Do you use condoms while swinging?

[BiloxiCouple 695]

Seen a lot of different threads on here about who uses condoms and who doesn't. Reality is the test.

 

This poll is completely private. (We don't know who you are!!!) So please vote!!!

 

We've been to quite a few different types of lifestyle parties and wanted to know who uses condoms and who doesn't or somewhere in between!!!!

[hfire269 16]

We always use a condom with other people. When it's just my hubby and I, we don't. I know that not all birth control is 100% effective but I'm on Norplant. I've had it for 2 1/2 years and haven't had a problem... knock on wood ?

[lovers 25]

Another option might have been "Do not use a condom with some partners, but do with others."

 

Just my $0.02 worth.

[angihay 15]

Always use a condom. Only one time we didn't and knew the person very well and had the results to prove there was no diseases etc. You never know what's out there these days so we never take the chance of bringing anything home.

[JustAskJulie 2,595]

I think the third option was misleading (sometimes - upon request). It leads me to believe that the sometimes is either:

 

a) only upon request or

b) they only do it sometimes when requested (in other words not every time it's requested).

 

A more general, leaving it at "sometimes" may have been a more encompassing answer (maybe). Or maybe I'm just reading too much into it...lol.

[lovers 25]

What we were trying to get at is this: There are some people out there who generally use condoms except with a select partner(s).

 

For example, if we know the sexual history of our partners and/or there is no way that someone is accidentally going to get knocked up, we'll go bareback. Otherwise, we use condoms.

[NorCal Nites 15]

Just my 2 cents here... I know this is a touchy subject to nearly all swingers.

 

I play safe with people that I don't KNOW at all.

 

Now, If you are going to have someone's pussy or cock in your mouth WITHOUT a condom or dental dam, then you are exposing yourself JUST AS MUCH to STDs.

 

The only difference, if wrapping your willy is that she is less likely to become pregnant (a big IF the condom does not break). Either way, the sensitive tissues in your mouth are a matched pair to the sensitive tissues within the vaginal opening.

 

Either way, if you're performing orally without protection, you may as well not use protection "down there" either unless there's the pregnancy issue.

 

Heck, most in this lifestyle have had tubal ligations, hysterectomies, or vasectomies... So if you're welcoming bodily fluids into your body orally (regardless of swallowing or taking the load after pre-cum), what makes you think you're protecting yourself from STDs?

 

Most people simply don't think about the consequences of oral sex. Oral is great, but if you're doing it without protection, and then having protected sex, you're just fooling yourself.

[Lorrie 21]

Originally posted by NorCal Nites

Most people simply don't think about the consequences of oral sex. Oral is great, but if you're doing it without protection, and then having protected sex, you're just fooling yourself.

 

Good post.

 

I know one woman who used to swing, but mostly were into group sex/gangbangs who wasn't fooling herself.

 

Her name is Catherine Millet. She wrote her autobiography where she said one day when she was young, a friend sent her a letter informing her that he had the clap and said everyone in their "circle" probably has it too. They all did.

 

Ms. Millet said from her book, "The clap had been my baptism; for many years after, I lived in mortal fear of that scissoring pain, even though it struck me as being nothing more than a distinguishing sign, the shared fate of those who fuck a lot."

 

She knew very well the consequences of practicing unsafe sex, and even embraced STDs as some sort of badge of honor for sexually liberated people.

 

I think stats aren't accurate about the likelihood of getting an STD by engaging in unprotected oral sex because most people would never admit it. How many people have ever admitted to getting an STD, even online?

 

I appreciate Catherine for being so open and honest with herself.

[Alura 2,773]

Quote

Originally posted by NorCal Nites

 

I play safe with people that I don't KNOW at all.

 

We don't have sex with people we don't know.

 

Now, If you are going to have someone's pussy or cock in your mouth WITHOUT a condom or dental dam, then you are exposing yourself JUST AS MUCH to STDs.

 

Either way, if you're performing orally without protection, you may as well not use protection "down there" either unless there's the pregnancy issue.

 

Most people simply don't think about the consequences of oral sex. Oral is great, but if you're doing it without protection, and then having protected sex, you're just fooling yourself.

 

Now, I'm no medical practitioner, but I understand there is a huge difference. There are some very strong chemicals, mostly acids, in the mouth and stomach that few "germs" can survive. That's why we get colds and the flu, not from kissing, but from shaking hands and then picking our noses or rubbing our eyes. I believe the AIDS virus, in particular, is quite fragile and dies instantly in the presence of saliva. That might explain why lesbians, as a group, have the lowest instance of AIDS infections.

 

Such protective chemicals don't exist in the vagina and, particularly, the rectum, where small tears caused by intercourse (for which the organ is not adapted) give easy access to the bloodstream for the virus.

 

Let me repeat that I am not sure of the accuracy of my remarks. Perhaps, Nightgoddess, Janet, or EBF can enlighten us more.

[yawanna 17]

Quote

I believe the AIDS virus, in particular, is quite fragile and dies instantly in the presence of saliva.

 

It dies when it's airborne or in limbo. It has to be direct immediate exchange of bodily fluids with no exposure to air or an immediate receptacle. Thus, the tearing of vaginal or anal tissues, or sores, bleeding, cuts in the mouth. IE: no flossing prior.

 

It has to penetrate skin tissue and get into the bloodstream ASAP to infect. Any interruption kills it.

[Alura 2,773]

Quote

Originally posted by yawanna

 

It has to penetrate skin tissue and get into the bloodstream ASAP to infect. Any interruption kills it.

 

Yes, I understand that, Yawanna. My question has to do with immersing the virus in acid.

[hmr 25]

Mr. Alura,

 

Maybe this will help to answer your question.

Quote

Kissing someone who is HIV-positive or who has AIDS. There's no evidence that the virus is transmitted through kissing. Although HIV is sometimes found in the saliva of people with the virus, it occurs in low concentrations. In addition, natural inhibitory substances in saliva help prevent transmission of the virus.

 

It is from the Mayo Clinic. Hope it helps.

 

mrs hmr

[TomF_22033 17]

I put always use a condom. But there is an exception and that's when I'm in a LTR. When a regular partner there are times that I may not use one.

[Alura 2,773]

Quote

Originally posted by hmr

 

Maybe this will help to answer your question. 

mrs hmr

 

Thanks, Mrs. hmr!

 

It's as I thought. I think I'll still avoid kissing anyone with AIDS, though.

[NorCal Nites 15]

Originally posted by hmr

There's no evidence that the virus is transmitted through kissing. Although HIV is sometimes found in the saliva of people with the virus, it occurs in low concentrations.

 

Yes, true... no evidence of it occurring, however... it can take HOW LONG to ever show up? And HOW MANY people have you been with since then that MAY or MAY NOT carry the virus?

 

It's one of those things that you may not want to think of, but also, it wasn't the mouth passing the virus that I was referring to... it was the fact that the membranes of the mouth are the same as the vagina, so that male or female ejaculate can infect you that way, as well... not necessarily from the mouth of the giver TO the receiver, but the other way around.

 

Also, these are just single studies that ATTEMPT to prove, yet never have had an actual answer, due to the fact that HIV can take so long to appear. Many clinics, hospitals, and learning facilities such as Stanford, Davis, Mayo, and others have all attempted to prove the transmission theory, but have not successfully done so to date.

 

Word to the wise... especially in this lifestyle; Play SAFE with those you're not sure about... Play CAREFUL with those you think you're sure about.

[Elusive BiFem 70]

AIDS/HIV is not my area of expertise by a long shot, but HERE is a link with some information.

 

As I see it...strictly personal opinions here...everyone, unless they have been totally celibate all their lives, is as some risk for contracting the disease, although it may be more minimal for some than others. As NorCal said, it sometimes takes years and years for the virus to show up in the blood tests available and therefore, we may harbor it, unknowingly, for years and years. Although we may feel better about getting periodic tests, that isn't any real assurance.

 

And like so many have said...I don't go without a condom unless I know someone really well. Yeah, right. Right off the bat, how many people, regardless of how well you know them, are going to tell you, "Oh, yeah...I picked up some guy/gal in a hotel bar one night in City, State and had a jolly good time! Nope...most don't. If anything, I think swinging partners are probably more honest about this type of stuff than those some of us might just start dating. After all, with swingers, it can be reasonably assumed we've had more than a few partners. With the cute, little, petite, blue-eyed, innocent looking blond that Mom introduced you to...her best friend's daughter...who knows.

 

Look at the transmission among health care workers. Although the incidents of needle sticks are considerably less, they still happen with great frequency. And who would be at greater risk than health care workers getting stuck with contaminated needles or hands cut with blood-covered scalpels? But again, were the relatively few health care workers that became infected actually infected in the work environment or was the virus already there? It seems, for the most part, that they were infected outside of their work environment.

 

I believe there is a ton more research to be done before we ever find out what this virus is all about, how it is really transmitted, the immune system response...that sort of thing. Look at the AIDS/HIV rates in Africa...a poor nation with nutritionally deprived people that could lead to some form of immunosuppression. Does that have anything to do with it? Don't know. Just wonder.

 

Another scary thing that could have contributed to the epidemic of the 80's-90's...in the early 80's, AIDS was around, but we didn't know what it was, and we didn't call it that. We just knew people were immunosuppressed and dying in spite of the antibiotics and other drugs we poured into them. During those early times, we did not wear gloves, masks, goggles...all that protective equipment. And in fact, as late as 1982, most of us were taught NOT to use gloves with patients - made them feel dirty and untouchable. And I guarantee you, needle sticks were as common back then as sunshine today! It wasn't a "day at the office" unless you had at least one! Again, you would think health care workers would have been dropping like flies, but they weren't. Why not? I don't know.

 

I personally believe that we need to all take as many reasonable precautions as possible, just as we do when we get into an automobile. Most of us don't drink and drive, we wear seat belts, we drive the speed limits, we stop at traffic lights and stop signs, we check our tires, etc. However, in spite of all attempts at safety, some of us are going to be involved in major and minor accidents. We only decrease our chances with vigilance to details.

The same can be said about our sex lives. Use the type of caution that is necessary in this day and age to protect ourselves and others. Beyond that, other than living a totally celibate life in a cave somewhere, what else can you do?

 

Oral transmission? Possible, I suppose...people with gum disease, open sores in their mouths...that sort of thing. But think of this. What about a hangnail? Or you've been working out in the yard with your rose bushes and have a bunch of micro-cuts on your hands and fingers. Later that night your hands and fingers are exposed to vaginal and penile secretions. Potential source of infection right there and something you probably didn't think about.

 

NorCal summed it up reasonably...

Quote

Play SAFE with those you're not sure about... Play CAREFUL with those you think you're sure about.

 

For me, I'm going to play it SAFE with everyone. There are just far too many conflicting sources of information and too much we don't know yet to do otherwise, IMO.

 

To tell you the truth...I'm far more concerned about the transmission of hepatitis than AIDS/HIV. Another reason for playing it SAFE with everyone.

 

Off my soapbox now...

[Maus-Katz 16]

EBF, excellent post (as usual).

 

For various job and travel related reasons, both L and I have been vaccinated for all variants of Hep and it's something people in the lifestyle should consider doing. By all means, ANY disease that CAN be vaccinated against, SHOULD be! Any good reason why not?

[NotsoNew 17]

Always with other couples...

[yawanna 17]

Quote

By all means, ANY disease that CAN be vaccinated against, SHOULD be! Any good reason why not?

 

TB can be vaccinated against. However, it is not often done as once vaccinated, you will always test positive for TB.

[Elusive BiFem 70]

Originally posted by yawanna

TB can be vaccinated against. However, it is not often done as once vaccinated, you will always test positive for TB.

 

What? I've been vaccinated against TB many times over the years - at least annually while working in the hospitals for over 20 years, and I never tested positive a single time. Am I missing something? - EBF

[Elusive BiFem 70]

Yawanna, just to be certain, I just went back and looked it up to be certain. I suspect you are talking about the "conversion," frequently seen in those vaccinated, especially those vaccinated frequently. When that occurs, chest x-rays are obtained to definitively rule out the presence of actual disease vs. the conversion factor.

 

That being said, TB is again becoming a serious threat in our society, in part because it did disappear for a period of time and people quit obtaining vaccinations to prevent the spread. Certain groups of people continue to be vaccinated. - EBF

 

FYI from the John Hopkins Center for TB Research:

* Tuberculin Skin Test Conversion. For persons with negative tuberculin skin-test reactions who undergo repeat skin testing, e.g., health care workers, an increase in reaction size of 10 mm within a two-year period is considered a skin test conversion which is indicative of recent TB infection. TST convertors are high priority candidates for treatment of latent TB infection regardless of their age.

* Reactors vs. Convertors. A reactor is anyone who has a positive tuberculin skin test. A reactor is a high priority for treatment of latent TB infection only if they have TB risk factors. A convertor has documented evidence of a TST converting from negative to positive within a 2 year period and is a high priority for treatment because of the risk associated with recent TB infection.

[yawanna 17]

Yawanna, just to be certain, I just went back and looked it up to be certain. I suspect you are talking about the "conversion," frequently seen in those vaccinated, especially those vaccinated frequently. When that occurs, chest x-rays are obtained to definitively rule out the presence of actual disease vs. the conversion factor.

 

aaaahhhh... thank you

 

In my field of endeavor, we had to look into vaccinations for staff given the population they work with. I am notorious for enforcing health and safety precautions "put these latex gloves on NOW!!"

 

When I asked at my doctor's office about a TB vaccine I was told I would thereafter test positive if vaccinated, so they don't do them. Thank you for the clarification

[Elusive BiFem 70]

I think I would seek clarification from my doctor. It is possible that one or the other of you misunderstood something...and maybe I have, too. But you are right, in your line of endeavor, as I understand it, you may be at a slightly more increased risk of TB than the average person...just as I have always been in terms of working in the hospital environment.

 

Ain't no place safe! If something doesn't get us in one place, something else will in another place! Yikes! (and right now, I'm dealing with the dust bunnies in my house...they are trying to get me in a serious way! )

[yawanna 17]

I actually did get a second, and a third opinion. Same thing - I'd test positive if vaccinated. So semi-annually I'd have to have chest x-rays done. Given the risk of exposure, we presently have a TB alert in my field....it was suggested that we just continue with our usual precautions. I can't do better than a latex gloved hand touching the arm of a person in crisis...other than interact from behind plexiglass?

 

Which gets me to thinking about this and other related threads....do we not perform certain jobs or hobbies or interests for fear of getting an infection or illness? We take the TTC a lot, and people who we've never seen before often sneeze or cough in a crowded subway car. In my days as a Volunteer Manager, I learned from the Health Dept. that people with infectious conditions, such as colds or flu, were not to be handling items that would be passed onto other people i.e. answering phones, licking envelopes, sorting food donations. I'd think twice about handling communal bowling balls

 

I've also read (check me on this one, too EBF ) that Hep B can be transmitted via kissing. So do I never kiss anyone other than my husband? Or the Dog and Kat on the top of their heads

 

Do we now live in an age of 'calculated risks'? I think we do and no one can ever be out in the world risk free of contracting an illness...anything from a cold to an STD. When you took your best precautions, something may still creep thru.

 

I was recently forwarded an invite to a private sex party...wherein...participants had to be tested for all STD's and provide proof prior to attending. I remember Howard Stern did something similar in his Shock Jock contests of men having sex with porn stars. I'm assuming this type of testing met moral (for the participants - no comment!!) and legal obligations.

 

I have seen dangerous behavior, health wise, in certain 'swingers'..... who we wouldn't meet with for that reason alone.....but the only sure way to avoid std's is to be sexually monogamous. The only way to avoid illnesses like colds...is to never leave your sanitized, air purified home, and never let anyone in.

 

I think we all take risks in our everyday lives...not just in having multiple sexual partners. In our world....the risks are calculated and precautions are taken. I think that's the best we can do or expect.

[Elusive BiFem 70]

First, I think I owe you an apology. You were talking vaccination and I was, too, but my brain was thinking skin test. I've never been vaccinated against TB, but I've received numerous skin test and never converted. Still, if I was currently working in a high risk area, with the incidence of TB on the increase, I'd certainly consider vaccination. Even if that meant I'd have to have a CXR every 6 months, although I still doubt that to be the case. You wouldn't be x-rayed unless you displayed symptoms.

 

As for risks, I agree...we live in an age of calculated risks in all that we do. All we can do to combat that is to use our best judgment and take available precautions. As in condoms...not foolproof by any stretch, but far better than none. You mentioned hepatitis...and yes, I suppose it is possible to contract it by kissing, tho' unlikely from what I've read unless there is an exchange of blood. However, if you knew someone was an IV drug abuser, would you risk a simple kiss? I wouldn't. You mention wearing gloves...just another precaution. Not foolproof...they are not impervious to absolutely everything...fluids leak in under the cuff...they get a micro-tear or puncture, but by wearing gloves, you decrease the risk substantially. If nothing else, you decrease the law of averages.

 

Seat belts...not foolproof. People die while wearing seat belts, and in some cases seat belts actually cause the death, but statistically, it has been shown that seat belts save lives.

 

I go with the law of averages and "best practices." It decreases my chances - doesn't eliminate altogether.

 

 

[2neophytes 16]

Hey, I'm new here, but I've been reading some of these posts, and I've always thought that HIV was transmitted via blood, not necessarily saliva, mucus, etc.

 

But then I wonder about the reliability of tests and the doctors that perform them. For example, seven years ago I had sex with someone I didn't know and he didn't use a condom; I didn't ask, etc., and I ended up with a really nasty discharge. I go to some doctor, and he tells me I have Trichomoniasis, which he says is an STD, and one I haven't seen listed. I hear something later from a different doctor that it's not really an STD, but something else like a yeast infection or whatever. This of course leads me to question the expertise of those we trust with our lives and then wonder what a yeast infection could do. And then I read somewhere that regular old yeast infections can cause problems (though not serious) for males. So now I wonder what really constitutes a sexually transmitted disease these days and how different are they (fundamentally, of course) than any other infection or disease. After this life lesson, I hold the opinion that using a condom is like covering your face when you sneeze and/or washing your hands after using the restroom.

 

Condoms, yes, definitely, except for my partner.

[NewBiFem 15]

condom, .50 cents; rubber dental dam $1.00, staying clean, PRICELESS!

 

it's a cryin' shame because I'm so into taste, but a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do!

 

"no glove, no love...

 

no rubber dam, no thank you ma'am."

 

[SluttyWife 17]

What a great one about the rubber dam...although I miss the taste/smell thing.

 

I got some over here at Toys In Babeland, vanilla glydes they're called! Yummy. However, the strawberry flavored condoms were no fun.

[Avril & Dec 108]

We are new to the board but I guess this topic has been well discussed before. We are aware of the need for protective sex but we have had unprotected sex with two couples we felt confident with - but I guess you can never be sure no matter how much you discuss it with your couple.

 

However Avril feels it's fantastic when she can feel her partner cum inside and it's so great for me to also cum inside just after knowing another guy has been there (not expressed well).

 

Is this an infatuation with semen or are we just being crude?

 

Regards from the emerald isle

[Vespertine 31]

I don't think you're being crude.

 

A lot of people like bareback sex for the very reasons you listed.

 

Here are some older threads you might be interested in:

 

Creampies

 

Reasons for not using condoms

 

Bareback Swingers

[DBL D 120]

As long as birth control isn't an issue, I don't think you will have a problem with bareback sex. Swingers are by far in better sexual health than any other category except Celibates.

 

The reason to not use condoms is the reason you give: so you can FEEL something.

 

My humble opinion.

 

Male D

[Greg & Sheryl 368]

You're not being crude at all. It's quite a common fetish. You'd be surprised as to how many other people enjoy "sloppy seconds."

[looking2swing 17]

I agree that it feels a lot better However, for us, birth control is an issue, as well as STDs. We are still new to the lifestyle and trying to figure things out and it just makes it easy for everyone we play with to wear a condom.

[calicpl2002 15]

Well for us we let the male go bareback until he is close then he puts on a condom for the simple fact that only hubby can cum inside me.

[curiousagain 326]

If all of you involved are comfortable not using condoms, then don't worry about what others think.

[2 Hot J's 16]

We feel that as long as you know the couple very well then have fun. It's much sexier to see a the excitement and feel the cum. Oh my there is nothing like it in our book.

[Chris&Amelia 253]

We enjoy riding bareback with two couples we know very well. We find it very erotic and enjoyable. Especially the "afterglow" when we're lying around, cooling off, and our semen is leaking out of them

 

But it's a rare thing. Everybody else get's the condom treatment.

[mrs good times 73]

Due to the recent interest in swingers and condom use I thought I would bump this poll to see how the current readers respond.

[Thkmlkchoclik 15]

Condoms are a must for me.

[Amanda69 24]

Absolute must we don't take any chances with our health no matter how well we know the couple.

[2jersey 16]

Condoms - always, never or sometimes?

 

2jersey: ALWAYS

 

We are happy to learn (from the results of this poll) that a very small number of people have chosen to not use condoms – and we assume that some of these people are in exclusive relations with their swing partners (as far as they know).

 

We are unimpressed by those who argue that “safer sex” does not provide foolproof protection. In this situation, we are advocates of a half-a-loaf-is-better-than-none approach. We refute the notion that condom users believe they are completely insulated from STDs.

 

We are unimpressed by those who believe they can detect and avoid sexual partners which carry STDs – many diseases, particularly recently contracted diseases, produce unnoticeable symptoms.

 

Finally - We are disturbed by those who appear to have blanket disregard for authoritative medical studies promoted by organizations which have genuine, rather than ulterior, motives.

 

From the World Health Organization:

 

1) Laboratory studies have found that viruses (including HIV) do not pass through intact latex condoms even when devices are stretched or stressed.

 

2) In Thailand, the promotion by the government of 100% condom use by commercial sex workers led to a dramatic increase in the use of condoms (from 14% in 1990 to 94% in 1994); an equally dramatic decline in the nation-wide numbers of bacterial STD cases (from 410,406 cases in 1997 to 27,362 cases in 1994); and reduced HIV prevalence in Thai soldiers.

 

3) The most convincing data on the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV infection has been generated by prospective studies undertaken on serodiscordant couples, when one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not. These studies show that, with consistent condom use, the HIV infection rate among uninfected partners was less than 1 percent per year. Also, in situations where one partner is definitely infected, inconsistent condom use can be as risky as not using condoms at all.

 

The discordant couple study is particularly compelling:

 

In a study of discordant couples in Europe, among 123 couples who reported consistent condom use, none of the uninfected partners became infected. In contrast, among the 122 couples who used condoms inconsistently, 12 of the uninfected partners became infected.

 

This study was published by a respected medical journalist:

 

De Vincenzi I. (1994) 'A longitudinal study of human immunodeficiency virus transmission by heterosexual partners', the New England Journal of Medicine; 331:341-346

[SuAndBud 21]

We can't answer the poll (sorry, but very poor set of options).

 

Up to now we've not used condoms (only having swung with one other, so far).

 

We expect to be swinging with him and his S/O at some point in the future and as they are in an exclusive relationship, we won't expect condoms (neither will he) but she might, in which case we'll wrap 'em up.

 

It depends who we're with and what activities are taking place and how well we know/trust you or him or her or them to be D&D free and how well they know/trust us.

 

In short, yes and no.

[mwc_mich 16]

Another option might have been "Do not use a condom with some partners, but do with others."

 

Just my $0.02 worth.

 

I would agree. I've never met a person who was in love with using them! For me it depends on the partner and the trust that I have built with that person.

Unless it is used wrong there is rarely a problem with condoms. I have an IUD so assuming that it working, I always have it my mind that if something were to happen and it failed would I be nervous about STDs? If the answer is yes then I probably shouldn't be playing with this person. If it is no, then I know I'm making a good choice and time and trust will probably lead us to more intimate times.

[MrsPandMe 150]

This is an interesting discussion, albeit mostly 4 years old! In any event, we're in the middle of working on baby number 2 (and likely we'll get fixed after that), so condoms are really more for birth control at this point. I think it pays to point out that swinging entails an AWFUL lot of trust in others. You trust that they will respect your wishes, you trust that they will respond if something isn't going right, you are trusting they are being forthcoming with their health. If you have someone who is trustworthy in your presence (or your pussy, as it were) then condoms are, for the most part, birth control related or psychologically needed. I have heard some stories of guys slipping condoms off without the female knowing about it, so it's not like you're completely safe from unsavory characters. Do your homework, take your time, and you'll be better off for it. If your desire is to "free-fuck" you know what you're getting into...

[ktc0913 15]

Not looking to get blasted for this, but my experience has been that most people DON'T use condoms. Despite the results of the survey, I'd think that the bottom category is probably in the 80th percentile. I think asking people in general whether they use a condom will always elicit an affirmative response, despite what the truth of the matter is. It's like asking a christian if they look at porn, they'll always blurt out NO, but both the askor and the askee know the truth.

 

If every scenario my wife and I have ever been in, whether it is watching at a party or playing with others, the condoms are nowhere to be seen. We can all fool ourselves that everybody's using them, but in reality they are not. I'd like to say that we always do, but the truth of the matter is we don't and we know the risks.

 

We don't have a lot of experiences and maybe that's why I have that opinion, but I'm wondering if HONESTLY people agree or disagree with my statement?

[two4youinswva 3,068]

ktc0913 said:

Not looking to get blasted for this, but my experience has been that most people DON'T use condoms.

 

Your experience is your experience, so there's no reason to blast that.

 

There are probably a number of factors that influence what you see. It would be interesting to see it broken down by age, time in lifestyle, region of the country/world, etc., to see how condom usage breaks out by category.

 

Your experiences may be with a group that is not similar to what the majority of the respondents are involved with. That could account for the difference in what you've experienced and what the poll reflects.

[Guest Aching]

We would never use a condom.

 

However, that's not to say we are indiscriminate either. But to us, the whole point in swinging would be to feel the ecstasy of the full, warm and wetness and the complete erotic anticipation, knowing someone is going to cum inside you, or the man knowing he is going to cum inside a new woman. To us, that would be the entire purpose of swinging.

 

We would not have sex with any strangers. We feel we will need to know and trust our partners. As we said in our introduction, we have never done it - yet.

 

But when (or it) we do, we will have some assurance that they are D free, and since we haven't been with anyone else in over 25 years, they will know we are.

 

So we're looking for someone to gently "break us in" and when that happens, we will want to experience EVERYTHING.

[EnjoyingLife 127]

We were just talking about this last night. We haven't full swapped yet, but if and when we do...

 

It has been 20+ years for both of us and we know we are totally D free, and we don't really want to risk that either. But if we do full swap we plan to be very discriminating. If we didn't trust the couple to tell us if there was an issue with them, we wouldn't be swapping in the first place. It would definitely be nice not to have to use condoms. We're definitely leaning in that direction. But I guess until it happens we won't know for sure.

[Alura 2,773]

We chose to trust in our playmates' limited experience. It's unlikely that a couple who haven't had sex with anybody else in twenty years or more will have an STD.

 

[rainbowskye 102]

We all have different experiences, and have seen different things. So the poll , in my opinion, would reflect that.

 

As for Me and my guy, between he and I no we do not use condoms. When we play with others, absolutely.

 

The risk factors are too high, especially for me since I have lupus. I am not willing to risk my health.

 

We also are very selective in who we play with. that is just us and our comfort level. We are each different.