what does this mean??

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-04-2004
what does this mean??
37
Mon, 10-04-2004 - 9:00am
Hi, I'm in a fairly new relationship and have a question. We've only been dating for about 2 months, and kinda taking things slow which I think is good. Last week, on our last date, I stayed over and we did everything (oral) but didn't have sex. So I'm wondering why it stopped there, cause he didn't initiate anything after that. We cuddled up and fell asleep. The date itself was great and we spent the next day together as well. So I guess I'm just confused. Do men feel intercourse is much more intimate than oral and perhaps he still wants to wait for that final step? I guess I thought that oral usually led to sex, but maybe it's different for everyone.

thanks in advance!

nikki

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-30-2004
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 2:21pm
Ahh yes, the standard babe in the woods. tsk tsk. Kids. On another board there was a lively discussion initiated by a under 18 poster asking advice and after about 20 messages and several days later the entire thread was terminated. Just gone. Sigh. I hope she doesn't misinterpret my evalutation of my own risks as meaning that hers are not significant. Copious gifting of random fellatio, while it sounds like a great idea, is quite a bit riskier than what I do. Lol, I guess she skipped the stats post. So kids remember, stay in school!
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-20-2004
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 2:51pm
So phat, what do you advise a young person to do? Even if she/he weren't even sexually active yet? That it's OK to have unprotected oral sex? And if so, in what context. Just looking for clarification on your advice to the young.


Edited 10/5/2004 2:52 pm ET ET by prettyinpurple2004
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-20-2004
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 3:43pm
What if every 1 out of 4 hamburger were tainted with ecoli? What if one in ever four people on the road were drunk, would you still ride without a helmut?
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-30-2004
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 3:50pm
I don't really want this responsibility at this point, it will be bad enough with my own kids, no doubt. However, for the sake of this discussion I would advise them to 1) Don't believe everything that you read. Educators sometimes confuse their responsibility to teach and provide information with their desire to control peoples' behaviour. So they will exaggerate this or downplay that (effectively lying and spreading misinformation) in order to get the behaviour they want. The media is also full of BS, because they are a commercial endeavor and try to sensationalize things in order to get a larger and more involved audience so that they can please their customers (advertisers are the customers in most cases, not the audience). The government is often less than accurate as well. There are lots of educators and media types in government PR departments. The government will often exaggerate or downplay information in order to protect themselves from political fallout by presenting unpopular information. Everyone is also afraid of getting sued or having things taken out of context by the media or legal institutions. A hint for detecting misinformation is to look for numbers. Numbers are definate and confirmable, they have to come from somewhere, they are accurate or inaccurate. If a source avoids numbers, then they are hiding something. Another hint is to look for political or commercial affiliations of the sources. If they are there, then they have alterior motives. The best way is to get as close to the original source as you can, read as many scientific literature items as you can get/understand. Scientists are much more honest with themselves than the PR people and media are with lay people. For example among researchers of HIV it is commonly known that 10% of northern caucasions cary a allele (a variation of a gene) called delta 32 that provides resistance to HIV. There are several additional genes that have alleles that are also resistance factors. Individuals have been found to have a couple of these alleles and are completely immune to HIV as nearly as ethical research can tell us. However, no one tells the public about this because they assume that the public would missunderstand the implications for risk and increase risky behaviour. The researchers don't hide it. It is those do the "service" of interpreting science that decide what people should know and what they shouldn't. Anyway, so much for point number one.

2) Understand the relative risks. I would like to point out the actual risks in numbers but I don't have those yet. Use your head and be sensible, think for yourself but listen to the advice of those you trust. Understand the consequences. What happens if you get herpes orally. What happens genitally. Many people don't realize that cold sores are oral herpes, or that genital herpes aquired in the mouth is a little less severe than the common oral herpes. What happens if you get gonorrhea? HIV? etc. Basically know the chances that you are taking as best you can. Prepare (have condoms, have a ride home, have your parents know where you are) so that you only take risks that you intend to take. Don't let things 'just happen' when you are not in control. Learn how to resist pressure. Learn how to be honest about what you really want rather than what you think you ought to want.

3) Understand that risk increases the more you take chances. Also understand that risk does not dissapear if it is 'only this one time'.

As for specifics. Cunnilingus is very safe for both parties as regards to HIV and most other STIs (the risk is very low, which is not the same as non-existent). Fellatio is less safe, but much safer than intercourse. There are certain things that decrease the risk of transmission. For example, avoiding ejaculations in the mouth lessens risk. Avoiding doing it when there is blood or open wounds even if they are small (from flossing, dental work, a misshap with the fly of his jeans, etc). Explore a bit first, say flirty things and be romantic while serupticiously looking for lessions etc. Do this in decent lighting. Manual is safer, and it is jsut as good for some people or in some situations. When you are deciding whether or not to do something consider the risks (how likely and how severe are the consequences both biological and social/personal) and consider the reward (how much you want to do it, how much enjoyment will both of you get? How will it enhance the relationship etc). Use common sense.

That is all that comes to mind.

Now, hopefully no one will read this and then get oral cancer from HPV and have their tongue cut out and then send their lawyer after me.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2004
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 3:54pm
yeap, that's why I always stress safe sex, you never know how old some lurkers and/or posters are.

bounxh0a-1.gif picture by dillbyrd

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-20-2004
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 3:59pm
lol

Well...my kids saw five people close to us die of AIDS, so I doubt they're going to take risks!

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2004
Tue, 10-05-2004 - 6:27pm
great reply...

...but those are not accurate risk factors. My point is that phat, is well aware of the risks, he has obvioulsy done his research and has concluded that, for himself, the risk does not outweigh the benefit.

Now, I personally am in a LTR (20 years) so I am not as well informed as I would be if I was single so, I can not say wether or not I would take the same risks as phat.

I also chose to have a homebirth instead of a hospital birth. Most people I know thought that was crazy! but, when I researched the statistics I found that for a low risk pregnancy, the outcomes of homebirth are equal or better than the outcomes of hospital births. But, of course my original MD would not have told me that.

Pages