Safe Sex and Sex Related Discussions in Thailand

[QUOTE=Mick Licker]I think discussion of what activities are risky or not so risky is far more worthwhile than debating whether one girl is more risky than another.
If the right precautions are taken the girl's background history becomes an insignificant factor which is just as well since we will never know what the background is for a new aquantaince.
Any normal girl is a high risk if she has ever had unprotected sex in the few months before her last blood test (or anytime after) if she had one.
Now all of that is really unknown, ain't it.

Am I feeling lucky today, punk? (Sorry Clint)
Better to protect all risky activities. I don't beleive in luck.
Shit happens all the time.[/QUOTE]

Spot on mate.

[QUOTE=The Traveler]Brain666,

I gave a couple of explanations why a younger girl could pose a higher risk than an older one opposite to Giotto's risk assessment. I also provided a few examples/reasons why a gogo girl can pose a much higher risk than a bar girl even though Giotto tries to tell us that gogo girls are less risky than bar girls.

[/QUOTE]
Yes so what?. This is statistics and probability. With the basic understanding how statistics works it is well known, that to every 80% probability there are the other 20% examples not applying. Otherwise it would be 100%. And I remember only words like more/ less/ equal in Giotto’s text and never ‘full’, ‘no’ ‘0%’, ‘100%’

[QUOTE=The Traveler]Brain666,

In short, we have absolutely no way to tell how risky an unknown sex partner is. Therefore we should treat them all the same.


[/QUOTE]

Yes, so what? The result of our guess is an assumption. And we can fail. Therefore the advise is right, but also very obvious.

[QUOTE=The Traveler] Brain666,

.....

Giotto's advice points into a complete different direction. He told us, that he will be more or less careful or better careless depending on his assumptions about a person. [/QUOTE]

I never read/ interpreted/ understood Giotto's risk assessment this way and I can't believe that there is a high number of mongers who understood it that way. I rather think you either really missunderstand it or you try to assume something between the lines.

[QUOTE=The Traveler] Brain666,

.....

He calls those assumptions "decision matrix" but they are nothing but assumptions as he doesn't know anything about the girls in question, especially nothing about their health status, preferred sexual practices and partners and so on. Therefore his risk assessment is completely use- and worthless.

[/QUOTE]


Yes the nature of risk assessment and risk factors is that you can fail in your assessment. Otherwise it wouldn’t be called assessment. Simply saying that if your risk assessment results in E.g. 90 % aids free asssumption, it still means 10% chance that you just got the unlucky 10% with aids.

[QUOTE=The Traveler] Brain666,

.....

If you decide to have sex with an unknown partner be as careful as possible, don't differentiate and don't believe that one may be more or less risky. Don't lie to yourself ![/QUOTE]

It is Obvious to be as careful as possible. But as you write: It is just as possible. And as possible includes still accepting a remaining risk different from 0.

Also you yourself accept a remaining risk with every girl you have sex with, with every protection measures you may use doing it with her. I don't believe that you don't 'check' or select your girl besides others also in terms of health risk before you ‘act’.

We all have a decision matrix for every sex partner we use. There is looks, there are other social factors, there is an interesting job, just to name some which makes us decide to think on sexual intercourse with a woman, and there are risk factors, such as being witnessed by wife, by colleagues and the potential health risk of an unknown women.

It is a decision matrix we go through with every sexual intercourse we plan which results in a simple yes or no (sometimes its just a yes or no to try ). So don’t tell me that before you have sex with a girl you don’t ‘walk’ through some kind of ‘brain work’ (if you don’t like the word ‘decision matrix, or risk assessment) to decide for yes or no to go for it.

Regards

Brain666

Gentlemen, what the fuck is the debate about?
There is no matrix, it is black or white. One decides if it is worth fucking someone without a condom, or not. There is no way one can tell on the basis of age, gender, occupation etc if the other person has any kind of STI/STD ( depends on language).
The safe way, as I have said before is assume that everyone is infectious. How in the name of fuck can one tell that an educated female lawyer will not have a horrible STI? So what she is educated, but she may fuck a client who is an AIDS ridden fuckhead- don't laugh, it happens. How the fuck can one stereotype?

When I say assume they are infectious, I don't mean treat them like some lepor, but someone with whom someone should take all necessary precautions. This doesn't mean a body suit or a post coital shower in bleach, but simply wearing a condom and reducing the risk factors to minimal.

When one has a monogymous relationship with another, and it is known to be such, and there is, trust/knowledge that no sexual diseases are involved, then it is apt to decide that the risk factor is minimal.

Imagine this: Someone like Opebo, who is by all accounts fairly articulate and charming, fucks some part-time prostitute- maybe a decent girl who needs a few thousand Bhat and turns a trick. He gives her a dose of whatever. Three months later, said same girl meets you, she is hard-up, says she has no regular BF, she has had no symptoms of any STI/STD- common! She fucks you, no condom, because she has no boyfriend, not had one for months, risk factor low! Is it fuck low.
Without a full history of who and when a girl fucked someone, one can never know their status.
The decision is this: I fuck someone without a condom, who WILL have fucked someone before, that person may have any STI, I don't know, and she won't tell OR I will fuck someone with a condom, tha person may have an STI, I don't tell, and she won't tell, but I will not take the chance.

Matrix, bollocks. Even a virgin cannot be guaranteed STI free. Someone can shoot a wad outside her **** and it can go inside. She may be an IV drug user- do you know? Are profesional people not users?
I could go on, but hopefully the pointis taken!

Pete is on target here. When the typical traveling monger lands in Thailand for his week of cavorting, he isn't going to know any girls well enough to do the analysis and he certainly can't trust them to tell him the truth about how old they are, let alone how long they've been working. Heck, even good non-p4p women often have no honor around this; that last is definitely not limited to Thailand.

Yes there are exceptions like Opebo who has his own rationalizations, but most of us like being disease-free and staying that way. So it's on with the condom for FS. Every time. Less worry that way. Other activities like DFK, BBBJ and DATY, I treat as discretionary depending on how the girl looks and smells, but I recognize that is not foolproof.

[QUOTE=Duniawala]Traveler, could you please take this to the Fight Club thread. It's between you and Giotto. I am sorry, but we all seem to miss the finer points of your argument about Giotto's staement. So take it to the Fight Club and thrash it out there.[/QUOTE]
Duni,

with all due respect, but it was directed at Brain666, not Giotto.
Besides missing the point you seem not be able to read either.

[QUOTE=Mick Licker]I think discussion of what activities are risky or not so risky is far more worthwhile than debating whether one girl is more risky than another.
If the right precautions are taken the girl's background history becomes an insignificant factor which is just as well since we will never know what the background is for a new aquantaince.
Any normal girl is a high risk if she has ever had unprotected sex in the few months before her last blood test (or anytime after) if she had one.
Now all of that is really unknown, ain't it.

Am I feeling lucky today, punk? (Sorry Clint)
Better to protect all risky activities. I don't beleive in luck.
Shit happens all the time.[/QUOTE]
Mick Licker,

I totally agree.
My question directed at Giotto regarding which of the girls is more risky due to his risk assessment rules should only show that those rules are nonsense due to the already mentioned reasons.

I knew from the very beginning that he would refrain to answer for obvious reasons.

Brain666,

since all your answer were "YES" I really don't know why you disagree with what I said about Giotto's risk assessment rules.

I also allow myself to cite Giotto [i]"There is a selected number of girls which I have a little bit more fun then normal Before taking that risk I do some basic layman medical checks (should mention that I have a EMT education):"[/i]

So Doc Giotto's sex practices depend on his assumptions regarding the health status of his partners. If he believes/assumes that they are less risky he will do additional sex practices like oral e.g.
How could I forget that you (or at least Doc Giotto) can see and smell HIV, Syphilis, Hep A,B,C and other nasty deseases, especially in their very early stages, right ?

Due to Giotto, an educated, young, good looking girl - if wealthy even better - is very unlikely a risk. Damn, how does it come that nobody told the HIV virus not to infect those people ? All those thousands and thousands of young, well educated and good looking people who died of AIDS could still be alive and the millions with STD/STI would have never been infected as well.

Pete got it completely right and just confirms what I am saying ever since : Expect all to be risky and act accordingly. You simply don't have enough info to put them in order and say who is more or less risky. Any attempt to do so is nonsense and you are just lying to yourself.

Though I generally believe that all discussions about HIV / AIDS and the related risks are useful in general and help to fight the transmission of this disease it I would prefer to detach the argumentation from any personal aspects or wrong development of the past. It is a too important issue.

I was accused here of having given wrong advice and even worse to underestimate the infection risk, and I think everybody can understand that I don’t feel so well with this image. For that we should get things straight and have a short review of what was really written.

After my report about Biergarten Soi 7 and my STD warning in there I was asked by Peter Kin about my local viewpoint of site/bar/massage parlor related STD transmission risks:

[QUOTE=Peter Kin]Giotto

Thanks for the warning on STDs etc.
From your experience could you prepare a list of most likely to least likely for STDs etc for:
Biergarden, Streets, Nan, Cowboy, MPs etc etc.
A local viewpoint would be helpful
Peter[/QUOTE]
I thought about how I really evaluate risks, about my personal behavior, and found it interesting to try a report about that. Here a link to that report:

[URL]http://www.internationalsexguide.info/forum/showpost.php?p=499576[/URL]

I started the report with a clear introduction, that all content of the report is my personal opinion, my personal norm to evaluate risks.

[QUOTE=Giotto]Due to the fact that I obviously have the talent and intention to open every possible can of worms I will try in this report to categorize and evaluate the risk factors for catching STDs in the Bangkok P4P scene. I refer to the question of Peter Kin some weeks ago.

Everything I write here is my personal opinion, my personal norm to evaluate the risk for each single experience.


[b][size=+1]1. Introduction[/size][/b]

[u]The general risk of catching STDs in the P4P scene in Bangkok is still high.[/u] Though the numbers of new HIV infections are falling in Thailand it should not be forgotten that we are not only talking about HIV. This might be the disease which scares us most, but there are other diseases which can cause severe damage to anybodies health, and additionally be spread further once you are infected. I only want to mention Hepatitis here, some types of this disease is about 100 times easier to transfer than HIV.

All these arguments cannot be used to justify the avoidance of using condoms. [b]Condoms have to be used in any case, and under any circumstances.[/b]

There is no official empirical analysis available to measure the infection rates based on the classifications I defined. Everything I write here is simply based on my personal assumption, they are my personal conclusions. Nothing more than that. [/QUOTE]
I wrote very clearly:

[QUOTE=Giotto]All these arguments cannot be used to justify the avoidance of using condoms. [b]Condoms have to be used in any case, and under any circumstances.[/b] [/QUOTE]
What followed then in that report was a list of risk factors which I am thinking about when I evaluate STD infection risks by contact with a woman/girl. This list was for sure not complete, and I remember some reports from others afterwards adding some additional risk factors to this list.

After this list of risk factors I then come to some conclusions which I experienced during writing the report. The first conclusion again refers again to unprotected sex, and gives the clear message that there is only one way for me to skip the condom, and that is after having performed the complete set of STD tests:

[QUOTE=Giotto][b]7.1. Tests[/b]

During writing this report I came to the conclusion that it doesn’t matter what I write here, it is somehow obsolete. There is only ONE way of being sure not to get infected – and that is a complete STD test for a sexual partner before performing any unprotected sex. And that also means to wait for at least 3 month to perform 2 AIDS tests – and during this 3 months ONLY protected activities! [/QUOTE]
Then second conclusion refers to oral sex, again clearly labeled as “My Personal Risk Assessment”:

[QUOTE=Giotto] [b]7.2. My Personal Risk Assessment[/b]

First let me state very clearly that there is NO WAY for me to take the risk of performing unprotected sex with a girl from the P4P scene. I always use a condom – no exceptions.

The only risk I sometimes take is related to oral sex. There is a selected number of girls which I have a little bit more fun then normal with. [/QUOTE]
I came to the same conclusion as many others here in this thread.

The last sentence was now taken out of the context in one of the reports before in this thread: [i]“There is a selected number of girls which I have a little bit more fun then normal with.” [/i] It is clearly stated what this risk I am willing to take refers to: [b] The only risk I sometimes take is related to oral sex.[/b]

Now we can discuss the risks of oral sex, and the different opinions about that. There were some reports about this issue too. Anyway – such a discussion would be again helpful, if it is based on facts.

For me it became clear during writing the report that I use a decision matrix based on all the mentioned risk factors before only as an supporting tool for making a decision of taking the risk of oral sex. Additionally to this decision matrix I perform some checks before sex, and make the decision solely on the outcome of this checks, whether I will have oral sex with this woman or not. As soon as I have the slightest impression of missing cleanliness I will refrain from oral sex, that is the basic message. And as soon as there are clear indications of possible infections (eg. skin lesions) I even will not have protected sex with that woman/girl.

What followed then was a more or less heated discussion about microscopic cuts of the skin and the fact whether I have given an advice or not. My original report did not contain any warning towards microscopic cuts in the skin, so I decided to refer to this risk in some of the following reports. The discussion went then so far that there was even statements that you can get infected via the normal unbroken skin (non-mucous membrane), and I made clear that opinion is not supported by the actual HIV science. But other STDs can be transferred via the normal unbroken skin. And we forgot to discuss another issue: The we rub the body fluid from a woman/girl into our eyes – that is definitely a risk, if we have the fluid on our hands.

My report did not contain any advice to others, I only wrote about how I make decisions about how extensive a session can be.

During the last weeks then the risk factors were target of the discussion. I see no use to argue about that, because I was writing about my personal risk assessment. Others will have a different risk assessment. To know about this might have an influence on my future decision matrix about this issue, if I can follow their argumentation, but who can change the past. But even if this would be possible - there will still be risk factors and a decision matrix! It is basically that what happens in the brain when one tries to evaluate a general risk - written down in a report.

To a certain extend I am surprised that nobody up to now smiled about that and asked the question: Giotto, if you are going to have sex with a woman/girl, do you have a paper and a pen with you and fill out a risk assessment fact sheet first to evaluate the risk?

Combination of risks: There were examples of risks which were balancing each other (old/young combined with Freelancing/Beer Bar/Gogo Bar etc), and there were examples of mixed activities (Freelancing Gogo girls). Or course, that is what a risk assessment is all about, to evaluate those singe risks components and somehow get to a result, in which all risk factors are added up to one single number. Scale the risk factors based on what you personally think is an important one, evaluate them – and get a number/level. And this number then can be compared to your own personal maximum risk number/level you want to take.

In that specific report I finally then remind everybody to his own responsibility:

[QUOTE=Giotto] [b]7.3. Protection and Responsibility[/b]

Finally – everybody please sits down and thinks for a minute before he gets involved in this game. [b]You and only you are responsible[/b] for the level of protection you require. Do not expect the girl to ensure that you use a condom! You have to be prepared, you need to have condoms with you, and you have to make sure that you do not get into contact with any body fluids of the girl. [/QUOTE]
I find it quite difficult to misunderstand all that, but obviously it is possible.

If now the impression of readers is, that all the risk assessment attempt is not of any practical use, and that the only way to protect yourself is to use condoms and avoid any contact with body fluids of a woman then I will fully support that. Even if you make an risk assessment there stays a risk > 0 – and there should be no discussion necessary about that.

For this reason I added another issue in later posts, which I find much more interesting to discuss:
[QUOTE=Giotto]… [b][u]Final Statement:[/u] The biggest risk factor are we ourselves, getting carried away during the sexual act and forgetting to use the condom. … [/b]Giotto[/QUOTE]
Compared to this risk all other risk factors related to the girls can be simply ignored! But the mentioned report was not about this risk, it was about site and girl related risks.

I personally doubt many “safest sex” statements here in this thread. To perform complete safe sex is nearly impossible and not really enjoyable (my POV). I discussed the issue with many of our hotel guests, and I know that a huge number (the majority) sometimes go bareback. I know the questions where to perform tests, after a guest gets carried away during a session. I know what the guests want when they ask me whether our girls are tested or not. I saw the fear in the faces of so many guys who lost control in the night before. All that is so human…

Some other issues I would like to add to the discussion, because it was not mentioned up to now:

[b]Normal Skin Infection Risk[/b]

We never discussed the risk of the girl getting infected when giving us a hand job. If there is a risk of cuts in the fingers the girl should be at risk, following argumentation lines from before.

[b]COF[/b]

The eyes are endangered, an easy entry point for many viruses and bacteria.

We don’t think too much about girls getting into contact with our body fluids, do we? We all like BBBJCIM?

[b]Finally: Back to the risk assessments.

I would be interested in clear statements about personal behaviors. Who has never taken any risk during a P4P session? That means: Never touched a pussy (because of possible cuts in a finger), never got a BBBJ, never had sex without a condom, never eaten a pussy, always successfully avoided to get into any contact with the body fluid of a woman, etc. etc. …[/b]

I admit, that I sometimes take risks, and to decide with which woman I can take a certain risk I have my own risks assessment scheme. But – I always use condoms for intercourse.



Giotto

I prepared to admit that some classes of girls are more risky than others statistically but do not wish to get involved in those arguments.
Anyway guys will just select the girls that appeal to them anyway.

Now suppose there is a problem with the precautions, e.g. condom slips off or breaks. These things have been known to happen accidentally occasionally.
Then need to rectify with the backup condoms immediately.
Always double check condom O.K. before orgasming (mainly for the girls sake)
After breaking condom girl will probably dash off and douse with something and be upset.
This is where the class of girl you are with might count for something.
I don't go for the cheapest of girls when mongering. I want the best and those groups more likely to have had real HIV tests would appeal even more.
Girls sometimes use sponges inside that cause can condoms to break through friction abrasion if longer than a cursory screw. I refuse to fuck girls using sponges no matter how much they deny it. Its either take it out or forget it.

If you are going to have sex with anyone regularly, then both should get HIV and other STD tested at the clinic for peace of mind, even though condoms might still be worn. Its just proving what you verbally claim.

My ex girlfriend expected me to be tested once every 4-6 months at least since she didn't trust me completely not to do anything stupid with another girl. I wasn't doing anything really stupid, but saw no harm in the tests at all (not expensive in Thailand).

[QUOTE=Martians]
As regards Odepo: his attempt to break a condom seems bizarre as I cannot see how that would increase his physical enjoyment.[/quote]

Surely you are pretending ignorance here, Martians. It is obvious that condomless sex will provide significantly more stimulation than sex with a condom. Many things can be attributed to personal taste - for example you may prefer a less intense sexual experience - but I think we can all agree that [b]the actual nerves are stimulated more[/b] during bareback sex than when they are covered up by a layer of plastic.

[quote]However, his outback reports and his further evidence (with Asian Rain) of the prevalence of barebacking should give the more cautious food for thought. This shit about the quality of life (condomless) versus quantity (condom) should be addressed to HIV/STI sufferers.[/QUOTE]

If anyone thinks that most people in the world are going around putting up with the awkward, pleasureless activity of condom sex, he is a silly fool who has no understanding of human nature (or for that matter the human condition - which is one of incipient mortality anyway). This is why researchers are pursuing the idea of a lubricant or gel of some kind which kills HIV - because it will offer a protective measure which does not ruin the act which is, after all, the point of all our lives.

[QUOTE=Giotto]Though I generally believe that all discussions about HIV / AIDS and the related risks are useful in general and help to fight the transmission of this disease it I would prefer to detach the argumentation from any personal aspects or wrong development of the past. It is a too important issue.
<cut>
Giotto[/QUOTE]
Very thoroughly covered again. Its hard to see why your comments were seen as controversial really. Everyone has their own views which cannot be always exactly the same.

Its just about being 99.999% sure of not dying through mongering and still getting to have some fun.
Whoops I went too far with 99.999.
Could easily die of a heart attack while fucking some sensational young sex goddess. But I don't think the risk is high enough to stop me.

[QUOTE=Opebo]If anyone thinks that most people in the world are going around putting up with the awkward, pleasureless activity of condom sex[/QUOTE]
Most of us mongers have to put up with it, but its not 'pleasureless'. Still, mongers go hunting for several girls to fuck in a day, despite the condoms used. There must be pleasure. Its not all pure addiction with no pleasure.
The difference between no condom and a very good thin condom is there but not so much as to be worth very high risks for most of us.
I would agree that some condoms are in the lower pleasure category. I select my condoms very carefully to be comfortable fit and minimising pleasure reduction.

The barebackers are in the minority, and a dieing breed. They possibly rely on the fact that guys catch form girls with more difficulty than the reverse.
But if they bareback often enough in risky places, eventually statistical probability will catch up with them.
You can dash accross a multi lane freeway once and survive, but wouldn't keep every few minutes. Sooner or later you will get collected.
Of cause metaphors prove nothing and only illustrate a belief.

Its worth getting a regular girlfriend and eventually moving to unprotected sex with her, assuming you both can be trusted to behave appropriatly. Obviously some mongers/husbands/boyfriends cannot be trusted. Thats obviously why the girls die.

[QUOTE=Mick Licker] The difference between no condom and a very good thin condom is there but not so much as to be worth very high risks for most of us.[/QUOTE]A nurse at a a safe-sex clinic once told me that a little lube on the knob before putting on a condom increases the "natural" feel dramatically. It works. (I still remember that honey of a nurse. They should only have ugly nurses checking out your equipment in a sex clinic. Just not fair).

[QUOTE=Mick Licker]The barebackers are in the minority, and a dying breed.
[/QUOTE]Was this double-entendre intentional? Pretty much sums it all up.

Come on boys, let's get it right here. Sex with a condom, sex without a condom: I have fucked many women without a condom- yeah, trusted ones, one of whom was my own mother-in-law, who had given birth. Not as tight as one could wish, but I got off, and enjoyed it- why? ...later.
I have fucked very, very tight Chinese and Thai girls with a condom, and yeah, again, enjoyed it, but in all honesty had I not used a condom I may not have lasted quite so long. My wife has had no children, and is as tight as she was 20 years ago. For some time I had to fuck her with a condom because she couldn't be on the pill and I was waiting for the snip. Granted, it wasn't quite as good, but I got off!

This is it. When you fuck someone, it could be anyone. Ultimately you will shoot your load. Is it not the case that the excitement is that you are shagging someone who you find attractive, and sexy, and who you would never normally be able to shag without paying?
If the difference to you is skin on skin, or skin on mucus membrane, and that is the only difference, between the girl and someone else, then please tell me if you have not lost the plot?

The excitement is shagging someone different. Suppose that someone different is a fucken stunner, but has had 10 kids, well, you wouldn't touch the sides, even without a condom. Suppose she is stunning, and tight, well, she will get you there . Shagging my mother in law was forbidden, different, and it wouldn't matter if I had used 30 condoms, she allowed me inside her!
What you are doing is shagging the girl, not her twat. One twat feels like another, with or without a condom. What is different is the girl you are shagging. If she does it for you, then it doesn't matter, slack ****, or condom, it is about the girl you are for that instant making love to.
That is my opinion

Others: Giotto has slapped in one of his mega essays siOdepo: nce my last post.
Odepo: I referred to you trying to break a condom as being bizarre. I cannot see the difference in enjoyment from a torn as opposed to an untorn condom. I have fucked countless (!) women bareback and condoms have broken on several occasions. They are not the same thing

Why did yioy confuse the two? We know why Giotta has his spam agenda here but what agenda have you?