Fun sex / Safe sex

Perseus

New member
Hello hello,

I'm a big fan of safe(r) sex. But there is no thing as safe sex in an absolute sense and this kind of freaks me out. Because if you educate yourself, go online, or read a book about it, it's all "shock and awe". I guess that's so they can scare you into using condoms?

Anyway, I'm so focused on the safe part that the sex itself is becoming less fun. So much that this is basically the hardest part about poly for me. I have a primairy, or what ever term floats your boat, and I would hate it if I would pass something on to her (or anybody else for that matter).

How to keep it safe AND fun. Also, are my worries of passing something on even when having safe sex realistic? What is your take on this?
 
Phone/chat sex and "ERP"ing are the only forms of sex that are 100% safe from all health risks. ;)

Beyond that... well, you'll have to decide for yourself (together with any and all potential sex partners of yours, obviously) what's a reasonably small degree of risk-taking for you. I'm kinda the last person on Earth to be able to give advice on that front, though, lol.
 
Regular testing for yourself, your partners, and their partners is a good way to meet your need for safety. Condoms are pretty effective. Avoiding one-night-stands with strangers and people who won't disclose their status / history (history up to a point. What you did 10 years ago, before testing clean 10 times in the last 2 years, is irrelevant. What you did last week is not.)
 
Use condoms. Regular testing. Educate yourself about STDs. Having casual sex doesn't matter, just use condoms.
 
just go get tested every 6 months. that's what I do, even before we opened our marriage up.

you can get home tests now right?
 
I just had a long talk about safe sex with one of my guys friends. He plays on a regular basis with his husband and a third. He says that in cruise places he's explored men are getting more and more lax with unprotected sex... there was also an article about it in the Times last week. However, people are pretty open BEFORE he even meets them about their status and whether they practice safe sex. By the time he the get to his bedroom .he already knows their opinion of condoms and no one, he said, has gone back on it. I don't know if he plays with people who are positive or not. I doubt it. Our friend died of AIDS, and he has remained negative all this time.

Does he have fun? HELL YES! probably way more fun that he should,

I think you are always taking a chance with new partners, but I think a condom usually works and people usually don't lie about their status. I'm sure there are many exceptions, so it IS always a chnce. However, I do know men who have been in pos/neg relationships for teen plus years and never contracted.

What STD'S are you afraid of getting?
 
I didn't look at your gender/perference.. but I have to say, getting fingered in a dark bar is pretty fucking fun. But I'm a little slutty. LOL
 
While I agree that there is no such thing as 100% safe sex, I do believe that there are definite ways to mitigate risk and that my choices about how I do so, are mine alone. What this means for me is that my primary (spouse) is unwilling/unable to have protected sex with his other partners. He assumes a level of risk with his partners that I am unwilling to assume for mine. As a result, I have abandoned our sexual relationship. He has ED with a condom and doesn't want to do meds. Okay, your choice. I don't want to assume risk on behalf of my partners AND would like eventually to have the option to be fluid-bonded with somebody. With him in the sexual mix, that would be impossible. There was no threat made. I did not give him an ultimatum. But when he made his choice, I voted myself off the island.
 
It's so convoluted. I don't really *know* why enough to speak on his behalf. After the fact, he said he'd only have sex with condoms with others, but in the past he's lied about it and I can't take the chance with the health of others. It is, what is is. I had hoped we could regain the sexual part of our marriage and the health of the marriage in general, but it's not looking like that will happen. In the meantime, we are still friends enough to raise our kids, share finances, and be supportive of one another. I wouldn't say it's a happy arrangement, but it is functioning for now.
 
Are female condoms an option? I'm assuming it's only putting a condom on his penis that affects his ED.
 
It's so convoluted. I don't really *know* why enough to speak on his behalf. After the fact, he said he'd only have sex with condoms with others, but in the past he's lied about it and I can't take the chance with the health of others. It is, what is is. I had hoped we could regain the sexual part of our marriage and the health of the marriage in general, but it's not looking like that will happen. In the meantime, we are still friends enough to raise our kids, share finances, and be supportive of one another. I wouldn't say it's a happy arrangement, but it is functioning for now.

Why not be sexual without PIV sex? so many other things you can do.
I understand that the fact he lied about it is probably a major issue here, but... I always wonder why the PIV is so important to many people..
New bf and I have been seeing each other for months now and haven't had PIV sex, and I kind of doubt we ever will, because he has ED with condoms also, and I won't have sex without one. But we're still having tons of fun ...
 
Whilst I may not have PIV sex every time, I wouldn't be happy taking it off the table altogether. There is something magic about it.
 
I still don't understand why you can't trust your partner to sleep with people who adhere to safer sex practices. People who have negative test results and use condoms with other people. Don't you trust his judgement? Do you think he would have barrier free sex with someone who he isn't sure about? If so, that is your issue. I'd forget the poly thing altogether and work on establishing trust and respect.

If that was my partner, I'd be okay with him fluid bonding with people who met our criteria for STD prevention. That would mean my partner can only have anal or PIV sex with people he has known for some time and who would be willing to chat with us about how we do things and the importance of all of us adhering to the rules. It must be very difficult for him to think he can never have PIV with anyone other than his wife or give up sex with her and he must desperately try and find loopholes.
 
Last edited:
In Dana's case, it sounds like it might be a large issue than PIV sex. I would not want to have a relationship with someone who didn't use condoms because I see that behavior as self-destructive.
 
Everyone's level of comfort is going to be different and should be respected. That said, make sure you understand the real dangers and not just what you think they are. For instance, at one time I was worried that my partner's partner, who's a sex worker, was at risk from having unprotected oral sex with people whose STI statuses she didn't necessarily know.

Then I actually looked up rates for transmission for various STIs via oral sex, and discovered that the things that can be easily passed on are curable, and the things that are incurable and scary (AIDS!) are virtually impossible to catch via oral unless you have an open, bleeding wound in your mouth, and even then are difficult to transmit. That left HPV and herpes, both of which ARE easy-ish to transmit via oral and ARE incurable. HPV was no big deal to me -- I've already had it, and am vaccinated against the other strains.

So I had to decide, was I scared of the one thing left, herpes? Did I consider that risk an acceptable risk? I did a lot of reading, and eventually decided that it was a risk I was taking already, constantly, with other partners, and that it wasn't actually that big of a deal (basically, in healthy people, an occasional skin condition in an embarrassing place). I surprised myself with that way of looking at something that had always freaked me out so much in theory -- in the end, the big scary monster just wasn't particularly scary.

All of that info, combined with knowing my partner's partner's safer sex practices (talking to clients, always using barriers for PIV and PIA, and getting tested every three months) led to something I never would have expected a year ago -- I'm now fluid-bound with someone who's also fluid-bound with a full-service sex worker, and I'm not worried at all (and I'm a chronic worrier!).

Anyway, that's one person's story of facing the question of safe sex vs. fun sex and making an informed decision. If my decision had gone in a different way, or if yours does, that's ok too, as long as you've really considered it and end up with something you're comfortable with. It was hugely important to me that I be able to make a free, unpressured choice. My partner made no secret that he was interested in fluid-bonding. I, in turn, made it clear to him that that option would be OFF the table if I felt like it was something I *had* to do to make him happy. You can't think clearly under pressure.

One more thing, fluid-bonding is no light matter to me. I've seen other people say things above like "can't you just trust your partner to have un-barriered sex with people they've known for a while and feel comfortable with and who use good practices"? I think that's unfair. With every single non-monogamous person who's added to your circle of fluid-sharing, your risks increase exponentially. That's just math. It's ok to be worried about it. It's ok to be careful. It's ok to not want too many people to be in that circle with you. It's ok to not want ANY to be in there with you!

In the end, safer sex CAN be very, very fun sex. There are a million and one things you can do that involve minimal risk and that bring pleasure and connection. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
 
In Dana's case, it sounds like it might be a large issue than PIV sex. I would not want to have a relationship with someone who didn't use condoms because I see that behavior as self-destructive.
If he puts a condom on, he loses his erection and can't have sex at all.
 
If he puts a condom on, he loses his erection and can't have sex at all.
One more thing, fluid-bonding is no light matter to me.

Who is it a light matter for?

I've seen other people say things above like "can't you just trust your partner to have un-barriered sex with people they've known for a while and feel comfortable with and who use good practices"? I think that's unfair
.

You think it's unfair to ask someone if they can trust their partner's judgement? Or do you think it's unfair to suppose the average person would like to avoid STDs? Or do you think it's unfair that this guy has ED and despite being in a poly relationship, is expected to never have PIV sex again with anyone other than his wife, even if new person is less of an STD risk than Wifey?

With every single non-monogamous person who's added to your circle of fluid-sharing, your risks increase exponentially. That's just math.

Let's say wife is only fluid bonded with hubby, sleeps with three other people regularly using condoms. Newcomer is only fluid bonded with hubby, sleeps with three other people with condoms. Both require negative STD results from all sexual partners before PIV with a condom. Both, or all people are at risk of one of newcomer or Wifey's other partners contracting an STD from their other partners between tests and transmitting it to them despite the use of condoms. Is it okay if Wifey was the one who let the cooties in? is it only bad if newcomer does?

If there are ten people who practice safer sex methods and three people that don't really adhere to them, the ten people are less likely to pass on STDs. So no, less people doesn't always equal safer.
It's ok to be worried about it. It's ok to be careful. It's ok to not want too many people to be in that circle with you. It's ok to not want ANY to be in there with you!

Agreed. But this OP should recognise that in this instance, an inability to trust her husband may spell the end of her marriage. She already gave him the choice of sex with her or sex with others, and he chose others. That says a lot. If I was her and wanted to get things back on track, I would be thinking seriously about what compromise we can make so I am still protected from STDs but he gets to have full relationships with everyone he is involved with.
 
Who is it a light matter for?

Lots of people. If that weren't true, we wouldn't have the STI problems that we do.

You think it's unfair to ask someone if they can trust their partner's judgement? Or do you think it's unfair to suppose the average person would like to avoid STDs? Or do you think it's unfair that this guy has ED and despite being in a poly relationship, is expected to never have PIV sex again with anyone other than his wife, even if new person is less of an STD risk than Wifey?

I meant exactly what I said.

Let's say wife is only fluid bonded with hubby, sleeps with three other people regularly using condoms. Newcomer is only fluid bonded with hubby, sleeps with three other people with condoms. Both require negative STD results from all sexual partners before PIV with a condom. Both, or all people are at risk of one of newcomer or Wifey's other partners contracting an STD from their other partners between tests and transmitting it to them despite the use of condoms. Is it okay if Wifey was the one who let the cooties in? is it only bad if newcomer does?

I don't see the point of inventing elaborate what-if scenarios and addressing them as if we actually had that level of info about the situation. And I find your questions facetious.

If there are ten people who practice safer sex methods and three people that don't really adhere to them, the ten people are less likely to pass on STDs. So no, less people doesn't always equal safer.

Saying "more people means more risk" is not the same as saying "less people always equals safer". You can take my words to mean "more people means more risk, all other things being equal".

Agreed. But this OP should recognise that in this instance, an inability to trust her husband may spell the end of her marriage. She already gave him the choice of sex with her or sex with others, and he chose others. That says a lot. If I was her and wanted to get things back on track, I would be thinking seriously about what compromise we can make so I am still protected from STDs but he gets to have full relationships with everyone he is involved with.

Dana, to whom you've been referring, was not the OP.

Not having PIV doesn't make something less than a full relationship.
 
Many, many people feel that having something they want to do prohibited by someone else prevents them enjoying a full relationship with someone else. It doesn't matter if it's PIV sex or going to the cinema.

You may find my questions facetious but they are totally valid. Unusually, it is the wife who is losing her relationship here, it is in her interests to look at the situation objectively and consider what risks who presents and how they compare to her metamours. Overall, she should be thinking of ways to lower risk and allow everyone to have sex with their partners.
 
Back
Top