Unfaithfuls less likely to practice safer sex than non-monogamous Individuals

[NinaBrooke]

Hello

Here is an interesting study, that - kind of - founds my experience as well.
I hope I am not starting a "bashing war" , my intent was to show that non-monogamous practitioners are very well aware of STDs and care for their health. Because many , who vote against non-monogamy use the Idea of STDs as a method for arguments .

So I do find it interesting that there finally is some research supportive of the fact that people, who are not monogamous (openly) do indeed cater to such ideas as well, because they have to, based on their lifestyle, and based on agreements on practices of Safe Sex with other people outside of the common dyadic relationship.

I do believe if you hide things you tend to just "split" your mind and not think too much about consequences, because you have a tendency to focus on different things to forget your wrong doing. I might be wrong. It is interesting facts though.

Any thoughts?
Nina

Given the prevalence and harm of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), there is a need to examine safer sex strategies in the context of romantic relationships and extradyadic sexual encounters. Sexual infidelity is associated with a variety of detrimental psychosocial outcomes; however, little research has addressed the sexual health ramifications of sexually unfaithful partners and members of other high-risk nonmonogamous lifestyles.

Aims.  To determine whether sexually unfaithful individuals or “negotiated nonmonogamous” individuals are more likely to engage in sexual health risk reduction behaviors during extradyadic encounters and with their primary partner.

Method.  Data were collected via an anonymous Internet-based study. Several hundred sexually unfaithful individuals and individuals with a negotiated nonmonogamy agreement completed a sexual health questionnaire.

Main Outcomes Measures.  Self-reported measures of risk reduction behaviors within the primary relationship and risk reduction behaviors during the extradyadic encounter were assessed.

Results.  Sexually unfaithful participants demonstrated significantly lower rates of protective sexual health behaviors both within their primary partnerships and during their extradyadic sexual encounters. Sexually unfaithful participants were also less likely to engage in frequent STI testing, and less likely to discuss safer sex concerns with new partners.

Conclusions.  These data add to the literature on the negative effects of sexual unfaithfulness. Understanding rates of nonengagement in safer sex strategies will be helpful to those who lead efforts to increase condom use and other preventive STI measures.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...712.x/abstract

[Guest121613]

OK, i must add some thoughts, I think the study is correct. There were fancy terms for cheating husband, and a footloose and fancy free man, because the technical terms are too technical, even for me. I appreciate your position on staying neutral and applaud you Nina, I am not quite at your level.

The cheating husband has had unprotected sex routinely with their SO, and so it is habit forming. I can offer my own experience, about 2000 sex acts with SO, to 25 sex acts with about 10 separate individuals. To be honest, I really have to concentrate to stay safe. I step into oral risk of STDs with BBBJ and DATY, so I am not sure if that is considered unsafe in the study. I am considering not doing BBBJ and DATY as I think is risky.

A big negative I am seeing as the cheating husband, I am good at covering tracks, which leads to thinking if I got a sore throat from bad DATY, would I be able to cover my tracks? The cheating husband may feel invincibility, and not worry enough about bringing something home

The cheating husbands motivation to say safe is not to get caught may not be all true. A high percentage of cheating husbands will not want to bring something home to get caught, but for some who may not be getting anything at home, that motivation may dissipate.

For footloose and fancy free, (FFF), he has been more habitual practicer of safe sex in his sex life. I would think FFF would still have BBBJ and do DATY, but I am not sure, and can't really speak from experience.

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by lostforkate

I appreciate your position on staying neutral and applaud you Nina, I am not quite at your level.

Oh gosh, I wish I was at "my level" 24/7 ... (twinkle twinkle...)

Originally Posted by lostforkate

The cheating husband has had unprotected sex routinely with their SO, and so it is habit forming.

Maybe, I am sure that is a great point. But, on the other hand, so do non-monogamous people. Usually they have safe - sex agreements based on certain standards, and primary partners hardly ever have protected sex. Aside from the pleasure based selfishness I sometimes see in men, not so much in women, so to speak ..... there is also something else to be seen as an interesting aspect for discussion in the mix. I assume you could put in place some kind of self punishment or revenge on the partner also subconsciousness-wise as a valid point in a hypothetical discussion. You tend to engage in behaviour of Self punishment with the idea, that if you catch an STD while doing so, you get the punishment you deserve - being the true evil that you are, even desiring what you desire in the first place (based on sex negativity).

This is based on the puritan Idea of sex being only acceptable in some ways - as a loving ground between two openly involved people.

Then, also the Idea of revenge on a partner that might possibly be acting cold at periods of time and "forcing" the cheater to act the way he does to establish an emotional and satisfactory balance. It`s also a catholic influenced Idea of "oh if you get AIDS, it`s because god punishes you for your promiscuity". The Idea of self humiliating and punishing partners (wife and the lover or mistress) is indeed an interesting one.

In many cheating cultures it is seen as worse if you are - for example - a woman affiliated with a married man, then if you are a married man that betrays his wife. So, the idea is, that the innocent married man would not engage in this behaviour, had the oh so evil snake of a mistress not let it happen or seduced him. So, the humiliation part considering a lack of transparency on STDs and carefulness serves also as a psychological way to punish the mistress by intentionally doing harm to her.

Another Idea is of course the patriarchal aspect of men always wanting to have unprotected sex, because hardly ever are they forced to act responsible since centuries. If a woman gets pregnant, who cares? It`s the Idea that a "good woman" does not engage in sex with many men, which pushes the idea that a married man is not at risk of STDs.

Interesting would be on aspects why monogamous women engage in unprotected sex with more than one person and do not tell. Female Submissiveness? The puritan ideal of being a good woman and also , once you ask for protection you might admit to not "doing it" with only this person, even if he`s married? I assume this could be one of many aspects. I`d be curious to discuss that.
An aspect that comes into my mind is the Idea of birth control: Many women take the pill or whatever (I don`t anymore thank god, I solely use condoms ... lol) to wave the men of any responsibility to even remotely think before they use their precious alter ego (cock) to pleasure women..

(I always get angry when I enter a long term relationship and someone indeed asks me why I can`t take the pill. I always answer that the side effects of the pill are way worse than the side effects of a little rubber glove on a private part )......aside from the notion that men can get sterilized as well)

Openly discussin these things might be tricky, since because people want to have a certain impression on people, they (women as well as men) might not easily admit to engage in unprotected sex and then discuss it openly. Specially monogamous people at some point tend to engage in such a behaviour. But again, also non-monogamous people are not free of flaws.

I certainly in my (private) life had way more "monogamous" or even "monogamously married people" thinking it was ok to try to bargain about the rubber thingie on or off than I had non-monogamous people, who most often did not even ask or complain in the first place.

[Guest121613]

You never cease to amaze me with insightful analysis.

Your response points at a factor I neglected, which is revenge, which I think can be conscious or unconscious. This could be the case more than I originally thought. In my personal example, is not revenge for me, whether against the provider, nor SO, but you did me think, as I would hope to have more character than to hobby for revenge. Though I must admit, I am being selfish.

I still think there is tendency by many non-faithful clients that have an invincibility complex that causes them to be more reckless when they spreading their wild oats.

I do agree with you that there is an impact to puritan and/or catholic upbringing. Clients spend more time suppressing themselves to a puritan, or even catholic upbringing, that once they get liberty, it is harder to control themselves.

Think of the smart reserved kid, with controlling parents, gets to spread their wings in college, and become one of the biggest the party animals on campus. I think this reaction is also present in non-faithful clients.

All in all, it is over-determined, having multiple combinations acting together.

I agree with your position on the pill. My wife was one the pill about 1/2 our marriage, and it is rough in the long term, and there are side effects. I was responsible for about a 1/3 of our time, and 1/6 our time was pro-creation periods.

[Guest121613]

Originally Posted by ninasastri

Another Idea is of course the patriarchal aspect of men always wanting to have unprotected sex, because hardly ever are they forced to act responsible since centuries. If a woman gets pregnant, who cares? It`s the Idea that a "good woman" does not engage in sex with many men, which pushes the idea that a married man is not at risk of STDs.

I wish I could disagree, but I hope this a view current and future societal norms reject.