Bareback for one husband, not the other. Is this fair?

[Hitch 37]

Mr Hitch and I have discussed the LS at length and it's amazingly freeing....

 

About safe sex... Mr Hitch is 'fixed' (his words) and we are STD free (getting checked at the next appt so I can have something that proves it, just in case) so I thought he should be able to play bare, if it's okay with the other person/couple.

 

Due to a blood clot after knee surgery, I'm not allowed to be on birth control (going off was the best thing that ever happened to me) and I think I'm still fertile-ish. I'm 48 so Aunt Flo isn't always a visitor, but I don't want to find out the very bad way that going bare was a bad idea.

 

My question, is it fair to the other him of the couple that Mr Hitch gets to go condom free? I'm fine with him doing so, but will the other couple have a problem with it? I know you all are not every couple, but I'd love your thoughts...

 

Thanks!

[longun45 115]

Here is where communication is Key. Ask them. Nobody wants you pregnant. Your swing partner most likely does not want you pregnant either. If your cycle is uncertain then ask them. Yes, it's fair to ask and let them decide.

 

Other options:

 

There are female condoms rated at about 79%, male condoms are rated at 85%. The sponge if you have had children is rated at 68%. Diaphragm and spermicide is rated at 85%. Also talk to our doctor about the morning after pill. It is actually a short burst of hormones that prevent pregnancy, so they may not be a factor in causing blood clots. There are other contraceptives like The Copper T is a flexible coil with copper inserted into the uterus. It is like 99% effective. Cost is another factor. It can run $500-$1000, insurance coverage is uncertain. And it may have side effects as well. Also you can get your hormones checked.

 

I found this info at RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF BIRTH CONTROL METHODS

 

Also there are Herbs that can prevent pregnancy but they must be used properly. Herb info:

 

Four Herbs that Act as Natural Birth Control - Top 10 Home Remedies

 

Have fun.

[Brad145 58]

We have been swinging for a little over 2 years and going bareback has never come up with any partners, whether we played with them or not.

 

Based on my sample size of one, it would be a rarity to find anyone even interested in bareback, so if your Mr Hitch wants to go bareback you may turn off a lot of potential partners.

 

Just the suggestion of wanting to go bareback would eliminate any chances you had with us, even if you were willing to use condoms.

[Mbgdallas 203]

We have been swinging for a little over 2 years and going bareback has never come up with any partners, whether we played with them or not.

 

Based on my sample size of one, it would be a rarity to find anyone even interested in bareback, so if your Mr Hitch wants to go bareback you may turn off a lot of potential partners.

 

Just the suggestion of wanting to go bareback would eliminate any chances you had with us, even if you were willing to use condoms.

 

Why would the suggestion of going bareback eliminate any chances of playing with you? It's just another question as to play to know what everyone wants out of the session. Now if it were presented in an aggressive or insistent manner or reluctantly about using them I might understand? Hmmm... What is you thought behind this? I certainly would not play bareback without knowing the couple very very well and it being an exclusive couple so I am not condoning playing without condoms.

[cplnuswing 4,713]

People interested in playing bareback are not rare, sooner or later you will run into it. I think it's best to just let them know up front that it's a possibility for him but not for you since there is still some risk of pregnancy. I'm sure they don't want you to be pregnant any more than you don't want to be pregnant!!

 

If you want to bareback too, then I'd look into some of the other birth control methods that were mentioned. Like anything in life, it's a calculated risk, both in terms of pregnancy and STD. Some people are perfectly fine with a 1 in 1,000 chance of something bad happening, while others are still petrified at a 1 in 1,000,000 chance. You just need figure out where you are on that scale on those issues, determine the range of your comfort zone, and then figure out what your options are to keep you in that happy place.

[JAPrufrock 588]

I can't use hormonal birth control due to a blood clot as well. The only option for me is an IUD (copper or the Mirena) I am uncomfortable with the idea of an IUD, so I haven't gotten one, but I would never play bareback even if pregnancy wasn't an issue. STD's are one of the biggest things holding us back. All it takes is one person who doesn't monitor themselves. I'm also not okay with Mr. Prufrock going bareback because it puts us both at risk.

 

If we ever end up finding a couple we click with, and are exclusive and comfortable with them, we may consider bareback, but there would have to be some serious friendship and trust involved.

 

I digress, the main point of my post was to say that if you are interested in the IUD route, most insurances should cover it at little or no cost due to Obamacare. Just call the number on the back of your insurance card and ask how they cover IUD's/contraceptive devices.

 

As to your play partner feeling upset, if he was really committed to going bareback, he'd have followed your husband's example and gotten snipped. He can't really be upset about it, vasectomies are much less invasive then getting your tubes tied. If he did lodge a complaint (I'm not saying anyone would, pretty sure he wouldn't want you to get pregnant either) I just wouldn't play with him. Everyone has their rules

[Willing29 66]

What would your move be if the other guy was 'fixed' (your words). Then you would have two fixed guys with two wild girls. What then...

[GuyInMD79 1,500]

We have been swinging for a little over 2 years and going bareback has never come up with any partners, whether we played with them or not.

...

Just the suggestion of wanting to go bareback would eliminate any chances you had with us, even if you were willing to use condoms.

We have been swinging for 14 months, and the topic of playing bareback has come up many times. In our experience anyway, it is not at all rare. Perhaps, Brad145, you have been successful in finding a circle of friends who agree with your views on condom use. Maybe it's an age thing- our age group includes more people who are not worried about getting pregnant.

 

About your statement of the mere suggestion of going bareback being disqualifying for play with you... I am as perplexed as a couple of other commenters here as to why you find the raising of the topic to be disqualifying. That said, your approach does does have a familiar ring to it. We have had two cases where couples, who we were corresponding with and getting along famously, dropped us like a hot rock once they discovered that we had played bareback in the past. We were not insisting that we play bareback with them, and in fact took great pains to emphasize that we think that either guy should wear a condom if anybody thinks he should. But the fact that we had bareback play in our history was enough to disqualify us.

 

To address Hitch's question, I think that you should explain the situation to potential play partners, as you have explained it to us. I don't believe any reasonable person would think you're trying to be unfair- as long as Mr. Hitch is willing to put on the raincoat when requested!

[JAPrufrock 588]

I can see why playing bareback with others might be a dealbreaker. In theory, they're less safe because who knows who they've gone bareback with? Even if you use a condom with them, what if the condom breaks? I'm not saying I would automatically eliminate people who play bareback, but I can see that side of things.

[GuyInMD79 1,500]

I can see why playing bareback with others might be a dealbreaker. In theory, they're less safe because who knows who they've gone bareback with? Even if you use a condom with them, what if the condom breaks? I'm not saying I would automatically eliminate people who play bareback, but I can see that side of things.

 

What you say is statistically true. But in my opinion, someone who is going to disqualify people on this basis has too low of a tolerance for risk to be engaged in swinging. I don't mean to be blunt about it, but the unfortunate truth is that swinging carries with it an increased risk of acquiring an STD. If one is looking to eliminate this risk completely, the only way is to abstain from non-monogamous sex. The next best thing is to use condoms or dental dams for oral sex, because some STDs do not require intercourse for transmission. And gloves, because some STDs require only skin-to-skin contact. And STD test results, because a person may be lying when they say they're clean. And a several-month quarantine period between test results and playing, because some STDs may require that long between the time a person is infected and when their infected status would show up in a test.

 

I'm not trying to be snarky here (well, not just trying to be snarky ). I'm trying to illustrate how one can either quickly go down the rabbit hole, or give themselves a false sense of security. If the people who reject folks based on past bareback play believe they are completely protecting themselves, they are regrettably fooling themselves.

[funcoupledayton 2,708]

I can see why playing bareback with others might be a dealbreaker. In theory, they're less safe because who knows who they've gone bareback with? Even if you use a condom with them, what if the condom breaks? I'm not saying I would automatically eliminate people who play bareback, but I can see that side of things.

 

Yes, there are people who do see it this way. And it is true to a degree. A few years ago a friend called to inform us they had been diagnosed with Chlamydia. We had used condoms when playing. Regardless, we got tested and were negative. But, I asked, "I thought you guys used condoms?" It turns out they didn't with a few select couples they felt they could trust. In addition these select couples mostly used condoms except with a few select (different) people. There were actually quite a few people not using condoms and an sti spread. Thank god it was treatable. But, still it was a pain to run out and get tested. If you think of the time and money and anxiety spent by that whole group of people, probably 20-30 people, to get tested, it's pretty crazy.

 

Chlamydia, Gonorrhea and HIV are very well controlled by condom use.

 

After that incident, we discussed, "Should it be a rule that we only play with always condoms people?" We decided against it because there are just so many who don't always use them. We decided it will just be the risk we take and we will always use them and get tested yearly.

[Lascivious L&L 866]

The best birth control method in my book is vasectomy. I've had one, best decision I've ever made and the best $400 I ever spent. A bit more expensive now. Once you're past the wanting more children stage, it's the cheapest completely effective method of birth control. I say completely effective because you can monitor its effectiveness yourself without going and getting tested. All it requires is a microscope on low power. It's amazing to watch those little wigglers and easy to monitor their absence.

 

Condoms are effective for Chlamydia, Gonorrhea and HIV, in the 85% range discussed above. Condoms are much less effective for herpes or HPV. In the older crowd, 50 and up, bareback is very popular and common. Some have said that going bareback is playing Russian roulette. Using condoms does reduces the roulette, but only down to 15% of your play. Call it semi-Russian roulette. The chances of being exposed to herpes and HPV are virtually certain even with condoms if you familiarize yourself with the stats. Doesn't mean you will become infected. Chlamydia, Gonorrhea are treatable and rare, at least in our older age group. Each person has to assess their comfort with risk. Safer sex (condoms) only reduces the risk of some STD's, doesn't eliminate the risk.

[GuyInMD79 1,500]

If you familiarize yourself with more of the stats, HSV-2 (genital herpes) is not nearly as easy to transmit as the previous post seems to imply. Stating that "the chances of being exposed to herpes is virtually certain, even with condoms" serves to increase people's irrational fears, without answering the only relevant question- how likely is it to transmit the infection?

 

How likely is it really to be infected with genital herpes? It is important for those with HSV-2 to behave responsibly, by using condoms (which do in fact help to reduce the risk of transmission), taking a daily anti-viral medication, and abstaining when they have an active outbreak. But if they take these responsible precautions, the chances of transmitting the virus and infecting a sexual partner are (depending on the study being referenced) somewhere between 0.4% and 2-3%, over a year's worth of exposure. Moreover, these odds apply to sexual contact via intercourse. The chances of infecting a sexual partner through oral sex are so much lower than the numbers I gave above, that it is essentially not worth considering as a risk factor.

 

It is also worth considering the likelihood of encountering a sexual partner who carries HSV-2. According to numbers I have seen, about 18% of US adults age 18 - 49 have the genital herpes virus. I have to think that the numbers are significantly higher among the swinger population, as we tend to have many more sexual partners than the general population. But I do not want to engage in speculation, so let's start with the 18% number. Another study shows that something like 80% of people who would test positive for HSV-2 are asymptomatic, and do not even know that they have the virus. So just a simple bit of math with those numbers tells me that at least one out of every six people you play with in your travels as a swinger has HSV-2 and does not know it.

 

So HSV-2 is common, and there are many opportunities to become infected without even knowing it. The good news is that this virus, unlike HPV, does not carry a risk of causing cancer. It is a relatively benign condition, that has no more impact for most people than to cause occasional localized skin outbreaks.

[GoldCoCouple 4,065]

If for no other reason, condoms also provide a barrier between us and any other partners...it provides a intimacy barrier in addition to the other functions it provides. For this reason alone, no matter what our play partners 'situation' is, they will be required.

 

It's always been kind of a running joke that if you are wearing a condom, as long as you are careful with your hands and feet, you can still say that you never actually 'touched' the other person...I guess it's more of a visual thing.

[sunbuckus 3,567]

GoldCoCouple said:

If for no other reason, condoms also provide a barrier between us and any other partners...it provides a intimacy barrier in addition to the other functions it provides. For this reason alone, no matter what our play partners 'situation' is, they will be required.

 

Even though this blog entry about fluid bonding is geared more toward those who are polyamorous, I think some of it does ring true for some swingers as well, for the reason GoldCoCouple pointed out. Barebacking/fluid bonding can sometimes have an emotional aspect and can be seen as something only reserved for those who are "special". A condom is not only serves as a physical barrier but a metaphor in keeping a certain distance away from playmates. It is similar in thought to those who have a "no kissing" rule. Kissing is just too intimate to share with others.

 

Are there swingers that engage in barebacking that don't assent to this? Absolutely. Just as swingers are able to separate sex from love, they can separate the emotional/intimate aspect between barebacking with their spouse to barebacking with a playmate.

[asncpl 729]

It turns out they didn't with a few select couples they felt they could trust. In addition these select couples mostly used condoms except with a few select (different)people. There were actually quite a few people not using condoms and an sti spread. Thank god it was treatable. But, still it was a pain to run out and get tested. If you think of the time and money and anxiety spent by that whole group of people, probably 20-30 people, to get tested, it's pretty crazy.

 

We are among those who play bareback with some couples. Luckily for us, we haven't had any STDs (knock on wood). But we also don't disqualify anyone if they don't go bareback, even if I let the other guy goes bareback with me. It's really a choice between four people, and unless everyone agrees, we will use condoms. But I don't think we have come across anyone who sees it as a tit-for-tat thing like if your husband goes bareback then my husband must go bareback situation.