That might be true for you, who is suggesting an 'all or nothing approach'.

But not assessing the relative risks involved in various forms of oral sex is a very stupid way to look at things. Most people are interested in the specific risks of different sexual activities so that they can make intelligent, informed decisions. That's what I'm trying to help with and it's got nothing to do with my personal preferences - why should it?

"All or nothing approach"?

The problem is that it is impossible to rate the risk of either behavior relative to the other. There isn't any available data to do that. That's why all of these sources we both quote invariably refer to the "theoretical risk" of both types of oral sex. And there is nothing in the behaviors themselves that lead one to think either is riskier than the other.  

And you still haven't answered my question? Even if BBBJ were (and there is no reason to think it is) 100 times less risky than DATY, it would still be risky. So if you're such a cautious and conscientious guy that you think we need to be warned about the extremely low risk of HIV infection with DATY, why aren't you also warning about the risk associated with your adored BBBJ? Could it be that your silence has something to do with the fact that you're on record as being a big BBBJ fan?

btw, that comment that you quoted in post #120 referred to both DFK and DATY. So yah, if the guy doesn't DATY or DFK his girlfriend, she's definitely not being fucked properly!

Again, that's just not true. Why don't you just admit that you don't know what you're talking about. There's theoretical risk and there's documented risk, i.e. where actual cases have been confirmed.

From your own post:


Although it's not common, this confirms documented cases for all forms of oral sex, with the exception of BBBJ from woman to man.

Those were your quotes pisser, I just pasted them in. And the only reason I did that was because I misunderstood the word "receptive" (I usually think of a guy receiving a BJ.)

There are very few documented cases of HIV transmission for either form of oral sex - certainly not enough to form any opinions on the relative risks.

You ignore the following (if you go back, you'll see that I actually address most of what you say, whereas your strategy is to pick out a few words from my posts and ignore the rest):

"Simply put, the answer is yes. It's possible for you to become infected with HIV while receiving oral sex, but certainly the risk is extremely low. The scenario that would lead to HIV transmission of this sort is very rare and the chance of it occurring is remote. If your partner has HIV, blood from small cuts or open sores in their mouth may enter the urethra (the opening at the tip of the penis), the vagina"

Cut in her mouth, possible HIV-infection to the BBBJ guy; cut in guy's mouth, possible HIV-infection to the DATY guy. Where in that do you see anything that would lead you to judge BBBJ safer than DATY?

And still you ignore this:

And you still haven't answered my question? Even if BBBJ were (and there is no reason to think it is) 100 times less risky than DATY, it would still be risky. So if you're such a cautious and conscientious guy that you think we need to be warned about the extremely low risk of HIV infection with DATY, why aren't you also warning about the risk associated with your adored BBBJ? Could it be that your silence has something to do with the fact that you're on record as being a big BBBJ fan?

But I have warned about the risk of BBBJ, here:

That insincere wad of weasel words is your idea of a warning?   Obviously, as you yourself admit, that very reluctant admission was only made to "pre-empt a reply" - i.e., it was merely tactical. (Actually it was made to avoid having to deal head-on with a huge hole in your argument that I had already pointed out.) And that out of the way, off you go again about how risky DATY is, when there is no basis in fact to consider it any more dangerous than your precious BBBJ!

This thread should have started and ended with "It’s up to everyone to assess their own acceptable level of risk  ... " because the only thing anyone knows about either DATY or BBBJ is that the real risk of HIV-infection from both is extremely low.

I'll take your feigned concern for that 20 yr-old seriously when you go back and change the title of this thread to, 'Is any form of oral sex 100% safe?'; and, given your seeming intolerance for even extremely low risks, admit that you're a reckless fool for asking WGs for BBBJ's.

Finally, admit that I was justified in calling you a hypocrite, and we'll be square!

[ Last edited by  Marsupial at 23-1-2010 00:58 ]

Personally, I think both of you guys need to get a life.  It should be clear by now that you're arguing like two people who don't share a common language.  Don't you guys have anything better to do?  Like maybe bonking a few WGs and writing up reports (BTW, if you want to come after me about my sad luck of reports, I'm open to criticism on that score).

But I was struck by a couple of thoughts...  

(1)  I don't give a rat's ass about theoretical risks.  I worry about real risks.  And mostly I focus on what I can easily do to reduce those risks.  For example, I have heard from several sources (which does not necessarily give it any validity whatsoever) that flossing creates small gum abrasions that take up to 24 hours to heal.  So I never floss for the 24 hours before seeing a WG...  a small precaution, perhaps ridiculous and unnecessary, but I do it just the same.

(2)  One small bright spot of getting older is that I don't need to worry quite so much about things that might kill me in 20 years.  It will probably all be academic then anyway!

Have fun, CGP

well, the only reason I never DATY is ...because I don't want to lick/suck a pussy knowing someone just banged it few minutes ago...thats all.

I never dfk/lfk either I just rub on the tits, and try to stick my finger in the ass, while I am fucking.

cheers.

Thanks for the rates SEAJ and pisser. I've never posted hateful or argumentative comments in any forum. Honestly, I think those are the types of posts that should be moderated. Or people making useless 1-word posts such as informing everyone that they were first to click the Reply button on a thread.

When I got negative ratings for my previous posts, I was posting my personal view as it related to the topic being discussed. There was no ill will implied or intended. I was new to the forum and I was trying to participate in conversation. I'm sorry if people took offense to me speaking my mind. I will be in China and Hong Kong in March. Then maybe I will contribute more things that people want to hear. I can make my own reports. Until then, there's not much I can do.

I just think there should be a bit more tolerance for the newcomers. Dropping the hammer because a newbie makes a post that isn't profound and awe-inspiring doesn't make us feel very welcome.

And by the way DArtagnan , there is no "Rate" button on my screen.

[ Last edited by  Sylvan at 23-1-2010 00:32 ]

Please refer to post # 83 in this thread
I agree your posts bore no ill will, implied or otherwise but they were irrelevant even though you might not think so.
Did you receive a PM asking you to read the Forum Etiquette thread ?

I love to DATY but I just cant bring myself to do it with working girls. I mean, your tongue is very porous, that's how we taste stuff, so it seems like a problem to me. Having said that, I know that lots of Bros go ahead and do it and that's fine as well. I just think we need to be careful about advocating the safety of DATY when we are not necessarily qualified. Everyone used to say, "dont believe everything you read in the news paper..." but we seem to believe almost everything that's written on the net. I know it's tempting... Hell, in the past week I have come really close to going BB during sex at the request of a girl. Damn took every ounce of my self control to say no coz I REALLY wanted to do it!

mea culpa

it's [Rating]

and it's found in the bottom right corner of every single post you're reading, along with  [Quote]  [Report]  [Rating] [Reply] ^Top

unless you're not logged in that is

You mean like this post?



And I can't even read this forum if I'm not logged in, so that theory is not possible.

[ Last edited by  Sylvan at 24-1-2010 21:34 ]

ROFLMAO!!!

We've had Members Power.... now we've got Newbies Power on the rise!!!

Yeah Sylvan- unfortunately newbies are NOT afforded the privilege of any point giving etc.  
You're just gonna have to keep on posting GOOD reports and get up to being a member before you can rate.

Good Luck!!

SEAJ

you seem to be rolling on the floor a lot ... hope you keep it clean !  

That's interesting - what's your take Twice?  

I'd understood all registered members could rate?  

If not, who can and who can't?

Better not touch a WG either. I mean the skin is very porous, that's how we sweat.

Members and upwards can rate acceptance, newbies don't have permission
http://forum.sex141.com/eforum/v ... &extra=page%3D1

Just to get back on track, and throw some citations on the fire here . . .

As what's-his-name said, saliva is very hostile to just about anything, especially the fragile HIV virus.  http://www.mcld.co.uk/hiv/?q=HIV%20and%20saliva  doesn't mean HIV can't be detected there, but it's a tough place for the virus to live.

And this hostility works both ways: it saves girls sucking cock and guys tongue fucking hookers.  It's also why I lightly disagreed with Mars' statement about 5 pages back that risk was created by a cut in the gum, etc.  That's only an hypothesis so far (and it sounds logical), however I think that given the environment (saliva) of the hypothetical "cut gum" one would have to be bleeding like a stuck pig for their to be any measurable increase in risk.  Again, that's just my hypothesis against the more commonly mentioned one.  No facts to support either side, just supposition.

However I would proffer the following Scientific Americanus Smartus article from 2007 that summarizes interesting research involving semen and HIV (what a job, somebody's not getting paid enough! )  The summary of the article: proteins in semen can make HIV up to 100,000 times more infective. Semen normally has a fairly low level of HIV, much lowerthan blood.  However it's these proteins that make it so infective.  The SA article: http://www.scientificamerican.co ... kes-hiv-more-potent

So here's my wild speculation: if semen is so infective (particularly yours Pisser ) then all those girls gobbling spunk would be sure goners EXCEPT for the remarkable powers of SPIT!    If saliva can keep a girl safe from spoiled spunk, then it also keeps us safe from coochie cooties.    Of course I don't mean to say that this is perfect safety; if your gums are bleeding like a stuck pig or are rotting away from periodontal disease then at some point you're going to be infective (and have really, really bad breath ),

Of course these clowns from 2001 disagree and think oral transmission is more likely in all cases than previously thought.  Their study sez that giving a guy a BBBJTCIM is 1/10 as dangerous as BB Greek sex.  http://www.cda.org/Library/cda_m ... 1/transmission.html

Is DATY safe?  Howsabout we ask a bunch of lesbos?  Brilliant, eh?   While no one will say it's without risk, this study of 26 lesbians over 3 years in 1996 showed that muff diving produced zero HIV infections.  http://www.aegis.com/conferences/iac/1996/TuC2455.html

Sooooo . . . it all sounds pretty safe to me.  Just so long as none of you guys have given her a creampie just before me.

Too much info out there and no real conclusions ...

Please read this thread, your comments will be appreciated ...
http://forum.sex141.com/eforum/v ... &extra=page%3D1