Is this for real? bbfs???

What is CID?

CID=Cum In Deep

It is a reference to creampie activity.

I followed this thread from an Austin one.

If the lady wants to offers BBFS or just CIM that is her business and her clients'. No one should make judgmental comments about what is offered.

Frankly, a little honesty is preferred instead of the wink wink let's not use one and say we did. If someone finds it disgusting that some one BBFS yet offers or wants CIM, you can find some else that offers/wants only CBJs and finds the aforementioned person that wants/offers BBBJ w/ CIM disgusting. Extending that further, you can always find a wife or g/f that finds every single provider and hobbyist on here disgusting for engaging in non-monogamous encounters that endanger not only relationships but the other partners' health even if covers are used for all activities.

It's just a matter of perspective with regards to how people feel about certain activities. Also, some people are trying to be a moral entrepreneurs and considering the audience, that is very ironic and hypocritical.

I always say: Assume that every provider barebacks every client and if you want to be safe cover up. It's the choice of between two consenting adults and no one else.

Frankly, I don't care what YOU do, I care about what I do.

Also, some people are trying to be a moral entrepreneurs and considering the audience, that is very ironic and hypocritical.


Frankly, I don't care what YOU do, I care about what I do. Originally Posted by Skip_8

1. No one said anything about morals. This is all about safety, not morals.

2. You may not care about what I do, but I care about what you do. Because if you have a disease and BBFS a provider before I see her, then there is at least some greater danger of me getting infected, even if I use protection.
In the hobby, the old saying is very true, "No man is an island."

Speaking of hypocrisy, ol Skip didn't feel this way a month ago in another bb thread. I wonder what brought on the change of heart.

I followed this thread from an Austin one.

If the lady wants to offers BBFS or just CIM that is her business and her clients'. No one should make judgmental comments about what is offered.

Frankly, a little honesty is preferred instead of the wink wink let's not use one and say we did. If someone finds it disgusting that some one BBFS yet offers or wants CIM, you can find some else that offers/wants only CBJs and finds the aforementioned person that wants/offers BBBJ w/ CIM disgusting. Extending that further, you can always find a wife or g/f that finds every single provider and hobbyist on here disgusting for engaging in non-monogamous encounters that endanger not only relationships but the other partners' health even if covers are used for all activities.

It's just a matter of perspective with regards to how people feel about certain activities. Also, some people are trying to be a moral entrepreneurs and considering the audience, that is very ironic and hypocritical.

I always say: Assume that every provider barebacks every client and if you want to be safe cover up. It's the choice of between two consenting adults and no one else.

Frankly, I don't care what YOU do, I care about what I do. Originally Posted by Skip_8

I have to disagree. This isn't just about tolerating another's taste or kink. I agree with you that what goes on BCD is BCD, but there are limits to that "don't ask, don't tell" perspective with regards to impacting the safety and well-being of others in your same community.

1. No one said anything about morals. This is all about safety, not morals.

2. You may not care about what I do, but I care about what you do. Because if you have a disease and BBFS a provider before I see her, then there is at least some greater danger of me getting infected, even if I use protection.
In the hobby, the old saying is very true, "No man is an island." Originally Posted by tikkler33

Even if disease wasn't a factor, I'm not visiting someone offering bareback.
It kinda grosses me out thinking that someone elses COVERED dick may have been in the diner on the same day that I'm contemplating DATY.
No way do I want whats left of their creampie too.


(My small effort to lighten the mood around here. )

Speaking of hypocrisy, ol Skip didn't feel this way a month ago in another bb thread. I wonder what brought on the change of heart. Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

thread?

She's offering AMCOYD (another man's cum on you dick)

Even if disease wasn't a factor, I'm not visiting someone offering bareback.
It kinda grosses me out thinking that someone elses COVERED dick may have been in the diner on the same day that I'm contemplating DATY.
No way do I want whats left of their creampie too.


(My small effort to lighten the mood around here. ) Originally Posted by riday

Funny, gross, but pointed. Well done. That is an excellent point.

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=60885 Originally Posted by daarakan

Quote from her above ad:

"BB with CID and CREAMPIE"

This is not a mistake as she claims. No freaking way. She is a BBP!


"I offer some Great FS, BBBJ with CIM and NQNS, PSE, GFE, DOGGIE, COWGIRL, DATY, DP, DFK, BLS, BB with CID and CREAMPIE, GEEEK, and RUSSIAN Experiences. I really just love about about anything sexual, but not into S&M, B&D, or GS."

It's okay to fuck bare back but don't try to spank her.

1. No one said anything about morals. This is all about safety, not morals.

2. You may not care about what I do, but I care about what you do. Because if you have a disease and BBFS a provider before I see her, then there is at least some greater danger of me getting infected, even if I use protection.
In the hobby, the old saying is very true, "No man is an island." Originally Posted by tikkler33

Ah, but the safety and moral issue are intertwined. When some one accuses someone else of engaging in unsafe behavior and putting other people at risk when that person should know better a moral argument is in fact being made. The implication is that a person who is not following the 'rules' by engaging in BBFS is acting immorally.

If it really is about safety then, one should only have one partner and not engage in the hobby, correct?

Invariably some one will offer the argument that the probability of contracting anything from a BBBJ is so low that a BBBJ is safe and worth the risk. Rationalizing a potentially unsafe behavior over another is where we start that slippery slope of picking and choosing what is acceptable in certain people's mind. What's next, seeing providers with bi-curious B/Fs but not ones with Bi-sexual B/Fs?

If you BBFS your faithful wife and she BBFS Sancho you may not know about it until you are pissing razorblades.

Truthfully, you never know who is engaging in BBFS and should always act as if EVERYONE is doing BBFS with everyone else.

Ambiguity aside, let's say this provider in question just announced that she is allowing BBFS.
This begs the question: How long has she been doing BBFS?
I say it is not relevant because one should act as if she was doing BBFS w/ everyone she met.

Let us say that she had she NOT advertised BBFS, either on purpose or my typo, and you saw her (for the sake of discussion) you may have been tempted to BBFS thinking you are the only one. Just for simplicity, let's say you stayed covered. It would not have changed the fact that she was doing BBFS with everyone else, right? Also, it would not have changed the fact that you decided to see her, correct?

However, now that the BBFS is allegedly on the menu and it's out in the open. Don't you feel like you should stay away from said provider because she engages in activities outside your comfort zone? Having made the decision to stay away, you should feel safer. This would only be accomplished if the provider felt she could not honestly put her real services to allow hobbyist such as yourself to make an informed decision.

Tell me, would you rather have the facts or be ignorant of her or any other provider's real menu thinking she only does CFS?

Ah, but the safety and moral issue are intertwined. When some one accuses someone else of engaging in unsafe behavior and putting other people at risk when that person should know better a moral argument is in fact being made. The implication is that a person who is not following the 'rules' by engaging in BBFS is acting immorally.

If it really is about safety then, one should only have one partner and not engage in the hobby, correct?

Invariably some one will offer the argument that the probability of contracting anything from a BBBJ is so low that a BBBJ is safe and worth the risk. Rationalizing a potentially unsafe behavior over another is where we start that slippery slope of picking and choosing what is acceptable in certain people's mind. What's next, seeing providers with bi-curious B/Fs but not ones with Bi-sexual B/Fs?

If you BBFS your faithful wife and she BBFS Sancho you may not know about it until you are pissing razorblades.

Truthfully, you never know who is engaging in BBFS and should always act as if EVERYONE is doing BBFS with everyone else.

Ambiguity aside, let's say this provider in question just announced that she is allowing BBFS.
This begs the question: How long has she been doing BBFS?
I say it is not relevant because one should act as if she was doing BBFS w/ everyone she met.

Let us say that she had she NOT advertised BBFS, either on purpose or my typo, and you saw her (for the sake of discussion) you may have been tempted to BBFS thinking you are the only one. Just for simplicity, let's say you stayed covered. It would not have changed the fact that she was doing BBFS with everyone else, right? Also, it would not have changed the fact that you decided to see her, correct?

However, now that the BBFS is allegedly on the menu and it's out in the open. Don't you feel like you should stay away from said provider because she engages in activities outside your comfort zone? Having made the decision to stay away, you should feel safer. This would only be accomplished if the provider felt she could not honestly put her real services to allow hobbyist such as yourself to make an informed decision.

Tell me, would you rather have the facts or be ignorant of her or any other provider's real menu thinking she only does CFS? Originally Posted by Skip_8

Maybe I am missing your intent, but you seem to arguing for two things:

1) Live and let die, who is anyone to take a higher moral ground with regards to tastes in the hobby?

2) Let's just be quiet about it and assume everyone is doing it and everything will be fine.

So let me ask you this:

Are you really willing to be more tolerant of the kinks of others and advocate quiet observation in all cases?

. . .would you feel the same way about a chronic masturbator?

He has a right to jack-off to his heart's content, but do you want him handling your food without washing his hands? What if his sexuality involves a desire to bareback the hamburger he is making for you before he put's it on your plate?

There are some activities in the hobby world that have a ripple effect.

Some of us that are being more vocal on this issue just want to make sure there is a sign on the employee break room about washing hands, hot water in the sink, and a dispenser of soap made available. It would also be nice if the manager would make sure their employees wash their hands from time to time, and if they did find some freak that was masturbating on the food, that they would take a very public stand about it.

Correct on Point 1.

Point 2, is funny. However, in the hobby we can choose to put a cover on before jumping in. Unfortunately, we don't have that option when eating a burger and digesting the cum-of-some-young-man.