RE: Unprotected Sex

RE: Unprotected Sex (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Health and Safety

Message

KatyLied -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/26/2007 5:01:22 AM)
quote: I was just wondering who would have their children vaccinated since it is becoming one of the most common STDs out there. If I had a daughter, I would take her to the doctor and we would both become fully informed regarding the vaccination. It would ultimately be her own decision. As parents we do many things to/for our children without their consent. I feel that if a child can understand and provide consent, it should be theirs to give. I did this with both of my sons regarding acne medication (accutane) that is controversial.

zindyslave -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/26/2007 7:13:06 AM)
Well, if my future UMs turn out like I did they most likely won't get any kind of vaccine like that because to do so would mean they are or are thinking of having sex. That is the way I most likely would have looked at it when I was younger much the same way getting birthcontrol made me feel then. My mom made me get birthcontrol and would most likely had made me get this vaccine had it been available at the time. I just think sometimes to protect your children you have to sometimes make them get something that will protect them from diseases in the future. We get them vaccinated for others things what is the difference?

KatyLied -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/26/2007 6:07:27 PM)
quote: We get them vaccinated for others things what is the difference? You do realize that the entire childhood vaccination thing is controversial now. Many parents are opting out of it. As parents we are often put in the position of doing things to/for your children without their consent. That is why I think it is important to make them part of the process when they are old enough to understand risks/benefits.

zindyslave -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/26/2007 6:36:50 PM)
Yeah I know that childhood vaccinations are an item of controversy right now, didn't know you could opt out of them but you learn something new everyday. Well, I was just looking back on my teenage years thinking about how I probably would have reacted to being told by my parents to think about getting the HPV vaccine I probably would have lied and said 'I am not having sex so I don't need it', so that is what I was looking at in my decision and what I said about it.

asubmissiveheart -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/26/2007 7:03:30 PM)
Thank you all for responding. I had no idea this topic would be so popular.

LordVelvet -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/27/2007 10:31:03 AM)
katylied, Many schools require the vaccines to get into school or do any sort of sport. I wonder how the opt out process works with that. I had not heard of that as of yet. Thanks for the info. Both of Mine have had all the shots though. LordVelvet

KatyLied -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/27/2007 11:17:36 AM)
I'm guessing it's a home schooling thing. I do not know what the state requirement is (for public schools). Both of mine were fully vaccinated, at the recommended times. http://www.dsf.health.state.pa.us/health/cwp/view.asp?A=178&Q=242070 The only exceptions to the school laws for immunization are medical reasons and religious beliefs. If your child is exempt from immunizations, your child may be removed from school during a disease outbreak. edited to add info

Celeste43 -> RE: Unprotected Sex (6/27/2007 11:48:23 AM)
We're fluid bonded, and both of us had been in celibate marriages for some time. We were both tested and came up clean. My daughter is getting the HPV vaccine and the meningitis vaccine next week. She just got a tetanus booster three weeks ago after cutting herself while helping in a soup kitchen. I doubt that the veggie knife was rusty but it did go in deep so stitches and shot it was. The problem with not vaccinating your kids is that if they get sick with whooping cough for example, the vaccinated kid in the seat next to them will not get sick but will transmit the disease to his grandmother who just finished a round of chemo for breast cancer. Between chemo and autoimmune disorders which are also commonly treated with immune system suppressants, there are a lot of susceptible people out there. My ex has an auto immune disorder and was on immune system suppressants. I requested that no unvaccinated kid be in our kids classes because of this. I was a lot less than pleased when they disregarded my request, potentially endangering the life of my children's father and grandfather(chemo).

habibi -> RE: Unprotected Sex (7/1/2007 3:01:38 AM)
i get chemo myself and hate the idea of ppl carrying virus' around needlessly. i could literally die because of it!! i've gotten every shot available for myself and my UM. when i was offered Hep vaccinations years ago i jumped at the chance! of course i want it! and i'd die if it ever came about that my precious lil one died all because i had some qualm about vaccinations. it seems to me that beliefs are great, but not when they could potentially kill others. on that note.. quote: ORIGINAL: ErusUxor In reply to Daddysprop247 "my Master and i have unprotected sex, obviously, but i am on birth control (pill). when he has intercourse with other women, he uses condoms. when he has me used by other men, sometimes protection is used, sometimes not, it depends on the person and the relationship he has with them. it's not my place to question either way. we both have full std screenings every 3-4 months. " I can't help it...I have to say something to this..... Ok...so he is protected with other women, but sometimes you are not protected with other men and then he has unprotected sex with you..... That seems like, a kinda sorta, reduction in risk, because the possible exposures are limited...but a 50% reduction still leaves a 50% risk......statistics say you are still engaing in high risk behavior.....so the question is...FEELING LUCKY? And is it worth your health? And how does your Master explain this lapse in safety? Is he not concerned for your health ALL the time? or just when it suites him? Sorry for the sarcasm, but it just boggles my mind that people still don't seem to get how dangerous these things can be. I've seen two I knew die of AIDS....not from drugs...but unprotected sex..one was a gay male, one was a het male. I also know a het female and het male currently infected with HIV....all sexually transmitted.... My own Mother is dead....she died one year ago yesterday....she died of septic shock caused by a lung infection . Normally this lung infection would have been fought off by her body....but she had a compromised immune system......Her husband had hepatitis and was not diagnosed with it untill a year after they had been having unprotected sex....My Mom never asked for him to get an STD test in the beginning of their relationship (she should have valued herself enought to require one) ...and she died at age 50 from a completly curable lung infection because of it...... How old are you? How many years would you have left if you died at 50? Just something to ponder....... i find myself floored at this reply as well...submissiveness and/or slavery can go as far as you like it to..but really?? the idea of contracting AIDS all because your Dom doesn't know his buddy as well as he thinks he does? never...never ever, for me. trusting your Sir is all good and well..but that does not mean it should hold in something so life or death. every one wants to think the one they love will be there forever, but what if he's not and you find yourself alone and dying. it doesn't seem worth it to me. it also doesn't seem like someone who loves you and wants the best for you would risk you that way. perhaps i'll be shot down for this...that's fine. i know what i've seen happen to too many women...

bbwslit2use -> RE: Unprotected Sex (7/27/2007 11:19:06 PM)
I never go unprotected unless there is a firm line of commitment...

freyjasdottir -> RE: Unprotected Sex (7/29/2007 11:55:48 PM)
To get a religous exemption all you have to do is sign a letter stating you have strong religious convictions about certain/any/all medical procedures, they don't ask details about your beliefs or anything else, there is one on file for both of my children as I believe it is my responsibility to care for my children, not the states. Though they are both vaccinated as required it was my choice not Big Brothers....as to topic on hand I've only been with 2 people in 8 years and have my tubes tied any new person had better plan on keeping it wrapped till he proves safe.

anguissette62 -> RE: Unprotected Sex (7/30/2007 11:54:48 AM)
Interesting thread. While I read that many folks claim to be "regularly tested," no one seems to mention what is tested, except to say it is a "complete STD panel." There is NO standard "complete STD panel." In most places, requesting such an array would result in tests for HIV, syphilis and gonorrhea. Period. You have to request these tests individually. Do some googling on the subject and some of you will be a bit uncomfortable, I hope. IMO, a "complete panel" would include not only HIV, syphilis and gonorrhea, but also Hep B and Hep C, chlamydia, herpes simplex 1 and herpes simplex 2, chancroid, trichomonas and HPV. There are also a number of other conditions that can be transmitted via sexual contact: yeast infections, NGU, crabs, scabies, etc. As others have pointed out, it's not enough to rely on a "clean" bill of health on these STDs -- before I will fluid bond with another, I will insist on two sets of panels: one at the beginning of the relationship and another after 6 months of monogamous, protected sex.

asubmissiveheart -> RE: Unprotected Sex (7/30/2007 5:33:50 PM)
Is this thread still going? I forgot I started it. This must hit home for many people.

daddysprop247 -> RE: Unprotected Sex (7/31/2007 7:56:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anguissette62 Interesting thread. While I read that many folks claim to be "regularly tested," no one seems to mention what is tested, except to say it is a "complete STD panel." There is NO standard "complete STD panel." In most places, requesting such an array would result in tests for HIV, syphilis and gonorrhea. Period. You have to request these tests individually. Do some googling on the subject and some of you will be a bit uncomfortable, I hope. IMO, a "complete panel" would include not only HIV, syphilis and gonorrhea, but also Hep B and Hep C, chlamydia, herpes simplex 1 and herpes simplex 2, chancroid, trichomonas and HPV. There are also a number of other conditions that can be transmitted via sexual contact: yeast infections, NGU, crabs, scabies, etc. it's good that you point this out. when i refer to a "complete" std screening, i'm referring to all the significant tests...chlamyida, gonorrhea, herpes, syphillis and HIV. it is true that in most places the latter 3 of those tests has to be specifically requested. fortunately my Master and i live in an area where there is a health clinic which specializes in stds, and the vast majority of the tests are free, as long as you come on particular days. we encourage others we exchange fluid with to get tested at the same location, as to do so anyplace else will be expensive, even with insurance.

Aswad -> RE: Unprotected Sex (8/2/2007 7:47:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: habibi submissiveness and/or slavery can go as far as you like it to [...] but that does not mean it should hold in something so life or death. Then it can't, in your view, go as far as one would like to. In either case, if you have 100 unprotected receptive anal sex intercourses (highest risk sexual activity aside from blood sports) with HIV-positive men, there's a flip-of-a-coin chance that you have been infected. With a prevalence of 0.6% worldwide, that translates into taking it up the rear from random guys 15.000 times to have a fifty-fifty chance of infection. And those are fairly pessimistic estimates. Risk free? Hardly. But then, some people engage in breath play, too. And, considering that her life is his, in their view, then I would also add that he would have to screw her about 750 times after she got infected to have a fifty-fifty chance of being infected himself. That's also a pessimistic estimate, as it takes time for the virus to settle to the point where the risk of infection is as high as the figures I'm basing this on. It also has to happen inside the incubation period of 6 months, since they do HIV tests every 3 months. Both are higher risk than I would choose, but not as risky as one might think. quote: i know what i've seen happen to too many women... They got what they asked for, and found out what they asked for wasn't what they wanted? Happens to men, too ... I rarely meet people who only ask for what they want. That doesn't mean I want to second-guess what they want, though. Nor that I think they should be "protected" from free will.

asubmissiveheart -> RE: Unprotected Sex (8/3/2007 6:46:19 PM)
Interesting thread, many people enjoy rolling the dice when it comes down to their health.

michaelOfGeorgia -> RE: Unprotected Sex (8/3/2007 6:47:17 PM)
the redneck idea of protected sex is carrying a firearm to bed with him...LOL

asubmissiveheart -> RE: Unprotected Sex (8/3/2007 6:48:45 PM)
Anguissette62, I am glad you pointed out the fact that you need to re-test after 6 month of monogamous sex.

Aswad -> RE: Unprotected Sex (8/4/2007 9:14:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: asubmissiveheart Interesting thread, many people enjoy rolling the dice when it comes down to their health. Yeah. But there's also a difference between rolling a single one, and going for Yatzee the first time around. As I pointed out, referencing HIV, the risks are great on a population level, but not much greater than certain kinds of edgeplay on an individual level. For a population as a whole, it can become an epidemic, as demonstrated in Africa. And it is certainly a public health issue. That, and a recent survey among women showed that only about half of them would disclose having STDs to a potential partner before unprotected sex; I imagine that the numbers for men are similar. Again, though, the risks with unprotected sex are present, regardless of the precautions. Which is not to say the precautions are worthless (they aren't), just that they don't eliminate the risk, and that the remaining risk may be more than most of us are willing to live with. But I would say that people overestimate the risk, much like with plane crashes vs car crashes; you're more likely to die in a car crash, but a plane crash is more dramatic and gets more coverage. Some even worry about HIV infection from urine, of which there hasn't been a single recorded instance, and where some in the medical community have stated that the virus concentration is simply too low to cause infection. Heck, blowing a random stranger off the street has a 1 in 1.500.000 risk associated with it. Breakdown: 1 in 10.000 if the person has HIV, which about 0.6% of the population has. That said, there are many other STDs that are much more likely to be a problem. In short, use facts and numbers, rather than fear, uncertainty and doubt. Being risk-aware means doing what you can to estimate the risk. Life itself is a risky proposition; it kills many people every day. Pick the level of risk you can live with, and throw the dice. P.S.: In certain subpopulations, there is a gene that confers a greater resistance to HIV, one that is derived from their ancestors having survived the bubonic plague.

Stephann -> RE: Unprotected Sex (8/4/2007 11:26:41 PM)
As I said on another thread a bit ago.... the odds are much better you will die in an accident, from having a flat tire, than from HIV. How many of the condenscending 'no unprotected sex' folks are sure their tires have air? Or need new tires? Stephan

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.09375