Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bbncc5.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!harvard!bbnccv!bbncc5!sdyer
From: sdyer@bbncc5.UUCP (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: Safe Sex
Message-ID: <155@bbncc5.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 28-Nov-85 00:15:03 EST
Article-I.D.: bbncc5.155
Posted: Thu Nov 28 00:15:03 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Dec-85 03:20:29 EST
References: <484@ptsfc.UUCP>
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 24

> My lover and I have been together for over six years. We have a
> completely monogamous relationship - and always have. Before we
> got together, neither of us was what you (or even Mr Falwell (:-))
> could call promiscuous. Neither of us has had a venereal disease,
> hepatitis or amoebas - we seem to have healthy, intact immune
> systems.
> For these reasons, we feel that "sexual activities involving the
> exchange of bodily fluids" are perfectly safe for us. 

Of course, the recommendation to avoid exchanging bodily fluids only
makes sense if either or both haven't been absolutely monogamous for the
past 5 or 6 years.  But even today's good boys and girls might not have
been in such a covetable position for that entire period--if one interprets
the recommendations strictly, even a single "unsafe" sexual experience since
1980 is enough to no longer feel 100% assured.

While I think it's great to be monogamous if that's OK with you two, it's
also pretty obvious that these recommendations are directed towards those
who haven't been practicing monogamy.  And that includes a lot more than
those whom you would call promiscuous.
-- 
/Steve Dyer
{harvard,seismo}!bbnccv!bbncc5!sdyer
sdyer@bbncc5.ARPA