tuscl

BBBJs and antiseptic mouthwash

Electronman
Too much of a good thing is never enough
Tuesday, May 12, 2009 8:40 AM
At the strip clubs that I visit (Detroit area), I'm occasionally offered a BBBJ. I'm very tempted to partake but I worry about STD's from any BB contact, including a BBBJ and especially in a SC. To what extent would I lower the risk of contracting an STD if I asked the dancer to use an antiseptic mouthwash? Are widely available mouthwashes, such as Scope, adequate for the task?

37 comments

  • shadowcat
    •
    15 years ago
    She would probably laugh her ass off! I know I am!
  • skibum609
    •
    15 years ago
    Ask her to gargle with water as they both have the same ability to protect.
  • Philip A. Stein
    •
    15 years ago
    Better yet, have her do several shots of Patron. The tequila won't stop any STD but maybe she'll get drunk and tell you if she has any STDs.
  • Notsosly
    •
    15 years ago
    That's like when I was in HS and a girl tried to tell me that we could do it in a jacuzzi without a condom because the hot water and chlorine killed it all. I laugh at it now, but back then it made complete sense.
  • thedirk444
    •
    15 years ago
    Dude, ever thought about taking a condom with you!
  • how
    •
    15 years ago
    If you "worry about STDs from any BB contact," your answer is simple: glove it.
  • Electronman
    •
    15 years ago
    OK, I'm not showing up at a SC with condoms, mouthwash, surgical masks, antiseptic wipes and a yellow haz mat suit. But what got me thinking about this was the last time I got a BBBJ in a strip club, I watched the dancer swallow and head out into the club where she promptly planted a kiss on the mouth of another customer. I also had a dance from a stripper who obviously loved to have her nipples sucked. I know that I tasted and smelled an antiseptic on her nipples. I didn't ask her if she was cleaning (or disinfecting) between customers, but she might have been for all I know. I don't know about you guys, but, if all else was equal (including STD risk), I would prefer BBBJ over CBJ. Most of us would not be reluctant to ask a stripper to use a condom; why not an antiseptic mouth wash--other than the fact that she'd probably laugh but who knows, customer service goes a long way if the customer is paying.
  • Notsosly
    •
    15 years ago
    You're missing the point... and that is that Antiseptic mouth-wash does NOTHING with regards to protecting you (or her) from STDs. Soooo... don't be silly, wrap that willy!
  • deogol
    •
    15 years ago
    Holy fuck the American education system is screwed!
  • how
    •
    15 years ago
    True dat, deogol. But the mouthwash might have been helpful for that dude who got the post-BBBJTCNQNS kiss!
  • pinu_09
    •
    15 years ago
    Only mouthwash may not be enough ask her also to floss.
  • londonguy
    •
    15 years ago
    Electronman, if you don't feel comfortable having a BBBJ from a stripper then simply decline the offer, personally speaking I don't think I would ever turn an offer down. You are no more likely to pick up an STD from a stripper than from a casual encounter elsewhere.
  • Clubber
    •
    15 years ago
    londonguy, I'm not of a math major, but wouldn't the odds be 50/50? Either you do or you don't catch something.
  • deogol
    •
    15 years ago
    Between a chick who swallows the load of ten guys and a chick who swallows the load of a hundred guys - you think the odds are 50/50? Stay away from the lottery and casino!
  • gk
    •
    15 years ago
    If you don't like or prepare for the hazards, get out of the hobby.
  • how
    •
    15 years ago
    Clubber, your statistics (odds) could use some work. No math major, indeed! Just because there are two outcomes (you do or you don't catch something), does not lead to 50/50 odds. One could set up the two-outcome scenario for anything: You do or you do not win the lottery, for example. Your odds of catching an STD increase with the increased number of partners you take, and the number of partners those partners have taken... The riskiness of the sexual activity with those partners is the other major factor.
  • londonguy
    •
    15 years ago
    Clubber, how is bang on target with his reply. You just have to decide if it's worth running the risk.
  • Clubber
    •
    15 years ago
    I know how odds work, it is just that in any single event such as was stated, you either do or do not catch something. It is as simple as that. I think I should have replaced "odds" with "chance".
  • wallanon
    •
    15 years ago
    Since it was mentioned, an oldie but goodie: Kissing an "extras" dancer on the mouth is worthy of its own thread, but to any rookies reading around here...just use common sense before you do it. If you do it. For Electro's question: A typical rubbing alcohol has concentrations of isopropyl alcohol around 60-70%. With minimal digging online, you'll start to run across discussion threads and some official sources on the virtues of isopropyl alcohol with respect to bacterial and viral disease causing agents. A typical commercial hand sanitizer contains 60% and up of ethyl alcohol, not isopropyl alcohol, but isopropyl alcohol sanitizers can be purchased (just not as easily). Medical grade sanitizing gels tend to use isopropyl alcohol. There is less information available online for the effectiveness of ethyl alcohol in deactivating disease causing agents. Do enough digging if you're truly interested in that and maybe something will turn up, or at least point you to more reliable information you can obtain offline. Electronman asked about mouthwash, so what's with all the chatter on hand sanitizer? Something like Listerine contains between 20-30% alcohol. If Wikipedia is to be believed, it is an ethyl alcohol mixture. Typical disinfectant mixtures formulated for use on skin are more than double that. If feeling adventurous, there are numerous online guides to mixing homemade sanitizer blends with the alcohol of choice. Does this answer the question no, but it hints at something an interested person could do to track down more reliable information. If a person considering or engaging in high risk behavior asks a legitimate question, I for one am glad to see it because having better information around improves the hobby for all of us. Accepting the risks is certainly part of the process. Getting the most out of the limited number of tools available that are practical to use OTR is even better.
  • Dougster
    •
    15 years ago
    The antiseptic mouthwash would probably do a decent job of killing a good percentage of the existing bacteria, but as new saliva was produced, which would happen rather rapidly, new bacteria would come onto the scene. A similar thing with viruses which make up the nastier STDs. Clubber: 50-50 chance? Man you are one dumb fuck, aren't you? Might want to get at least a high school level in mathematics before you blather on here.
  • Clubber
    •
    15 years ago
    Dougster, Yes, 50-50 CHANCE, not odds! In case you are so ignorant that you do not know, the "chance" and "odds" of a single event happening, are NOT the same thing. Odds are a ratio of the likely hood vs. the un-likely hood of that event occurring. No apology needed, as I am sure you were just ignorant of the difference, and of course, calling others names is also a trait of the ignorant.
  • Dougster
    •
    15 years ago
    Clubber: Wow, you are a complete idiot aren't you? As usual rather than just admit you made a mistake you try and weasel your way out of it by BS'ing, talking tough, and hoping no one is going to call you down on your bluff. Problem is, in reality, you just make yourself look dumber and dumber, and, in mathematics, there is no subjectivity so it's easy to prove you are wrong and you can't even hide behind "opinion". Here's a clue: [view link] which shows that "chance" is a synonym for probability. So by saying the chance is "50-50" you are claiming equal probabilities, which is just non-sense in this case. Suggestion to you: if you have the guts just admit you made a mistake here, that's really the best course. Unfortunately, I know you are way too insecure, not mention dumb to admit that, so I know you are just going to bury yourself deeper on this while I will be here LMFAO.
  • Electronman
    •
    15 years ago
    Thanks to Wallanon for a thoughtful reply to my initial question. I did some searching on Google Scholar and MedLine but I did not find an adequate answer to my question. I also posted this question on [view link] and I'm waiting for a reply, hopefully from a physician who can explain germ theory and STD transmission. If any of the TUSCL readers have a suggestion for reliable web sites for medical information, let me know. There are reasons to suspect that antiseptic mouthwash would have little impact on STD transmission--after all STD's are systemic infections, not just collections of germs on the surface (in this case the mouth of the "giver" of the BBBJ). However, the method by which the STD would be transmitted to the penis has to involve exposure of the penis to the microrganism, probably by infected saliva of the "giver" coming into contact with the permeable membranes of the penis. Thus I would not expect mouthwash to eliminate the STD risk, but, it might temporarily reduce the risk if the mouthwash was strong enough to kill the virus or microrganism. Just for clarity, I know that the mouthwash will not cure the systemic infection-- this means that the infected person will continue to shed microrganism via infected saliva, vaginal secretions sperm, blood, etc. If mouthwash reduces risk, it would only be temporarily until more microrganisms are produces in the saliva. If I get a more definitive answer, I'll post it. And for all those who want to remind me to use a condom--- I know to use a condom and I do -- but if there was a way to greatly reduce the STD transmission risk of a BBBJ, then I'd prefer that over a covered BJ (by the way, using a condom reduces but does not completely eliminate risk of STD transmission via oral sex).
  • Notsosly
    •
    15 years ago
    antiseptic mouthwash doesn't do anything vs. viral STDs (HIV, Herpes) because virii aren't "living" and therefore can't be "killed" by any anti-bacterial/anti-biotic. Personally, those would be the 2 that I would be most worried about, so ya.... It doesn't help at all.
  • Dougster
    •
    15 years ago
    Viruses don't get killed they get inactivated. Alcohol has been shown to be effective in inactivating viruses, so there is a good chance antiseptic mouthwash would inactivate existing viruses in the mouth. Unfortunately, as new saliva was produced, which would happen rather quickly, new, active virus would be the threat.
  • wallanon
    •
    15 years ago
    This really isn't the forum to be offering advisement on this sort of issue, even if we happen to have some closet doctors out there in the peanut gallery. No one has claimed to be one to my knowledge. It is fine to offer opinions and make assertions, but just in case somebody might believe what's being written let's try and be as specific as possible with the statements. It would help readers and participants alike understand where there is agreement in what has been written and where the perspectives differ. As I said in my last post, getting better information out into the world in a way consumers can understand helps us all. Anybody try putting something like this on WebMD or a similar forum? Maybe it's already there? Do the products in question contain alcohol or not? What type of alcohol, or if there is a substitute what is it? What is the chemical concentration we're talking about? What are the known effects of that chemical on the disease causing agents, and what is the context? If we're going to go this route, being clear and specific (and as factual as possible) is the responsible thing to do.
  • Clubber
    •
    15 years ago
    wikipedia! A wonderful "source" that all of science uses! No need to do anything other than check wikipedia. I think the astronauts, as I type, are checking wikipedia under "Hubble repair"! I would imagine that someone that counts on wikipedia for a fact, also thinks EVERYTHING on the internet is fact! No need to waste time on those ignorant ones!
  • Dougster
    •
    15 years ago
    As predicted, rather than just admit he is wrong idiot clubber digs himself deeper and deeper. Don't like wikipedia (even though it 100x times smarter than you)? Fine, how about Webster itself: [view link] "probability... synonyms chance..." IDIOT CLUBBER LOSES AGAIN!
  • wallanon
    •
    15 years ago
    If you look on the back of a bottle of Listerine for its alcohol content, it says "alcohol". Not particularly helpful. Their website says the same thing. Several sources around say it's the industrial grade castoff from refineries that also produce the alcohol found in commercial beverages. That's why alcoholics drink it. That also implies ethanol, but Wikipedia was the first reference that specifically mentioned ethyl alcohol. Since it was a quick search to flesh out roughly how to go about answering some of the questions posed above, it was good enough (and mentioned by name so that if somebody cared to question it as a reference they could do so). This is the type of topic better served by informed thought rather than imagination and assumption.
  • Clubber
    •
    15 years ago
    Dougster is one of those that never open their mouths without subtracting from the sum of human knowledge.
  • StripperLuv
    •
    15 years ago
    THIS IS THE MOST HILARIOUS SHIT I EVER READ!!! I KNOW & GOD KNOWS THERE'S STRIPPERS THAT BELIEVE THIS SHIT!!!! OMG LMFAO
  • judyjudy
    •
    15 years ago
    what is a bbbj and a cbj stand for?
  • txtittyfan
    •
    15 years ago
    Judyjudy, you must be kidding. If not, I will gladly me you at your work for training. Regarding the answers on probability, the probability is not 50/50 as stated by clubber. The probability factor only comes into play if you do it, and then there are conditional probabilities depending on the providers cleanliness and frequency among other factors. I am always amazed at how bsaic requests for info sometimes turn into name calling. This site s/b for an exchange of info not personal attacks.
  • JerseyJack
    •
    15 years ago
    judyjudy - As a new dancer (judging from your profile), you might want to consider getting acquainted with the TUSCL glossary (see the link in the menu at the top of each page). BBBJ - Bare Back Blow Job. BJ sans condom. CBJ - Covered BJ. BJ with condom.
  • wallanon
    •
    15 years ago
    Oh no, new judy found this thread? Now she is most definitely not going to post where she dances...
  • JerseyJack
    •
    15 years ago
    wallanon - looks like Michigan. click on her name, see her review.
  • wallanon
    •
    15 years ago
    Thanks, JJ. Techman was asking in another thread. That one's still on the front page...not really something you need to dig for, though.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion