Bareback / Raw Sex Discussion + Fucking Without A Condom / Bareback = Trust ?(compiled)

[snowball]

this thread can be Positive educational topics if only we ourself know it well,

is the way how we going to " hghlight " and bring our msg to the readers here,

we are adult, we all can distinguish.

most important is, we must be responsible for own acts.

[SKMan]

this thread has turned into something really familiar to a previous thread i was on .... lol

anyways, to each his own lah.

as long as u know what u are doing, and u are responsible for ur action, can liao lol.

'peace

[Sticky&Sweet]

I believe by maintaining this thread with enough people like me saying NO to bareback sex because of the dangers of contracting any forms of STDs, people tempted to do so will realise bareback sex is wrong and is NOT advocated by the majority.

[steelwings]

Don't be afraid to share your experiences and the more you let others hear of what you have been through the better it is for fellow readers to take precaution. AFA can only do so much to help MSMs, giving out condoms, having sero prevalence programme, on site free testings at suanas, spas, clubs and bars, etc these are really a lot of work and free labour from volunteers so do not discredit these people's effort.

[fab]

BB is only meant for couple who respect monogamous.

Suffice to say, not everyone is capable of handling it.

[Guest Guest]

I remember a time when condoms were used only for contraception purposes which was it's original intent. In gay sex it was unheard of to use condoms since the question of pregnancy if 'out of question'. Then when Aids started to kill thousands of gay men in their prime in north America the practice of gay sex came under scrutiny. It wasn't until the scentists was sure about how the HIV virus was transmitted that condom became advocated as a prevention tool not only against HIV infection but also other STIs. Do you remember the Mr Condom of Bangkok? I think a lot of us got the message drummed into our heads about using condoms from Mr Condom. Bangkok, then, became a success story of how condom use could reduce HIV infections. But now it's a different story.

There is a trend of young gay/msm worldwide practising bareback sex fuelled by gay pxxns...drug use..and psychological factors. Read the following article. It's about a young bareback pxxn actor who died of Aids early this year at only 25 yrs old. Ironically, like many young barebacking gays, "he never known a whole without hiv and yet it was invisible to him" Quote.

http://www.poz.com/articles/podium_mark_king_401_18271.shtml

[hazilyhasty]

The truth is, you can never know your HIV infection status until around 3-6 months after the initial infection.

And vaseline, seriously? That's a very bad idea.

[Guest roben]

why has the statistic part not presented here, how many people got infectrd when they do it without condoms ?

[Guest monogamy]

Got a medical question.

Theoretically, if both parties are in a STRICTLY monogamous relationship but practice bareback sex, will they still be exposed to HIV for that? Any research/statistcs on that?

[Guest Ironrod]

Got a medical question.

Theoretically, if both parties are in a STRICTLY monogamous relationship but practice bareback sex, will they still be exposed to HIV for that? Any research/statistcs on that?

If "STRICTLY monogamous" like my boy and me, after 12 years of bareback we are still healthy and fine.

But a lot of gays don't play by the rules, unless u able to train your boy well or really trust the person.

Perhaps u shouldn't take the risk.

Go listen to George Michael song "Spinning the Wheel" - Do you really want somebody to spin your wheel for u?

[GachiMuchi]

Got a medical question.

Theoretically, if both parties are in a STRICTLY monogamous relationship but practice bareback sex, will they still be exposed to HIV for that? Any research/statistcs on that?

Is this a medical question? No. it is not.

It's a common sense question. If you still have doubt, go visit. www.afa.org.sg

[Guest Guest]

do you guys use condoms with ur bf?

[Carmen69]

I have trouble staying hard in a condom, so I always prefer bareback.

[Guest Emery]

I have trouble staying hard in a condom, so I always prefer bareback.

Good on yer , mate.

My bf also prefers me to screw bareback as it is sensational , tingling and we feel so much into each other and we have been together over 15 years already.

we love it bareback

[AfA_MSM]

Lately alot of very BOLD people, don't even consider your health. If you love yourself, you won't have Fxxk without condom.

Worst still, you have Bareback fxxking. You are not those film or movies stars, after they acted bareback, they will be paid alot of $$$.

Then they rest for a while b4 the next video film. Atleast they get paid. Unlike most people they don't even think for their health and just wants to distroy it. Is it really worth it?????

Please note that Action for Aids will only submit post using the member account 'AfA_MSM' and not under a guest account. Thanks !

[AfA_MSM]

Is this an official response from AFA? So fxxking simplistic and moralistic!! Sounds like the catholic church moralising...but in this case about using condoms instead of abstinence. Self love??? $$$$$ ????? So this is how your outreach program is all about. No wonder!! :whistle: :whistle:

Please note that Action for Aids will only submit post using the member account 'AfA_MSM' and not under a guest account. Thanks !

[Guest lex19]

And people who practise safe sex will never suffer?? A great Saint from India some 2500 years ago had said...we are all suffering whether u like it or not...or know it or not.

I assure you, everyone ...whether u have sex or not at all...use condoms or never used at all....will all suffer. But the suffering is not a punishment. It is as natural as birth and death. It is essential to make us better human beings. We will all be accountable for our very own actions....reap what you sow....like our shadows our karma will follow us through eternity.

but at least those that practise safe sex do not suffer MORE than those that do bareback fxxking............

[azuchan]

Fallacy.

People who have sex bareback suffer just as much as people who have sex with condoms.

When you are having sex bareback, naturally you would be worried about STD, HIV, and so on.

When you are having sex with condoms, you'd be worried if the condom would break accidentally or not, if the rubber will cause chafing which will result in open wounds and so on.

So to say people who have sex with condoms do not suffer as much as people who have sex bareback, it's just plain and simple bullpuckey. You just have different sets of worries.

[Guest Gymguy]

Fallacy.

People who have sex bareback suffer just as much as people who have sex with condoms.

When you are having sex bareback, naturally you would be worried about STD, HIV, and so on.

When you are having sex with condoms, you'd be worried if the condom would break accidentally or not, if the rubber will cause chafing which will result in open wounds and so on.

So to say people who have sex with condoms do not suffer as much as people who have sex bareback, it's just plain and simple bullpuckey. You just have different sets of worries.

You are talking rubbish!!!

[Guest monogamy]

Is this a medical question? No. it is not.

It's a common sense question. If you still have doubt, go visit. www.afa.org.sg

It is a medical question for me. Me question doesn't stem from a decision of whether to bareback or not. I have the common sense to know the dangers.

I'm just curious to know if there has been any scientific studies regarding barebacking for multiple vs single partners. Since multiple partners without condoms have been known to be high risk, what about having a single partner (with all other control factors the same).

[Guest monogamy]

Is this a medical question? No. it is not.

It's a common sense question. If you still have doubt, go visit. www.afa.org.sg

It is a medical question for me. Me question doesn't stem from a decision of whether to bareback or not. I have the common sense to know the dangers.

I'm just curious to know if there has been any scientific studies regarding barebacking for multiple vs single partners. Since multiple partners without condoms have been known to be high risk, what about having a single partner (with all other control factors the same).

[Guest Ironrod]

It is a medical question for me. Me question doesn't stem from a decision of whether to bareback or not. I have the common sense to know the dangers.

I'm just curious to know if there has been any scientific studies regarding barebacking for multiple vs single partners. Since multiple partners without condoms have been known to be high risk, what about having a single partner (with all other control factors the same).

Mono:

U must first understand any STDs or HIV does not matter if u fxxk with multiple or single partner(s)

As long as you fxxk with an infected person [for example your monogamous bf] you will be infected.

Barebacking - DOES NOT CREATE STD OR HIV.

Therefore it doesn't really matter you bareback with 1 person or a few person, if they are all certified infection free.

The main problem here is "How do you know your bf is infection free?"

Do you know about window period?

Do you know as much as a doctor does? [even some doctors do not all all signs of STD till it reach fatal stages]

I hope the above answers your question below.

"Since multiple partners without condoms have been known to be high risk, what about having a single partner (with all other control factors the same)."

The high risk stems from the logic that fxxking around puts you in high chance of meeting an infected person.

If you only fxxk with your bf but your bf fxxks around, you still have a high chance in getting infected.

So it does not matter if you barebacking with 1 guy or few guys, it really voice down who you fxxking with and how much you can trust them.

[Guest monogamy]

Ironrod, thanks for taking time to explain.

I am aware of all the points you have raised.

I do know that in the real world, you can't trust your partner 100%, so even if you are monogamous with him, the discipline may not be reciprocated. It just takes one lapse and you may get it.

That's why in my question I kept stressing THEORETICALLY.

Basically my question is more a hypothetical one.

Example if you put 2 individuals who are HIV- (window period considered) and they have no contact whatsoever with a third party. They engage in only bareback sex with each other. I wanna know in such a situation, will any of these two become HIV+? You've raised the point that barebacking does not create HIV, so in such a scenario we wouldn't expect these two to become +ve right? I've never come across any findings on that.

[azuchan]

Ironrod, thanks for taking time to explain.

I am aware of all the points you have raised.

I do know that in the real world, you can't trust your partner 100%, so even if you are monogamous with him, the discipline may not be reciprocated. It just takes one lapse and you may get it.

That's why in my question I kept stressing THEORETICALLY.

Basically my question is more a hypothetical one.

Example if you put 2 individuals who are HIV- (window period considered) and they have no contact whatsoever with a third party. They engage in only bareback sex with each other. I wanna know in such a situation, will any of these two become HIV+? You've raised the point that barebacking does not create HIV, so in such a scenario we wouldn't expect these two to become +ve right? I've never come across any findings on that.

Mathematical law dictates that 0+0=0. It's pretty straightforward that given a scenario that 2 HIV negative guys, who are both having sex for the first time, will NOT contract HIV.

HIV is passed on from a POSITIVE person to a NEGATIVE person. It cannot appear out of thin air for no apparent reason. Nature does not work like that. It is verifiable and observable, and given the fact that HIV requires bodily fluids, namely the blood, sexual secretions and breast milk, for it to survive and be transmitted, because it cannot survive in the open air.

And you don't come across such studies because it is not logical to do such a study. It's pretty common sense even during the time of the Black Death, that people know that someone with the disease needs to be in contact with another person for the disease to be spread.

[GachiMuchi]

Got a medical question.

Theoretically, if both parties are in a STRICTLY monogamous relationship but practice bareback sex, will they still be exposed to HIV for that? Any research/statistcs on that?

It is a medical question for me. Me question doesn't stem from a decision of whether to bareback or not. I have the common sense to know the dangers.

I'm just curious to know if there has been any scientific studies regarding barebacking for multiple vs single partners. Since multiple partners without condoms have been known to be high risk, what about having a single partner (with all other control factors the same).

No. That was not the question you asked on 22nd Sept. The 1st question u asked was NOT a medical question. That can be answered with common sense. IF A & B are STRICTLY monogamous, it is not possible to get HIV, unless A or B was infected and didn't know they were infected and if they practice bareback sex, then A may infect B or B may infect A. What not to understand about such common sense.

The 2nd question you asked was also NOT a medical question. It's more a question of statics and studies.

Medical www.dictionary.com

–adjective

1. of or pertaining to the science or practice of medicine: medical history; medical treatment.

2. curative; medicinal; therapeutic: medical properties.

3. pertaining to or requiring treatment by other than surgical means.

4. pertaining to or giving evidence of the state of one's health: a medical discharge from the army; a medical examination.

–noun

5.something done or received in regard to the state of one's health, as a medical examination.

I hope you are clearer on what IS and what IS NOT a medical question.

[Guest monogamy]

Mathematical law dictates that 0+0=0. It's pretty straightforward that given a scenario that 2 HIV negative guys, who are both having sex for the first time, will NOT contract HIV.

Thanks for the confirmation. I guess I wasn't initially certain that it would be as straightforward as a 0+0=0. Sex and its bilogical makeup is surely more complex than Maths

[MarriedTop]

Ironrod, thanks for taking time to explain.

I am aware of all the points you have raised.

I do know that in the real world, you can't trust your partner 100%, so even if you are monogamous with him, the discipline may not be reciprocated. It just takes one lapse and you may get it.

That's why in my question I kept stressing THEORETICALLY.

Basically my question is more a hypothetical one.

Example if you put 2 individuals who are HIV- (window period considered) and they have no contact whatsoever with a third party. They engage in only bareback sex with each other. I wanna know in such a situation, will any of these two become HIV+? You've raised the point that barebacking does not create HIV, so in such a scenario we wouldn't expect these two to become +ve right? I've never come across any findings on that.

That is funny, then where does the 1st HIV + came from?

[veith]

That is funny, then where does the 1st HIV + came from?

you can read more from the website.

http://www.avert.org/origin-aids-hiv.htm

[Guest mongamy]

No. That was not the question you asked on 22nd Sept. The 1st question u asked was NOT a medical question. That can be answered with common sense. IF A & B are STRICTLY monogamous, it is not possible to get HIV, unless A or B was infected and didn't know they were infected and if they practice bareback sex, then A may infect B or B may infect A. What not to understand about such common sense.

The 2nd question you asked was also NOT a medical question. It's more a question of statics and studies.

Medical www.dictionary.com

–adjective

1. of or pertaining to the science or practice of medicine: medical history; medical treatment.

2. curative; medicinal; therapeutic: medical properties.

3. pertaining to or requiring treatment by other than surgical means.

4. pertaining to or giving evidence of the state of one's health: a medical discharge from the army; a medical examination.

–noun

5.something done or received in regard to the state of one's health, as a medical examination.

I hope you are clearer on what IS and what IS NOT a medical question.

I can assure you that there's absolutely no need to go round quoting me a Webster or an Oxford.

If a question related to HIV and/or Bareback Sex is not a medical question I don't know what is. You may think that it is a silly question, but it is still a question pertaining to one's medical health. I just don't know why you are more hung up about it's validity as a "medical question".

To me, there's nothing shameful about asking any question that others like you may think it's silly or common sense. The more you know, the more you know you don't know. If I have the humility to ask, Condescension is not the answer I'm looking for.

Plus, I never state that my second question is a medical one. That's why I said "scientic studies". True, it may be backed up by statistics and studies, but these numbers are just an instrument to highlight a medical issues.

Similarly, a scientific study on the Birth Rate in Singapore is a study on Population. Statistics is the instrument used to prove certain points.

btw, Moderators, I'm sorry about the multiposts for my previous reply. Can you please delete accordingly? Thanks

[GachiMuchi]

I can assure you that there's absolutely no need to go round quoting me a Webster or an Oxford.

If a question related to HIV and/or Bareback Sex is not a medical question I don't know what is. You may think that it is a silly question, but it is still a question pertaining to one's medical health. I just don't know why you are more hung up about it's validity as a "medical question".

To me, there's nothing shameful about asking any question that others like you may think it's silly or common sense. The more you know, the more you know you don't know. If I have the humility to ask, Condescension is not the answer I'm looking for.

Plus, I never state that my second question is a medical one. That's why I said "scientic studies". True, it may be backed up by statistics and studies, but these numbers are just an instrument to highlight a medical issues.

Similarly, a scientific study on the Birth Rate in Singapore is a study on Population. Statistics is the instrument used to prove certain points.

btw, Moderators, I'm sorry about the multiposts for my previous reply. Can you please delete accordingly? Thanks

1. Do note that I did not say that you had posted a "silly" question.

2. I am not "hung up" about your "medical" question. It's more pertaining to your 1st question about "if .. STRICTLY monogamous relationship...bareback..." for which Azuchan had answer it with his post. What Azuchan had stated can be seen as an answer with common sense while your question is seen as lacking.

Simple as that.

[Guest Save_ourselves]

I wanna comment something about HIV that's extremely extremely controversial. I know I'll get flamed but seriously I just hope it may actually save lives. But if I keep mum about it then I will feel uneasy. Argh nvm... Just do a google for 'hiv scam' or 'aids scam'. Then do a search for 'poppers and aids'. Read at least 10 websites from each search results n draw your own conclusions. Hope I did not just open pandora's box.....high level sophisticated deception at work....read them with an open mind... The western medical industry that we put so much hope n our lives on. They are....sigh... Shall say no more.

Reading from these websites may help solve the mystery of the mysterious n peculiar disease that is Aids. I was skeptical n leery of this whole thing since day one... Wat a revelation... Worthy of an entire ripley's believe it or not episode. The truth is out there...

[hazilyhasty]

Ironrod, thanks for taking time to explain.

I am aware of all the points you have raised.

I do know that in the real world, you can't trust your partner 100%, so even if you are monogamous with him, the discipline may not be reciprocated. It just takes one lapse and you may get it.

That's why in my question I kept stressing THEORETICALLY.

Basically my question is more a hypothetical one.

Example if you put 2 individuals who are HIV- (window period considered) and they have no contact whatsoever with a third party. They engage in only bareback sex with each other. I wanna know in such a situation, will any of these two become HIV+? You've raised the point that barebacking does not create HIV, so in such a scenario we wouldn't expect these two to become +ve right? I've never come across any findings on that.

Logically speaking no. HIV infection is caused by the virus known as the human immonodeficiency virus, whose long latent period makes AIDS hardly detectable in the first few months of infection. If both parties are HIV free, there is simply no reason (by chance or act of God or whatsoever) that they will be infected.

I still don't quite understand the question because I thought Ironrod made it very clear.

HIV does not arise spontaneously, nor does it transmit through any kind of medium except for bodily fluids where it can survive. Therefore, as long as both parties are HIV- there's no reason why bareback sex will lead to a HIV infection of any kind.

[Guest Guest]

taking yeast infection as example, if the woman did not keep ur vagina clean, then it attracts yeasts to grow....but having bareback w 2 negative ppl will not just 'grow' hiv virus.

the person who asked this qn sounds like he is from some laidback 3rd world country...im surprised for his ignorant if he is a singaporean. lol

[Guest Guest]

the person who asked this qn sounds like he is from some laidback 3rd world country...im surprised for his ignorant if he is a singaporean. lol

it should be ignorance, not ignorant. lol

[Guest jayy]

Well, you can't get infected with HIV magically. There is only a risk of infection if 1) you come into contact with bodily fluid from an infected person and 2) there is some route available for this fluid to get into your bloodstream (open wound, tear, cut etc).

[Guest -anyhow-]

wah....time to revise our microbiology, bacteriology, virology, pasteuriology.......bla bla bla, haha

if 2 hiv -ve guys have fun and suddenly they become hiv +ve.... maybe you can try to put 2 rocks together, and one day suddenly the 2 rocks will become GOLD, haha

[Guest Kendall]

taking yeast infection as example, if the woman did not keep ur vagina clean, then it attracts yeasts to grow....but having bareback w 2 negative ppl will not just 'grow' hiv virus.

the person who asked this qn sounds like he is from some laidback 3rd world country...im surprised for his ignorant if he is a singaporean. lol

I am a Sporean, and I am not too surprised if Sporeans are indeed one of the more ignorant pple ard.... and think otherwise.

Exercise some humility, dude.

[Guest IRC]

i do cruise on irc when horny. but always insists on safe sex when it comes to fxxking.

i avoid guys that bareback as i consider them higher risk. even they willing to use condom when sex with me.

some of these guys say i hypocrite. come out to play with strangers on irc already dangerous.

so why avoid those man who bareback, as long as i use condom when sex with them.

am i right ? are they right ?

[koolkai]

some of these guys say i hypocrite. come out to play with strangers on irc already dangerous.

so why avoid those man who bareback, as long as i use condom when sex with them.

am i right ? are they right ?

What they say is true. Having sex with strangers is already a risk you are taking. And how do you know guys who say they will use condom when having sex with you may have sex without condom before?

Hence, having sex with strangers is definitely dangerous.

[Guest manlybi]

you are right to insist to use the condom, especially you dun know them

i do cruise on irc when horny. but always insists on safe sex when it comes to fxxking.

i avoid guys that bareback as i consider them higher risk. even they willing to use condom when sex with me.

some of these guys say i hypocrite. come out to play with strangers on irc already dangerous.

so why avoid those man who bareback, as long as i use condom when sex with them.

am i right ? are they right ?

[Guest Guest-Star]

you are right to insist to use the condom, especially you dun know them

How many times do we actually know a person "well enough" to start to have sex with him. He may be the guy you met at the club, a guy introduced to you by another friend..... At the end of the day we don't really know if this person practice save sex, have multiple sex partners or even go for orgy parties. It's just so difficult to judge who is to be considered a stranger..... are they all not strangers when you have sex with them for the first time? It's all about feeling amd impulse I think.

[Guest Naughty]

i do cruise on irc when horny. but always insists on safe sex when it comes to fxxking.

i avoid guys that bareback as i consider them higher risk. even they willing to use condom when sex with me.

some of these guys say i hypocrite. come out to play with strangers on irc already dangerous.

so why avoid those man who bareback, as long as i use condom when sex with them.

am i right ? are they right ?

IRC, i do have the same feeling as you ...

[wildfireboy]

Just do what you think is correct. Don't bother what others said as they have no right and are in no position to rule your decision.

Cheers.

[desmadonna]

of course you are not hypocritical.

i think a lot of people are same as you, including myself,

will go to irc to look for sex , and ask the ons partner to put condom.

Asking the stranger to put on a condom is the safest thing you can do already.

[thorzguy]

Yes, do not be disturbed by what others say. Most importantly is to play safe. Personally, i feel a condom is not only about protection against unwanted diseases, also for hygienic purposes.

[Guest Obvious is obvious]

The ones who don't want condoms obviously have AIDs/STDs, that's why there isn't a point for precaution anymore.

[fab]

Not intending to promote BB, but it is not really true.

Some ppl are unable to get erection (or stay erected) with condoms while some dislike the feeling with condoms on.

[snowball]

everyone have their reason(s) to put on rubber or BB during anal sex,

to reduce the risk or unprotected as long both cool with the agreement

[Guest elgar90]

using a condom doesnt mean that it is safe sex, its only safer. If either way isnt safe, then avoid having any form of sex. Jus DIY yourself. Or at most find a monogamous sex buddy...

[Guest curious person]

Curious and wants to know whether are there any people out there who got HIV after unprotected oral sex and has never done anal sex before?