how do you really feel ? do you want it listed  in reviews now?  do you think this will help  or hurt TER? just reads some providers thread they are not happy at all thinking of delisting  themselves.....I can now see providers not encourging reviews  and if they get one of these black eyes  real or fake  not going to be good  for biz.....IMHO but maybe you guys feel different  also heard there is a new owner on the scene  and this could be why the new changes.....I also heard its a done deal  so we have no say  girls wanted to start a  movement against this but again this  is a manly site we are just here for them.... kinda like Christmas decorations no real purpose just to look good

I just don't think it's a great idea to put so much detail out there...  hard to believe this "new owner" wouldnt take into consideration what the girls feel.. we play a big role on here just as much as the guys... there are lots of great providers that without them this site wouldn't exist in the way that it does now. sigh... I hope that its not listed in our reviews...

but yes I want it listed in reviews. I feel like that allows me to make a more well informed choice on who I see as a client or not. Prior to setting a date I check out the reviews that my potential date has written and If I were to notice in his reviews that he is doing bbfs I will not be seeing him as a client.

Just that extra piece of info (bbfs) well help providers make a safer decision when it comes to seeing clients or not. At this time we are still in the dark. We all know whether or not TER decides to include it , it will still be going on. But at least if TER decides to include it we can make a better decision.
Its my body and I should have the right to know exactly, who I will be sharing my body with has been doing.

Also, I do understand there is the whole thing about guys writing fake reviews and saying she does bbfs when she actually doesn't.

Perhaps if TER makes a decision saying that reviews can only include BBFS if written by your true handle.

What if he never mentions it in his review? He doesn't mention he did cover up but he doesn't mention he did BBFS either. I think you ladies are going to have a lot harder time trying to screen clients now. Maybe I have been being naive when reading reviews and thinking that if it is not mentioned that the cover was being used. How do you ladies plan on dealing with that now? What if he is one of the good guys and actually uses a cover when he is with a provider known for BBFS? Is he going to get to see you? Pretty hard to say he did or didn't so I think he is not going to get to see you lovely ladies. That's fine by me. The safer you can keep yourself the safer your going to be for me too see.

we have a front row seat to this train it will either derail into a trainwreck or stay on track....I do agree with Krista on one point if it is allowed  no allis should be allowed  own up to it you want it you got it on both ends.....there is  now going to be a lot of  we can do it but promise me you will not write it into review  but you can pay me more for it  kinda crap going on  who in their right mind will amit to it ???? Oh yeah that guy who wrote he made me come five times in 1hr will LOL dumb asses will write it or angry men you denied will to hurt your  business  ....well on the bright side we have  now have a board full of he said  she said posters.......popcorn anyone?

Call me stupid, but other than pregnancy, if you are worried about STD's, isn't the risk the same if you do BBBJ, BBBJCIM and DATY compared to BBFS?

See my response from this morning on the GD board. We lost this fight before it was even fought. The decision was made before the subject was posted. My post from this morning:

Reagan I just wanted to let you know that I do agree with what you wrote. I love how you took a quote from TER's website to back up your statement. The purpose of TER is definately INFORMATION.

so let us BE INFORMED....

The bad news Krista is that would only work is there were no ALIAS REVIEWS.

Now all a man has to do is keep writing his regular reviews,  but then create an ALIAS for his BBFS reviews, thereby hidding his regular TER handle.

A lady will not be able to use reviews to screen out BBFS hobbyists.

What a shame.


HalfHour

Reagan, that was a great post. I particularly like your idea of having the BBFS as an item in the profile and then not allowing it in a review if it's not in the profile. I see the malicious false review of a provider who doesn't offer this as the biggest downside to allowing this in reviews, and yours is a simple solution. There would have to be an additional control though. I've turned in a number of problem reports over the years and had things corrected on a provider's profile. That one would have to require agreement by the provider to be changed to guard against the flamers.
I don't have a lot of faith in the accuracy of the profiles on this, since I doubt many will list it even if they offer it. However, if even a few ladies who offer this are willinng to check the box, that will help those who want the service and, to me much more important, help those of us who prefer to stay safe.

actually it is not the same.

A couple years back there was a debate here about percentages and statistic of condom use and the safety it creates. No one could point to actual studies to back up the conflicting claims.

That prompted me to go on an obsessive search to find the actual studies done and read them along with the post study evaluations by the researchers, and then public health officials who cite them, right on up to the Surgeon General.

It took me a few weeks and dozens of hours to track the actual stuff down and then read it. What I found was shocking and disheartening.

FIrst off, I discovered that the common information out there is not correct.i.e. it is simply not what the studies show. WTF??? was my reaction. So them I started researching exactly what different organizations claim and where they got THEIR information.

What I found was like the rancid icing on a stale cake. it seems that what we would consider "credible" resources such a university medical research centers, private and public health organizations were simply passing around the same incorrect information that certain "political" groups were promoting. many times the actual wording was fully plagerized. What's worse is that there was no specific source.

There was one center in DC, the name escapes me, that sounded like a government agency. It was not. It was a private liberal right group. (I;m a liberal, so no insult here.) They had published a pamphlet information on condoms to go with their "give condom to teens" promotion. The info had no sourcing nor reference; yet the exact wording they used was being touted on a half dozen University medical research sites at  accurate information.

In other words, someone just typed it up and sent it out promoting it, repeatedly, and other people just thought it was legit, and repeated it.

That should be surprising. That is something that media, advertising businesses, governments, schools, churches, etc. all do. As people we believe something when we hear it over and over, and we DONT believe something if if doesn't match what we already think. That's human nature; and that's the way of the world.

Now here is the real heart of this story:

I found the studies, and there are not that many. AND....Condoms are not nearly as effective as people think.

The studies (and all the baloney repeat reports ) use the phrase "WHEN PROPERLY USED" as a caveat for condom safety. Yet it's never revealed what that is. I found THAT study on the US GOV site (it was hard to find, and not easy to read, as are most medical studies.)

According to the study that establishes what WHEN PROPERLY USED" means, a man must put on the condom when fully erect, before there is arousal contact with the woman.

You should read that again. No one does that.

Also, if there is a condom change, the man must disengage, wash completely and apply a new condom before re-engaging.

No one does that, either

Here is the kicker: Depending on WHAT disease is being refered to, that being disease that a condom can even stop... They are about 60% effective for disease prevention.

That is just depressing.

For a while after I discovered that, I talked to friend and aquantences about the information at any opportunity and I discovered something else disheartening: no one cared.

No one cares!

It's just how we are as people, I believe. We are bombarded with "facts" and details, of this and that, constantly contridicting the one before or the ones we believe we know to be true. We are presented with minutia that is so meaningless that we grow mentally callous and weary. That doesn't even take into account how we reject information due to our presonal evaluation of the SOURCE of that information, which may not be a correct criteria for factuality.

Hell, if Bailey even bothered to read this far down in one of my verbose posts, she would already have rejected everything I said as an "ear fuck" even if I had some information that was vital to her.  (In this case, I just may. LOL!

Anyway, minutia aside, we are not as safe with condoms as we believe.  Additionally, some of the viruses are moved skin to skin, some disease needs breaks in the skin. More porous tissue (like a colon)can more easily absorb disease. (Think: you cant get drunk by poring a shot of liqour on your body, put you can instantly by putting it in your rectum) Some disease is killed by the chemisrty inside the mouth or by stomach acid but not by vaginal flora (that's why swallowing sperm may do nothing but in the vagina will.)

The passing of disease is very complex and each one has a diffenent route and some are more virulent than others. It's all risky. Everything we can do to be safe is good, but it is an act of FAITH, how much good it actually does.

Right now, the only safe sex is masturbating with each other over web cams.  Hmmm. I wonder if anyne has ever thought of that?

Be safe. Have fun.


HH

That makes it no different than it is now. Its a net zero game currently. We get no information as it stands.

Its my opinion that the TER poll is inflated somehow. Either by votes from people looking to create a fantasy world or by TER. I dont belive BBFS is sought out by 50% of  the population. Personaly I have never had a client even ask.

Thyat being said I am sure it happens. Just an opinion.

Both my email to TER and post on the GD yesterday say that Alias reviews amongst other things must be stopped to help curb the possible abuse.

Not stupid at all   I was thinking  the same thing the other day  so geez I guess everthing is free game nowdays......soon we will be listing  the obits page along with with the  reviews  "rest in Peace" for the  piece of ass  hope it was really really  good.......but then again this all just one big dream fantasy right?  so might as well go out smiling.....

I was getting lost in the Gen board, but feel like you all have a good understanding of the issues.  I love Krista 's comment, its your body and your choice how you want to play, bravo.  Very good post Regan.

I especially am glad to see the alias post questioning the safety between bbbj cim and bbfs.  To me this is huge!!!!

I suspect the bbfs issue is very negative and unwanted from the provider side.  I would like to know from the girls if they are afraid that the hobby will gravitate towards this style, and that they will need to do bbfs to keep up, or risk loosing customers.

I met someone while her style was condom bj and no kissing. We dated and things went well for awhile, but after a year she felt she had to get with the gfe style because she wasn't making enough money to cover her expenses (which were not as expensive as some perceptions of provider income were).  She cited ter and other sites as proof girls have to do this. It was the end of our relationship. She said she would never allow cim, but without a condom sometimes it happens. She was very upset that a review or two would say she did cim. She had very difficult times with getting the reviews pulled via contact with the reviewer and ter.

I see the bbfs issue being the same thing. However, my feathers get ruffled at some of the "scare" tactics; a death sentence,  "Why not allow posts about sex with minors"... both thrown out to compare bbfs to those awful things.

I am in favore of being truthful.  No aliases to hide behind.  Reviews the way people want to post them. If a girl contests the review for a falsehood, get it pulled, but not if its because she doesn't like the ratings, or if the Guy said he didn't have a good time.  Pull a review if she is falsely written for bbbj dfk bbfs anal etc....

So ladies, is this the biggest fear about opening up about bbfs?  The concern of this going mainstream and being expected?

Thank you for sharing your findings.

As a youth I was terrified of getting aids and it stopped me from several fun experiences, which I have later regretted and helped push me into the hobby.

As I got older I wondered about the validity of many of the sex disease "facts", started comparring notes with my other friends and figured out the reported "facts" don't make sense, and are probably being pushed by people with an anti multi partner view.

The quick answer is NO you cannot read provider board but many even from  PHX are thinking about delisting themselves rather than compromise  their business  some do  not want to be on a site that appears to be promoting or at least comparing  the girls that will and will not and are afraid  of this tainting the population in general with STDS .....some are thinking of going backwards to body rubs .... looks  like we might lose some of  our very own  premier providers over this issue......it was incouraging to read TER removed or edited  the bareback  review.... maybe the backlash does have some effect after all

GOOD info thanks so much HH

Thx for the response, I wasn't asking about the provider board.  I will rephrase the question,

To the ladies: why all the significant negative attention to bbfs? I think bbfs is not too much more risky than bbbj cim. Yes your right, there is no legitimate fact for this either way. But the bbfs issue is polarizing.  The arguments about bbfs spreading more disease, being a death sentence and anything else negative one can think of is bunk.

You don't want to do bbfs because you don't want to do it, period. That is a true and very respectable answer.  You will never be able to screen out men and women who do this because not everyone reports, and if they do report, they don't report everything.

Having said that. What is all the fuss about?  I am curious if the reason is because by allowing bbfs on ter, we, as an underground community, are legitimizing bbfs and by doing so more providers will feel like they have to do bbfs to stay in business?   My previous post was about a girl who didn't want to work gfe, but resorted to that because she can't get a different job and she had to make money.

All I can say from my hobby experience and civie experience is that my main goal towards meeting a partner is one who I find physically attractive at a price I am comfortable with. I don't care as much about what service is offered.  Some guys do care and wont see non-gfe girls; apparently there are enough guys in that boat to where just about every girl is gfe these days.  Will that happen with bbfs? I don't know, but maybe that's the real concern, is it?

Hmmmm Interesting....... I know a provider that practices that exact same washing technique with condoms, wow what a shocking coincidence

Posted By: HalfHour

actually it is not the same.

A couple years back there was a debate here about percentages and statistic of condom use and the safety it creates. No one could point to actual studies to back up the conflicting claims.

That prompted me to go on an obsessive search to find the actual studies done and read them along with the post study evaluations by the researchers, and then public health officials who cite them, right on up to the Surgeon General.

It took me a few weeks and dozens of hours to track the actual stuff down and then read it. What I found was shocking and disheartening.

FIrst off, I discovered that the common information out there is not correct.i.e. it is simply not what the studies show. WTF??? was my reaction. So them I started researching exactly what different organizations claim and where they got THEIR information.

What I found was like the rancid icing on a stale cake. it seems that what we would consider "credible" resources such a university medical research centers, private and public health organizations were simply passing around the same incorrect information that certain "political" groups were promoting. many times the actual wording was fully plagerized. What's worse is that there was no specific source.

There was one center in DC, the name escapes me, that sounded like a government agency. It was not. It was a private liberal right group. (I;m a liberal, so no insult here.) They had published a pamphlet information on condoms to go with their "give condom to teens" promotion. The info had no sourcing nor reference; yet the exact wording they used was being touted on a half dozen University medical research sites at  accurate information.

In other words, someone just typed it up and sent it out promoting it, repeatedly, and other people just thought it was legit, and repeated it.

That should be surprising. That is something that media, advertising businesses, governments, schools, churches, etc. all do. As people we believe something when we hear it over and over, and we DONT believe something if if doesn't match what we already think. That's human nature; and that's the way of the world.

Now here is the real heart of this story:

I found the studies, and there are not that many. AND....Condoms are not nearly as effective as people think.

The studies (and all the baloney repeat reports ) use the phrase "WHEN PROPERLY USED" as a caveat for condom safety. Yet it's never revealed what that is. I found THAT study on the US GOV site (it was hard to find, and not easy to read, as are most medical studies.)

According to the study that establishes what WHEN PROPERLY USED" means, a man must put on the condom when fully erect, before there is arousal contact with the woman.

You should read that again. No one does that.

Also, if there is a condom change, the man must disengage, wash completely and apply a new condom before re-engaging.

No one does that, either

Here is the kicker: Depending on WHAT disease is being refered to, that being disease that a condom can even stop... They are about 60% effective for disease prevention.

That is just depressing.

For a while after I discovered that, I talked to friend and aquantences about the information at any opportunity and I discovered something else disheartening: no one cared.

No one cares!

It's just how we are as people, I believe. We are bombarded with "facts" and details, of this and that, constantly contridicting the one before or the ones we believe we know to be true. We are presented with minutia that is so meaningless that we grow mentally callous and weary. That doesn't even take into account how we reject information due to our presonal evaluation of the SOURCE of that information, which may not be a correct criteria for factuality.

Hell, if Bailey even bothered to read this far down in one of my verbose posts, she would already have rejected everything I said as an "ear fuck" even if I had some information that was vital to her.  (In this case, I just may. LOL!

Anyway, minutia aside, we are not as safe with condoms as we believe.  Additionally, some of the viruses are moved skin to skin, some disease needs breaks in the skin. More porous tissue (like a colon)can more easily absorb disease. (Think: you cant get drunk by poring a shot of liqour on your body, put you can instantly by putting it in your rectum) Some disease is killed by the chemisrty inside the mouth or by stomach acid but not by vaginal flora (that's why swallowing sperm may do nothing but in the vagina will.)

The passing of disease is very complex and each one has a diffenent route and some are more virulent than others. It's all risky. Everything we can do to be safe is good, but it is an act of FAITH, how much good it actually does.

Right now, the only safe sex is masturbating with each other over web cams.  Hmmm. I wonder if anyne has ever thought of that?

Be safe. Have fun.


HH