"Sometimes safe" on Rentboy

[Guest Merlin]

I have several times seen guys on Rentboy say that they are "sometimes safe". First time I thought it was a mistake. But I see it increasingly and now realize it must be taken as literally true. It seems to be a way of saying the guy will do bareback, and may be an admission that he is HIV positive. I never do bareback of course and always practise "safer sex". As part of safer sex, I do not hire guys if I have any reason to believe they are positive, since even with safe sex, accidents do happen.

I have also begun to notice guys who simply do not answer the question re safe sex. and I guess this also is a way of saying that they are not always safe and are perhaps positive.

It is commendable that they are honest in not claiming to be safe and negative.

[bobchitown]

I've always viewed "safe sex" as a binary setting. Either you practice it, or you don't. "Sometimes safe" automatically puts the person into the unsafe side of the equation. Doesn't mean you can't still have safe sex with them, but they themselves are not in the safe sex category. Its sort of like being sort of kosher. Either you are or you aren't.

[Steven_Draker]

Merlin,

Internet "honesty" is not something that we're ready to see anytime soon.

 

I've been "advocating" for this for a long time with no success. Good luck to you.

 

There always will be people (including posters on this board) who lie about their age, cock size, HIV status and ... and ... fill the blank

 

Cheers, Steven ~

[+ sniper]

Well, it could also mean they're willing to top you without a condom, as it's not as risky for them.

(And FTR I KNOW nothing is 100% safe but the risk of getting HIV from topping without a condom(if circumcised) is about the same or less than getting it from bottoming with one. So in terms of risk levels they're about the same).

 

But yeah in general I think it's a red flag, though I do commend them for their relative honesty.

[+ Charlie]

"Safe sex" refers to the acts an escort is willing to engage in, but tells you nothing about the STD status of the escort; of course, if he is willing to engage in "unsafe sex" acts, it probably means that he has done so in the past, and that he MAY be HIV+, not that he is. It is also a fact that both escorts and clients often have different ideas of what constitutes "safe" and "unsafe," and an escort may check "sometimes safe" so that he doesn't cut off the possibility to be hired by a client who wants to do something that the client thinks is risky but the escort thinks is not.

[alanalt]

And there's nothing in the ad categories of 'safe', 'sometimes safe', or 'unsafe' that tells a potential client what the heck the escort might be doing when they're off the clock. To be honest, I really don't pay as much attention to the 'safe' vs. 'unsafe' category as I do with some of the others for that very reason.

 

In short, there's no way I can be sure of what kind of sex they're having when they're not with me, but I darn well insist that they play safe when they play with me!!

[uwsman2]

what to assume

 

The "safest" way to be is to assume that anyone whose HIV status you don't know is potentially infected, and only do with them what you would be willing to do with an infected person.

 

That means no anal without a condom. Most people would say that if you don't have any sores or bleeding gums, it's probably safe to suck without a condom.... but not 100% safe.

 

And asking somebody their HIV status is no guarantee that you'll find out the truth. They may lie, or they may not know their HIV status. Remember it is possible to have tested negative and yet be positive, if one's exposure is relatively recent. So even an honest person who tells you they are negative could be mistaken.

 

Since escorts have sex with lots of people under varying circumstances, I think it is prudent to have only safe sex with escorts, while understanding that if one is having sex with escorts, one is taking a risk.

[Guest ryan2552]

Merlin,

Internet "honesty" is not something that we're ready to see anytime soon.

 

I've been "advocating" for this for a long time with no success. Good luck to you.

 

There always will be people (including posters on this board) who lie about their age, cock size, HIV status and ... and ... fill the blank

 

Cheers, Steven ~[/color]

So I would assume this statement would also apply to you Steven? Back in my lurker days weren't you pretending to be another poster using a name like fire ice wizard frog eater or something like that?

 

I am sure many have a "Internet past" including me. I just don't think one should be holier than another when it comes to integrity. Thats my perspective of what you wrote.

 

Much on the Internet should be taken with a dose of skepticism.

[Steven_Draker]

Mr. "Ryan2552" or whatever that is hiding behind that screen name: INTEGRITY is something that either you have it or you don't.

 

I have been around for quite a few years to know something about that.

 

This thread is about "safer sex", so attack the issue and not the poster.

[Steven_Draker]

The "safest" way to be is to assume that anyone whose HIV status you don't know is potentially infected

 

In that light a well-known doctor considers that there are only 2 variations of one's HIV status: POSITIVE and UNKNOWN.

[+ Italiano]

the "safest" way to be is to assume that anyone whose hiv status you don't know is potentially infected, and only do with them what you would be willing to do with an infected person.

 

That means no anal without a condom. Most people would say that if you don't have any sores or bleeding gums, it's probably safe to suck without a condom.... But not 100% safe.

 

And asking somebody their hiv status is no guarantee that you'll find out the truth. They may lie, or they may not know their hiv status. Remember it is possible to have tested negative and yet be positive, if one's exposure is relatively recent. So even an honest person who tells you they are negative could be mistaken.

 

Since escorts have sex with lots of people under varying circumstances, i think it is prudent to have only safe sex with escorts, while understanding that if one is having sex with escorts, one is taking a risk.

 

 

bravo!!

[seaboy4hire]

It should also be noted that just because one (client or escort it goes both ways) plays safe with you doesn't mean they do it all the time. So just because one says they play safe doesn't always mean it is so.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[Guest Merlin]

I absolutely agree that you should assume the other guy is positive, and so practise safer sex. BUT it is safer still, if you avoid guys whom you know or have reason to believe are positive. Because, accidents do happen and safe sex is never totally safe. No, you do not know who is positive. But sometimes you do know or have reason to believe. A few escorts disclose that they are positive, while others advertise that they will bareback. I would place "sometimes safe" in the same category.

[+ Charlie]

I undertand that, for public relations and possibly legal reasons, the only choices the website offers the advertising escort are "safe" and "sometimes safe," rather than "safe" and "sometimes unsafe." However, the wording "sometimes safe" oddly creates the impression that the escort's behavior is normally unsafe, but he will practice safe sex if the client requests it, whereas "sometimes unsafe" would suggest that he normally practices safe sex but will make an exception for a client. In either case, of course, the practical consequences are the same, so the client should think carefully about what he asks for.

[JT Brooklyn]

I undertand that, for public relations and possibly legal reasons, the only choices the website offers the advertising escort are "safe" and "sometimes safe," rather than "safe" and "sometimes unsafe." However, the wording "sometimes safe" oddly creates the impression that the escort's behavior is normally unsafe, but he will practice safe sex if the client requests it, whereas "sometimes unsafe" would suggest that he normally practices safe sex but will make an exception for a client. In either case, of course, the practical consequences are the same, so the client should think carefully about what he asks for.

 

Hey "No Hat..No Party" Period!

 

"Sometimes" I myself Move On to the Next guy in NYC that's a No Brainer.

 

BUT all this type FUN is one of Lifes "Crapshoots" anyways!

[Guest ryan2552]

Mr. "Ryan2552" or whatever that is hiding behind that screen name: INTEGRITY is something that either you have it or you don't.

 

I have been around for quite a few years to know something about that.

 

This thread is about "safer sex", so attack the issue and not the poster.[/color]

 

I didn't realize that integrity was limited to such a narrow topic especially since you were the one that expanded on it. Go figure.

 

btw If and when I decide to "attack you" trust me you will know.

[Guest greatness]

I agree

 

You have to be careful no matter what. A postive person can be tested negative but after 3 month a test result can be reversed. Even though you use a condom there is a possibility that unfortunate things can happen. Oral sex isn't risk free either. But it is much safer than anal sex. I admire people who are honest.

 

In that light a well-known doctor considers that there are only 2 variations of one's HIV status: POSITIVE and UNKNOWN. [/color]

[Guest greatness]

well

 

Unfortunately, there are clients who are HIV+ and don't really care about escorts' health. Let's say that a negative escort practice a safer sex with these clients. Will you not hire this escort because accidents do happen even with a safe sex? I think there is no way of knowing one's status. Just be careful and do not do anything extreme.

 

 

I have several times seen guys on Rentboy say that they are "sometimes safe". First time I thought it was a mistake. But I see it increasingly and now realize it must be taken as literally true. It seems to be a way of saying the guy will do bareback, and may be an admission that he is HIV positive. I never do bareback of course and always practise "safer sex". As part of safer sex, I do not hire guys if I have any reason to believe they are positive, since even with safe sex, accidents do happen.

I have also begun to notice guys who simply do not answer the question re safe sex. and I guess this also is a way of saying that they are not always safe and are perhaps positive.

It is commendable that they are honest in not claiming to be safe and negative.

[JoshAB]

In that light a well-known doctor considers that there are only 2 variations of one's HIV status: POSITIVE and UNKNOWN. [/color]

 

Riddle me this:

 

If you are an escort who is POZ and taking HIV drugs, let's say you have an undetectable viral load. From a statistical perspective, is it now safer to have sex with said escort rather than "UNKNOWN" Escort (who SWEARS he gets test every 3 months).

 

Dunno. I know an undetectable viral load doesn't mean there isn't anything there. But are you safer than with a 'safer sex' escort?

J

[seaboy4hire]

I also want to add that while I understand the concern of becoming positive it is not that easy to catch. It is far more easier to catch one of the other std's just by oral then it is to catch hiv from oral. Take your pick there is syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, ngo, chlamydia and what not. And as mentioned before do not take ones status for anything as gospel and that goes for both client and escort.

 

Hugs,

Greg