How many of youlike it / prefer it / actually do it. Just say yes or no.
Bareback
- Thread starter Lizardlegs
- Start date
cellguy850us
Loved Member
Always fuck bare - not worth doing it if I have to cover it. On PrEp; keep your judgements to yourself
Can't stand it. Wouldn't ever try it. Seems to be a Russian Roulette approach to sex. So I don't ever do it.
Yes / Yes / Only when in a relationship (and after we've both been tested)
Not really a yes or no answer, the way you've asked the question.
I like it and do it, honestly though it really doesn't make that much difference to me either way. I don't really understand guys who would only go bareback, they must have incredibly sensitive dicks if it makes that much difference to them.
I like it and do it, honestly though it really doesn't make that much difference to me either way. I don't really understand guys who would only go bareback, they must have incredibly sensitive dicks if it makes that much difference to them.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2017
- Posts
- 491
- Media
- 47
- Likes
- 2,216
- Points
- 313
- Location
- Nanaimo (British Columbia, Canada)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Nope. Bareback isn’t something I’m going to be doing anytime soon.
There’s been a massive spike of other STIs since PrEP has been made available on the provincial health plan (i.e. free). Too many people have decided that with HIV basically neutralized, it’s open season again. But PrEP is useless against gonorrhoea, syphilis, herpes, hep C, chlamydia and a couple more STIs.
Using a condom will help reduce most of these other infections and crank the effectiveness of truvada up to essentially 100%. To not use condoms is putting yourself - and your future partners - at risk, willingly.
It’s certainly your choice if you want to go the no-condom route.
For me, however, the choice is pretty damn obvious: I’d rather not contract a bunch of diseases, some still not curable, if I can avoid it. And putting on a condom means I’m reducing the chance of getting them very dramatically. So I’ll stick to that process.
There’s been a massive spike of other STIs since PrEP has been made available on the provincial health plan (i.e. free). Too many people have decided that with HIV basically neutralized, it’s open season again. But PrEP is useless against gonorrhoea, syphilis, herpes, hep C, chlamydia and a couple more STIs.
Using a condom will help reduce most of these other infections and crank the effectiveness of truvada up to essentially 100%. To not use condoms is putting yourself - and your future partners - at risk, willingly.
It’s certainly your choice if you want to go the no-condom route.
For me, however, the choice is pretty damn obvious: I’d rather not contract a bunch of diseases, some still not curable, if I can avoid it. And putting on a condom means I’m reducing the chance of getting them very dramatically. So I’ll stick to that process.
Always, love it, wouldn't have it any other way......But im in a relationship. Thats not to say when single i didn't prefer it, i was just more selective over who i did it with.
yes I prefer bareback, 99% of the time I play safe if hooking up for random guys, sometimes that 1% of the time it just happens, probably shouldn't but you're in the midst of it all and well it just happens, in all my long term relationships, after both been tested (for everything not just hiv) , and both in agreement, we've gone with bareback just cos its more spontaneous and I've been lucky to have partners who like my cum in them. As a top guy it does feel different - whether that's psychological or real not sure.
Silbot.
Superior Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2018
- Posts
- 1,411
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 3,637
- Points
- 258
- Location
- Wuhan (Hubei, China)
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
MuscledHorse
Superior Member
Love it. On PrEP, etsted often due to my work and proud to take care of hundreds of guys a year.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2017
- Posts
- 1,596
- Media
- 5
- Likes
- 3,704
- Points
- 258
- Location
- Toronto (Ontario, Canada)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
I respect the answer but how do you know they are monogamous?
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2017
- Posts
- 1,596
- Media
- 5
- Likes
- 3,704
- Points
- 258
- Location
- Toronto (Ontario, Canada)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Congrats to the guys on PrEP who are getting this right. Everyone else gets a failing grade in risk assessment management here unless you are rubbers 100% and not often (failure rate is high).
You cannot know what you partner is doing. You can only know what you are doing. If you trust him, and you think this is a good way to avoid risk, it is not. One of the worst, in fact. Men lie. A lot. Using condoms 99% and then not? Also fail. Better than never if you are managing risk, but not a good strategy.
No, choosing to fuck raw is not putting your partners at risk automatically. This is yet more stigma based bullshit. I am HIV+. I am untransmittable. I fuck maybe once a year. Get fucked more often. Always by other HIV+ untransmittable men. Guys who know if they have an STI and who take care of their sexual health. Why am I using a condom again? There is negligible risk of an STI, we have both accepted it's a possible, the risk is managed. HIV cannot come from no virus. Even if I was crawling with it I cannot give it to someone already infected. The number of men in my situation is tens of thousands, so please, enough with the typhoid mary shit, it's old, it's hurtful and it's misleading and shame inducing.
Let's go to PrEP. No HIV on PrEP. Yes other STI's., Orally transmitted in every case as well. Unless you suck dick on latex staaaahhhp. Do you know what men who fuck a lot are good at? Managing sexual health. These are not the ones driving the explosion of other STI's. It's not PrEP. I work in this field and for decades and my doctor runs the clinic that did all the major studies I'm using here.
The explosion of STI's cluster around methamphetamine use. Lack of testing. Poor adherence to some regimes, and poor or incorrect condom use. The raw sex is not the issue. The raw sex with no planning is the issue.
The men who take ARV right and who take PrEP are the ones doing it the best. Abstinence you get a shout out. 100% condom users who don't bottom lots and who suck dick through a rubber next. The rest, you are risky in your approach. Assess that risk correctly, make changes if you want, and carry on.
You cannot know what you partner is doing. You can only know what you are doing. If you trust him, and you think this is a good way to avoid risk, it is not. One of the worst, in fact. Men lie. A lot. Using condoms 99% and then not? Also fail. Better than never if you are managing risk, but not a good strategy.
No, choosing to fuck raw is not putting your partners at risk automatically. This is yet more stigma based bullshit. I am HIV+. I am untransmittable. I fuck maybe once a year. Get fucked more often. Always by other HIV+ untransmittable men. Guys who know if they have an STI and who take care of their sexual health. Why am I using a condom again? There is negligible risk of an STI, we have both accepted it's a possible, the risk is managed. HIV cannot come from no virus. Even if I was crawling with it I cannot give it to someone already infected. The number of men in my situation is tens of thousands, so please, enough with the typhoid mary shit, it's old, it's hurtful and it's misleading and shame inducing.
Let's go to PrEP. No HIV on PrEP. Yes other STI's., Orally transmitted in every case as well. Unless you suck dick on latex staaaahhhp. Do you know what men who fuck a lot are good at? Managing sexual health. These are not the ones driving the explosion of other STI's. It's not PrEP. I work in this field and for decades and my doctor runs the clinic that did all the major studies I'm using here.
The explosion of STI's cluster around methamphetamine use. Lack of testing. Poor adherence to some regimes, and poor or incorrect condom use. The raw sex is not the issue. The raw sex with no planning is the issue.
The men who take ARV right and who take PrEP are the ones doing it the best. Abstinence you get a shout out. 100% condom users who don't bottom lots and who suck dick through a rubber next. The rest, you are risky in your approach. Assess that risk correctly, make changes if you want, and carry on.
I don't. But I have done as much as I am willing to do to mitigate risk. I see it as no different as rock climbing, bike riding, parachuting or driving a car. You weigh up the risk you are willing to take and accept the consequences of your choices.
There are no guarantees. As far as I know, PrEP is not 100%. It's less effective than condoms. I have read it's somewhere around 92% effective. But as in all things science, it comes back to the quality of the data so who knows.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2017
- Posts
- 1,596
- Media
- 5
- Likes
- 3,704
- Points
- 258
- Location
- Toronto (Ontario, Canada)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Hey man. I know it was a personal decision which is why I answered you separately. Brodie PrEP is 99.99% effective. This is my field of Doctoral research. It is much much much more effective than condoms. My doctor Colin Kovacs, one of the leading HIV research doctors heading up Canada's most prestigious research lab is one of the PrEP research hubs. There are three cases of failure. Three. Two involved infection with coinfection before treatment was past the number of days needed to suppress (there is a point when you might not test Poz after infection but still have it). The third case is immunosupression from a heroic drug binge non compliance and secondary infection because the primary had not incubated yet. These are extremely specific the treatment was not designed to be effective in these cases nor should we even consider them. They are statistically insignificant. Condoms in anal Intercourse fail 3 to 9 percent. One study went as high as 14. That is hundreds of thousands of failures a year. That's FAR worse. It's also really disingenuous to question the methodology and research behind the really extensive and highly regarded PrEP study when you've not read it. Normally I'd not care but these are colleages.
This wasn't a criticism of you. You clearly thought it out and that's awesome. All any of us can ask for. I brought it up because when I did intake at Toronto PWA fully 33% of my new infection clients were in 'monogamous' relationships. It's as much for others than for you although I care about your health too. I will relentlessly correct on HIV. It's still with us because we still don't get it right. I don't want anyone here to get the news I got 27 years ago.
It's ok, I'm not offended or taking anything personally when we discuss things. I hope you feel the same way.
I'm just going by statements made by the other organizations which put the effectiveness as low as 92 percent.
I'm don't think it's disingenuous to question study methodology. I am basically agreeing with you.
People lie, they say they take PrEP consistently and don't. Their positive results contaminate the data. So basically I was leaving the door open to an effectiveness higher than low 90s. Your examples of ruling out outliers is essentially an example of questioning the data as well.
Similar threads
