what he wants only does not change any facts.

 

I am very disappointed that a few on this board talk of not using condom, do as you please does not change the facts, even if you think I am silly old female. We buy special condoms, they are put out around our bedroom when we play. We make it a fun thing, they have even glow in the dark ones and we make it sexy to put on. It is just all in one's head, even the fact that using them makes sex less fun, or too messy, or we have to stop to put one on. You best have it on him from start to finish once he enters you. Do put a small dot of lube on head of his penis as you put the condom on.

 

I love to suck on a man, but it is covered with special favored condom, all kinds of fun things, if you keep an open mind. We talked about being part of a "group" and no sex outside the groups. I feel that it is a terrible mistake even for older couples to put their health at risk. Life is a risk in the best of circumstances, why add more to it?

 

Happy Swinging to all with or without. LOL

[aahours1 16]

I guess it depends on the people you are with. I have at times done that, but other times I have pulled out and cum on the belly. Alot of women like the cum on their titties. So like I said, it depends on who you are with and their feelings about it. But if you are uncomfortable with it, YOU MUST USE A CONDOM and and also the other male must use a CONDOM, and make that a rule up front. But you must talk it over with you other half.

[Chicup 41]

We have one couple we don't use condoms with but these are very close and 'special' friends. We were both close to swinging virgins when we met them, and STD's are not an issue there for a number of reasons. Its closer to ployamory than swinging with them (closer but its not ).

 

All others are full condom.

[SW_PA_Couple 4,023]

OK, so I'm awake this morning, laying in bed, waiting for the clock-radio to awaken me and tell me it's time to arise. I think to myself, "OMG, there is an aspect of BoxerCouple's original question that I failed to recognize." A man cumming into a woman implies more than a risk of STD. It implies a risk of pregnancy. Not an issue with Mrs. J or with me as as I was "fixed" when I was 31 years of age and she is a "woman of a certain age", as the French say. But certainly an Issue (use of the capital I intentional) for most women lesser than that number of years.

 

So let me ask my own questions. With how many of you is the possibility of pregnancy an issue and in what ways do you address the issue?

[Spoomonkey 421]

With how many of you is the possibility of pregnancy an issue and in what ways do you address the issue?

 

Both of us were fixed in our previous marriages. So - we are "double dammed".

 

If we have a baby, we are naming him Jesus...

[good times 991]

Like the Spoo's, we are both fixed, myself when I was mid 30's, Mrs. GT a year or so ago. In fact, this was our main worry when we started swinging and why Mrs. GT went ahead and got her tubes tied, our family raising days are behind us and we would just as soon keep it that way.