How is this any better than bbfs?

Why is that little tid bit of my post so shocking to you? I might be more careful and practical than you give me credit for. Originally Posted by acp5762

It was not shocking that YOU said it babe...just an obvious factor no one seems to be considering. Contact with cum on the vagina is in no way SAFE on any level!! BBBJ has risks sure, but gimme a break! As I said, if people are engaging in activities like this video, they may as well allow bbfs! Big deal that there is no entry...wtf, the cum is everywhere! Having a weenie in there, would be more safe than having full on cum in you!

here is a good video that shows how you can maintain control with nuru and why size makes it easier http://www.youporn.com/watch/382142/...ch_full&pos=14 Originally Posted by Thatdude

This would be an incredible thing to try with a wife or girlfriend, but no way would I try this in the hobby world and I'd be pretty leery of any provider who offered it.

It was not shocking that YOU said it babe...just an obvious factor no one seems to be considering. Contact with cum on the vagina is in no way SAFE on any level!! BBBJ has risks sure, but gimme a break! As I said, if people are engaging in activities like this video, they may as well allow bbfs! Big deal that there is no entry...wtf, the cum is everywhere! Having a weenie in there, would be more safe than having full on cum in you! Originally Posted by London Rayne

Well that is the risk of having multiple partners. Public Health Depts in every city will supply people with condoms at no cost. Even though Condoms were developed to prevent pregnancy, they are also now, as we all know to thwart the spread of STD's. But keep in mind that there is absolutely no chemical in the manufacturing of condoms that will kill any pathogenic Virus, Bacteria or Fungi that may infect us, they are merely a barrier. The only chemical used in condoms is a Spermacide to reinforce it's contraceptive properties. But there is a new condom in the testing stages that is in liquid form or a gel that has ingredients in the manufacturing process that is designed to kill pathogens that may cause STD's. They are also trying to work in spermacides to prevent pregnancy. This seems to be an amazing product. It is applied in a liquid form once penetration is made it begins to solidify more like a conventional condom. Although this product is still being tested and refined we will see this type of condom in the near future. I would hope and assume it would have a more comfortable and natural feeling unlike most conventional condoms. Enjoy your evening. Take care.

It was not shocking that YOU said it babe...just an obvious factor no one seems to be considering. Contact with cum on the vagina is in no way SAFE on any level!! BBBJ has risks sure, but gimme a break! As I said, if people are engaging in activities like this video, they may as well allow bbfs! Big deal that there is no entry...wtf, the cum is everywhere! Having a weenie in there, would be more safe than having full on cum in you! Originally Posted by London Rayne

OK so I'll play devils advocate here for a minute. Exactly how is cum around (not in) the pussy so much worse and different than cum on your hands, chest, face, ass, mouth, whatever? If the standard is now simple skin contact with semen we might as well all just quit now and watch this industry dry up and blow away.

I have never done this nuru stuff but it does look fun. Plus the video linked is much different than others I have seen. This one is more porn rather than massage oriented.

I have never done this nuru stuff but it does look fun. Plus the video linked is much different than others I have seen. This one is more porn rather than massage oriented. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

That's what I've been saying. He could have stuck his dick up her ass and fucked her, but that doesn't mean that's a mandatory part of nuru. What you do when slippery is up to you.

OK so I'll play devils advocate here for a minute. Exactly how is cum around (not in) the pussy so much worse and different than cum on your hands, chest, face, ass, mouth, whatever? If the standard is now simple skin contact with semen we might as well all just quit now and watch this industry dry up and blow away.

I have never done this nuru stuff but it does look fun. Plus the video linked is much different than others I have seen. This one is more porn rather than massage oriented. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

I am not looking at it from only a skin to skin issue. I offer cim but would never offer this, so there must be something more dangerous about it. It's only one step below a freaking cream pie. My whole point was that if I were to offer this nuru thing, I may as well go ahead and offer full on bbfs, because to me it's just as stupid and risky.

OK so I'll play devils advocate here for a minute. Exactly how is cum around (not in) the pussy so much worse and different than cum on your hands, chest, face, ass, mouth, whatever? If the standard is now simple skin contact with semen we might as well all just quit now and watch this industry dry up and blow away.

I have never done this nuru stuff but it does look fun. Plus the video linked is much different than others I have seen. This one is more porn rather than massage oriented. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

I wasn't going to ever state this but I'll state this to you, cause ya kinda brought it up. As you know advertisments from the Public Health Dept. These are the people who put out information to the public through all media sources about the dangers of unsafe sexual practices. They urge people if you must engage in sexual activity to please wear condoms. Now they can't tell you what Iam about to state because it doesn't encompass a large enough group in the population and people have no proof about a partner they maybe with. The largest group of people who are being reported with STD's are IV drug users, People with tissue wasting diseases, People with Diabetes, Hepatitis, Low White Blood Cell Count, People who have had an STD, People who have had Chemotherapy, Benzene exposure and other industrial chemical exposure. Now Iam not going to candy coat anything and say if someone doesn't fall into any of the above it would be alright to engage in BBFS. But what I will mention is this if someone who does fall into one of the above groups they wouldn't require a high exposure to an STD to manifest the disease, where as someone who doesn't fall into one of the above groups would require a much higher exposure to manifest illness associted with an STD. Although we've all heard about the high risk of IV drug users and AIDS it's not just the fact they are IV drug users but because they often share needles. But since we don't really know our partners it's best to be safe and responsible. But if in the event two healthy individuals who don't fall into the above groups and beyond, happened to engage in bare back intercourse they probably would go unscathed. We have a high STD ocurrance rate in this country because the above groups are extremely high and there are other factors as well. So everyone can be at some risk at some point and time. This industry probably shouldn't exist but it does. Many people engage in it to some degree. It's just best to be aware and be practical in our approach. Now Bann my ass, lol.

Now Bann my ass, lol. Originally Posted by acp5762

You gotta do a lot better than that. Amateur

I offer cim but would never offer this, so there must be something more dangerous about it. It's only one step below a freaking cream pie. Originally Posted by London Rayne

Continuing my devils advocate role.....like what?

My whole point was that if I were to offer this nuru thing, I may as well go ahead and offer full on bbfs, because to me it's just as stupid and risky. Originally Posted by London Rayne

I get your point. I'm asking why you feel it is stupid and risky in light of BBBJ CIM and swallowing.

And I'm not disagreeing with you, trying to get your thought process.

Ok well let us turn it around....would you as guys prefer a bbbj or bbfs in the hobby?


All we ever hear are guys b3tching about cbj vs. bbbj, but we rarely ever find a loon willing to dog a girl for no bbfs now do we? I think I just proved my point.

ACP, I know all the risks associated with any kind of unsafe sex and if I were in another business that did not put me in contact with so many men (whose health I do not know about), it might be a different story. As it stands, I take enough risks due to the amount of men I see, plus the bbbj thing. If I wanted unsafe vaginal sex, I would just go back to being a wanton slut who did it for free lol.

The point of this thread was to ask how is the nuru massage done this way, any safer than bbfs...it is not, and actually it's worse!

Right, but my point is when done without any of that, the juices are still flowing. You don't need to insert the weenie, to catch something ya know. Originally Posted by London Rayne

Why do ya have to call it a weenie, lol. You can say Penis thats what it is.

The point of this thread was to ask how is the nuru massage done this way, any safer than bbfs...it is not, and actually it's worse! Originally Posted by London Rayne

I love how you support this claim. Worse, really? Seems to me you've had your mind made up before you "asked."

I love how you support this claim. Worse, really? Seems to me you've had your mind made up before you "asked." Originally Posted by OneInAMillion

Actually, a monkey could make his mind up after watching that video. It's pretty hard to speculate when you see the evidence right in front of you....an entire "load" of evidence lol. What I did not know and still don't, is if that video represents how it's commonly done in the business.

If cum is literally sprayed all over the vagina even without the pee pee going in, how is putting it in without shooting any worse? Oh, that's right....it's worse for the GUY. I would rather have a bare member inside me where the guy pulls out to nut, vs. having a load of cum inside me! Duh!

My take on this:

NURU massage involves using the slippery stuff to make a body-to-body (B2B) massage much better. The NURU massage does NOT have to include the stripper slide (SS) activity, but in the porn arena it most often does.

Stripper Slide usually consist of bare penis rubbing bare lips of lady. While classic stripper slide is what would be done in a strip club, with lady standing over guy and rubbing the lips of her vaginal opening on the guys penis, variations are done in the hobby. These variations include are sorts of positions where guy's penis and lady's lips are in contact.

In the stripper slide, it is best done with lady well lubricated, either natural or artificially. It can be done without resulting in actual ejaculation, but there is a risk that it might occur. It is also very easy for either accidental or purposely having the penis enter the vagina. The "accident" can be initiated by either party, and how well a lady can prevent it is something I am unable to address.

If you take it to point of ejaculation (even "pre-cum"), then the risk to the lady probably approaches that of BBFS, or of a cream pie risk.

I am not a doctor, but I do understand that there is a theory that enzymes in our saliva and acids in our stomach will kill many pathogens, and thus BBBJ risk is much lower than BBFS. Similar thought process for DATY. However, when ejaculation occurs from the guy onto any other body parts of the lady, if there are cuts or openings (eyes, nose, wounds) then I think the risk is similar. Similarly, cuts in mouth, on hands/fingers, etc. can raise risk (for either party).

I was not involved in the discussions that occurred in this industry when the standard evolved from CBJ to BBBJ. I think this discussion is similar. Right or wrong, enough ladies were willing to go to BBBJs that the industry standard became that. If enough ladies allow greek, it will one day become a normal activity, although physical limitations may prevent that. Same with the dreaded stripper slide. The demand is there, likely supply will have to follow. Until some provider infects a dozen guys via a stripper slide with a STD, it will grow in popularity.

Things to do to reduce risk of Stripper Slides

1. Keep the tip of penis away from opening of vagina. This prevents fluid exchange as well as "accidental" penetration.

2. Avoid having cuts on genital areas. I would guess that shaving down there would increase this risk. (Though a stripper slide against a clean shaven lady's lips improves the feel).

3. Avoid ejaculation by the guy onto the vaginal area.

The interesting thing about many of the activities we engage in here is that I believe the lady is much more at risk, because she is on the receiving end of our ejaculation, than the guys are. Therefore, a lady must decide which activities she is comfortable with, and then deal with the client base that accepts her menu. Some guys may avoid her because she does engage in risky behavior, others will flock to her. If her menu fails to provide a steady number of visitors to meet her marketing plan, then she must either change her menu, change her marketing plan, or change her career.

OK, I love BBBJ. If offered only a CBJ, I would pass. I also love stripper slides. And I probably break all of the rules listed above. But the risk are there, I know that, and I am willing to accept those risk when a lady has that activity on her menu. And based on my meager research, a lot of ladies offer stripper slides, and thus it appears to be a new fad.

Finally, a history note. In days of old, prostitutes would service their customers in the back alleys. The quickie was the norm, MSOG was never considered. Often, a lady would be leaning against the wall, the guy would be pumping away, but the penis was merely gripped between the lady's thighs and never allowed to enter the vaginal cavity. This was done as much to prevent wear & tear on the lady as it was to prevent pregnancy. Perhaps we have come full circle now, maybe a more appropriate name is "THE BACK ALLEY SLIDE."

With all that goopy sliding oil, I would surmise that it's hard for any bodily fluids to maintain enough purity to be effective, in terms of possible infection or impregnation.

Just my assertion. Could be wrong.

Looks fun. Let's try it, London.