BBPaulZA Posted March 23, 2015 Report Posted March 23, 2015 So, is it just me - or is it true that a guy with "safer only"is his profile is more likely to breed me bareback? Quote
BBPaulZA Posted March 23, 2015 Author Report Posted March 23, 2015 Had one guy fuck me with no condom for hours...but he wouldn't cum in me or let e eat his cum because he said it wasnt safe! Quote
Guest ff-whole Posted March 24, 2015 Report Posted March 24, 2015 Had one guy fuck me with no condom for hours...but he wouldn't cum in me or let e eat his cum because he said it wasnt safe! that's stupid... didn't he know precum could have been just as unsafe? Quote
slowfuck Posted March 25, 2015 Report Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) There's plenty of illogical responses to the risk. I've been on the receiving end of the 'fuck bare and then put a condom on for the orgasm' scenario. Few people I meet are as knowledgeable as those of us who have researched HIV transmission, but generally I feel people say Safe only both to avoid judgemental responses, and as they feel other Safe only guys will be safe to fuck bare because they are safe only. It's probably wilful blindness about their partners' past activity to be able to blame the other guy if they get unlucky. I despair of trying to communicate the, to most, seemingly counter-intuitive idea that an upfront Poz undetectable guy on meds would be safer than a safe only barebacker in general. But what can you do. Edited March 25, 2015 by slowfuck Quote
melbtm Posted March 26, 2015 Report Posted March 26, 2015 Even guys are safe sex only but they are hard they want to bury their dick in a whatsoever hole they can get. Talks are nothing but actions are real. Quote
.thumb.png.1f029cb1e8f169a830fca9c403f729f5.png)
Recommended Posts