Try here. It worked for me.
[url]http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2006/07/hitchens200607[/url]
Printable View
Try here. It worked for me.
[url]http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2006/07/hitchens200607[/url]
Every woman who decides to seek a career in the P4P Industry
should be made to watch [URL='http://m90.org/index.php?id=28384']THIS[/URL]
I was surprised at the advice this lady was giving. The best bj's are ones where the SW does not use their hands or very little. A few years back I got a bbj from this druggie SW named Junie in San Diego. I was limp when and she went hard from the very beginning. This was one of the best bj's I have had. I was also surprised that she did not mention bls.
[QUOTE=Hizark21]I was surprised at the advice this lady was giving. The best bj's are ones where the SW does not use their hands or very little.[/QUOTE]
In [i]your[/i] humble opinion, right?
This tape was about giving head effectively and for a SW "quickly and efficiently" to completion. Used well a hand can feel good, but the girl who can get you off with just her mouth are a rare item.
Not sure if this is the place to post this question... But, here goes:
I have noticed in the past (in movies and real life) that certain ladies will go ahead with a BBBJ, but then insist on a CFS instead of BBFS. Then, some even go further to finish after the CFS with a BBBJCIM.
If they are going to give a BBBJ and maybe even finish with a CIM, what would the reason be for requiring CFS? I am sure it could not be pregnancy.
Van
[QUOTE=VanDriver]If they are going to give a BBBJ and maybe even finish with a CIM, what would the reason be for requiring CFS? I am sure it could not be pregnancy.
Van[/QUOTE]Two thoughts (and a note that I am not a doctor):
1. I have heard it stated that there is some semen in the pre-ejaculate so CFS is suggested to avoid possible pregnancy.
2. The different evironments (mouth vs pussy) to which the penis is exposed. Possible bug/viral transmission/pick-up with vaginal penetration? Versus the mouth, saliva and enzymes, etc. And where the next stop is the stomach, a very acidic evironment. e.g. yeast infections. Is there such a thing as a mouth yeast infection? I may be wrong; just my 0.02 worth.
Eccrawler
I don't mind if the SW uses her hands a little. But I just hate it when they use their hands to pump you when the suck you off for the whole bj.
If you give the girl directions it's not hard at all for me to cum without little or no hands. If she is willing to take directions and has some talent it's really great.
I think using their hands while sucking you off enhances the bj. I think it makes the bj that much better.
Don
[QUOTE=VanDriver]Not sure if this is the place to post this question... But, here goes:
I have noticed in the past (in movies and real life) that certain ladies will go ahead with a BBBJ, but then insist on a CFS instead of BBFS. Then, some even go further to finish after the CFS with a BBBJCIM.
If they are going to give a BBBJ and maybe even finish with a CIM, what would the reason be for requiring CFS? I am sure it could not be pregnancy.
Van[/QUOTE]
Some of them (especially the younger ones) are hung up on the idea that uncovered vaginal penetration can give them AIDS or some other STD but that their saliva will protect them from any of these diseases, so they are willing to take cum in mouth, but some of them gag on it or spit it out. Probably a lot of them believe in "Old Wives Tales".
BBJ is one thing but BBFS is just dumb. There is a some cases of heterosexual HIV infection. But the thing to remember is that with BBFS is that there is a lot of friction so there is a greater likleyhood that blood contact could be made.
[QUOTE=VanDriver]Not sure if this is the place to post this question... But, here goes:
I have noticed in the past (in movies and real life) that certain ladies will go ahead with a BBBJ, but then insist on a CFS instead of BBFS. Then, some even go further to finish after the CFS with a BBBJCIM.
If they are going to give a BBBJ and maybe even finish with a CIM, what would the reason be for requiring CFS? I am sure it could not be pregnancy.
Van[/QUOTE]
CBJ doesn't look good on film. It doesn't test well, and it doesn't sell well either.
The issue is direct blood contact and termperature. With BBJ HIV is not a issue since saliva is involved which has been shown to be a poor medium for transmitting HIV. In fact saliva has been shown to inhibit HIV.
With CFS there is a greater chance of direct blood contact. The chances are fairly low especially when compared to anal sex. But there is still a good number of HIV transmission during CFS.
[QUOTE=Hizark21]The issue is direct blood contact and termperature. With BBJ HIV is not a issue since saliva is involved which has been shown to be a poor medium for transmitting HIV. In fact saliva has been shown to inhibit HIV.
With CFS there is a greater chance of direct blood contact. The chances are fairly low especially when compared to anal sex. But there is still a good number of HIV transmission during CFS.[/QUOTE]
Hizark,
You're preaching to the choir man... I was specifically talking about why there isn't much CBJ represented in film.
Bench
Oral sex can cause throat cancer
* 22:00 09 May 2007
* NewScientist.com news service
* Roxanne Khamsi
People who have had more than five oral-sex partners in their lifetime are 250% more likely to have throat cancer than those who do not have oral sex, a new study suggests.
The researchers believe this is because oral sex may transmit human papillomavirus (HPV), the virus implicated in the majority of cervical cancers.
The new findings should encourage people to consistently use condoms during oral sex as this could protect against HPV, the team says. Other experts say that the results provide more reason for men to receive the new HPV vaccine.
Maura Gillison at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland, US, and colleagues collected blood and saliva samples from the throats of 100 patients diagnosed with cancers of the tonsils or back of the throat. The scientists also took samples from 200 healthy people for comparison.
By combining the blood and saliva samples with antibody molecules, Gillison's team could tell whether a person had ever had an HPV infection.
Cancer traps
All of the study participants provided information about their sexual history, including the number of people with whom they had engaged in oral sex.
After controlling for other risk factors for throat cancer, such as drinking and smoking, the analysis revealed that people who had prior infection with HPV were 32 times as likely to have this cancer as those with no evidence of ever having the virus. And those who tested positive for a particularly aggressive strain of the virus, called HPV-16, were 58 times more likely to have throat cancer.
By comparison, either smoking or drinking increases the risk of such cancer by about threefold.
The throat cancers analysed in the new study mostly started in the "crypts" of the throat – the grooves at the base of the tonsils. This might be because the tonsil grooves trap infectious particles, suggests Mark Stoler of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, US, who was not involved in the study.
High risk levels
The study also revealed a link between oral sex and throat cancer caused by HPV. People who had one to five oral-sex partners in their lifetime had approximately a doubled risk of throat cancer compared with those who never engaged in this activity - and those with more than five oral-sex partners had a 250% increased risk.
There was an even stronger link between oral sex and throat cancers clearly caused by HPV-16 (those tumours that tested positive for the strain). People with more than five oral sex partners had a 750% increased risk of these HPV-16-caused cancers.
"This study is important because it is putting all of the pieces together," says Gillison. "We need to add oral HPV infection to the list of risks for oral cancer," she adds.
Virus vaccine
A vaccine against several of the most aggressive strains of HPV linked to cervical cancer received approval from the US Food and Drug Administration in 2006. However the plan to vaccinate adolescent girls with this vaccine developed by Merck, called Gardasil, has received some criticism.
There have been no studies investigating whether the vaccine can also protect against throat cancer, but the new evidence linking HPV to throat cancer could lead to broader vaccination with Gardasil. "We will see a push for vaccination in men," says Stoler, who has been involved in the development of the vaccine.
Tonsil and throat cancers affect about two in every 100,000 adults in the US. The new results could promote the development of spit tests for HPV infection to help identify people at high risk for these cancers, researchers say.
Journal reference: New England Journal of Medicine (vol 356, p 1944)
Related Articles
* Cervical cancer virus is common in the US
* [url]http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn11265[/url]
* 27 February 2007
* Cervical cancer vaccine should also be given to men
* [url]http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18825215.400[/url]
* 15 October 2005
* Oral sex linked to mouth cancer
* [url]http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4712[/url]