Talk:Bareback (sexual act)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Name of article

I had doubts that the article should be titled "bareback" instead of sex without a condom or unprotected sex. It seems, though, that the term "bareback" is accepted internationally as a term for this practice, as evidenced by the Wikipedia articles called "bareback" in other languages". I know this is no solid evidence of use, but it does establish that this is a leading candidate for naming the practice. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:33, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, the topic of sex without a condom or unprotected sex is already covered at the Safe sex article; the term unprotected sex currently redirects there. I know that the Bareback (sex) article is specifically about sex without a condom, but the term bareback or bareback sex, as indicated by the Bareback (sex) article, especially refers to gay culture (this is seen by thoroughly researching the terms); it especially refers to a male engaging in anal sex with another male without use of a condom; that's why I reverted you here at the Safe sex article. Flyer22 (talk) 21:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Flyer22 That's cool for now. This article can go in one of two ways - it can become more gay, and talk about the gay culture of sex without a condom, or it can become more of an article on unprotected sex and could actually be moved to unprotected sex which is a redirect now. Right now, the sourcing is not strong in this article for either direction. It is my opinion that the article safe sex does not have good coverage on the concept of consciously foregoing the use of condoms, so if this becomes a gay article, then I think that this article should lock out discussion of heterosexual sex without a condom. I am looking right now at the article on Truvada and among the applications for the drug are higher-risk heterosexual sex. It seems that Wikipedia does not currently have discussion of straight sex without a condom. Should there be a sex without condom use article, or should that concept go to unprotected sex which in turn goes to safe sex? None of this needs to be sorted now - I am just thinking. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

• @Bluerasberry: I'd personally prefer a "sex without a condom" article.. I'd rather not use the term "unprotected sex" when referring to sex without a condom because "unprotected sex" implies that condoms are the only way to protect yourself when having sex. However, birth control protects against pregnancy, PREP protects against HIV, and there are vaccinations that protect against STIs. The CDC stopped using the term "unprotected sex" when referring to sex without a condom for these reasons [1]. Prcc27 (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, for what I mean about the term bareback especially referring to gay culture, see this regular Google "Bareback" link, this regular Google "Bareback sex" link, and this Google Books "Bareback sex" link. I used the "Bareback" search on Google Books as well, but that mostly pulled up the horse riding aspect to the term.

As for sorting the article content... Well, the Bareback (sex) article is already very gay; the only heterosexual content in the article is regulated to the small Heterosexual bareback section and the decent-sized (but unsourced) Fluid bonding section. I understand what you mean about having this article focus exclusively on gay culture; we can then point readers to the Safe sex article for more detail on sex without a condom, such as sex without a condom among heterosexuals. The Safe sex article thoroughly addresses sex without a condom; this naturally includes heterosexuals since heterosexuals are believed to be the majority sexual orientation (though some sources speculate that the vast majority of people are bisexual and choose the heterosexual label because of heteronormativity). Either way, heterosexual sexual activity, according to various research data, is the most prevalent sexual activity. And when safe sex material is talking about birth control, it is even easier to assume that the content is not excluding heterosexuals. As Prcc27 knows, I am not keen on unnecessary WP:Spinout articles, and creating a Sex without a condom or Unprotected sex article would be unnecessary WP:Content forking. When people or the literature on safe sex state "safe sex" or "unprotected sex," they usually mean "make sure that you are having sex with a condom." And then there are the alternative safe sex methods, which, of course, are also addressed in the Safe sex article. We don't need, and should not have, more than one article for the same thing or what is generally the same thing. The WP:Content forking guideline is clear on that. This is similar to the recent discussion you and I had at the Domestic violence article. We discuss alternative terms in the one article. So I think that "sex without a condom" information you are looking to include should be added to the Safe sex article. That article should also include information on gay male content, which it already does, but for content particularly focusing on sex (especially anal sex) without a condom among gay males or men who have sex with men, we should point to the Bareback (sex) article. We can include a brief mention of heterosexual bareback sex in the Bareback (sex) article, but the vast majority of WP:Due weight for that term should go to gay male culture. And, yes, the Bareback (sex) article currently needs significant fixing up. Flyer22 (talk) 22:46, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

When I see unnecessary WP:Content forking, I am likely to seek a WP:Merge, or get something done about it; I did similarly with the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agender matter. Flyer22 (talk) 22:58, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Flyer22 Thanks for commenting. Your perspective is unexpected to me and it seems to me to be a solid position which I did not consider, but also, I still find problems with this article. I am not sure if I will have any ideas about changing anything so I think I will leave this.

The biggest problem that I see is that sex without a condom has one article for straight people, transgender people, and some men who have sex with men - Safe sex - and another article for participants in Western gay male culture - Bareback (sex). From the perspective of "sex without a condom" it might seem like Wikipedia has two articles covering the topic of sex without a condom. If the perspective is that "bareback sex" is a cultural phenomenon then it could be distinct from the concept of "safe sex". I am not sure here - I want to think for a while. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:12, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Bluerasberry (last time pinging you to this discussion via WP:Echo because I assume that you will check back here if you want to read replies), I'm not sure how I've surprised you, but I clearly agree that we shouldn't have two articles on what is essentially the same thing. The bareback sex aspect, however, is not essentially the same thing as the topic of safe sex; this is because, like I stated above (with sources to support it), it (or rather the term) is usually specific to gay male culture. Gay male culture includes men who have sex with men, and bareback sex therefore includes men who have sex with men (the Bareback (sex) article mentions them). Gay often means any same-sex sexual attraction or same-sex sexual activity in the literature. Bareback sex is a WP:Notable topic in its own right and the sources I pointed to above can be used to build a decent article, a WP:Good or a WP:Featured article on the matter. There is no aspect of safe sex, or bareback sex, that requires articles about those topics among heterosexuals, lesbians or transgender people. Transgender people usually identify as male/man or as female/woman, and as heterosexual, gay or lesbian, by the way. Yes, some of the aspects mentioned in the Safe sex article apply to lesbians or other women who have sex with women as well, especially dental dams. But as noted in the Dental dam and Lesbian sexual practices articles, even though dental dams are commonly advertised to lesbians and other women who have sex with women as a safe sex method, they generally do not use dental dams for safe sex. In fact, as somewhat noted in the Health risks section of the Lesbian sexual practices article, lesbians and other women who have sex with women often think that they don't need to practice safe sex because of the literature often showing that they are less, or significantly less, at risk for STIs than people of other sexual orientations/gender combinations. I'll add more to the last paragraph of that section at some point. Flyer22 (talk) 20:25, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Also, no need to ping me to this talk page since it's on my WP:Watchlist. Flyer22 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Fluid bonding

Does anyone have any sources they would like to add to this section of the article? If not, I'd like to remove it altogether. --Amlz (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Amlz I removed it because there are no sources. Thanks for signalling the problem. Blue Rasberry (talk) 10:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Propose to remove heterosexual section

There are two sources in the heterosexual bareback section. The about.com source is inappropriate and the pinknews source is very week. I think the concept here is male to male sex. Does anyone have an opinion about removing this section? Deisenbe you just added some text here. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

But I thought the article was also about sex without a condom. Prcc27 (talk) 23:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Prcc27 See the section above, "name of the article". The sources being cited are all about gay sex. Almost every use of the word "bareback" for sex is talking about gay sex. Right now, Wikipedia does not have a general article for "sex without a condom". It has this one, that only cites sources about gay sex, and it has the "safe sex" article which presents the concept of sex with and without a condom.

I am not sure what the existing sources cover - definitely for bareback they cover gay sex, but I am not sure what special name, if any, is given to non-gay sex without a condom. I am not sure what is best - what do you think? Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

• Well we can always replace the pinknews source with something more reliable. And that source deals with male to male sex as well so even if this article only deals with that it should still remain on the article. The about.com source is used elsewhere in the article as well. Prcc27 (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with covering the heterosexual aspect in this article, since the term bareback sex, while usually referring to gay male sex, is not solely restricted to gay male sex. We cover alternative definitions and aspects in our Wikipedia articles; this is one such case.

Having a "sex without a condom" article was already discussed in the #Name of article section above. The Safe sex and Bareback (sex) articles are the articles that address that topic; per WP:Redundant fork, we don't need yet another article about sex without a condom. And since I don't feel like repeating myself on all of that, anyone wanting to know my arguments on it should read the "Name of article" discussion above. Also, remember that you don't need to WP:Ping me to this talk page; it's clearly on my WP:Watchlist. Flyer22 (talk) 05:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Prcc27 and Flyer - Right now there are no sources presented which use the term "bareback" to mean heterosexual sex. I am not ideologically against including that term here, but for Wikipedia to present the term in that way, there should be some sources cited also using the term in that way. I looked through Google and Google scholar. There is the pinknews source already cited, which is not a good source, and I found these:

• Slantist
• Jezebel
• Postivelite this source considers using it for straight people, then suggests it is not the right word

The first two sources are incidental mentions and are not consciously considering or defining the term bareback. What other sources exist which present the term to mean heterosexual encounters? What are the best sources? Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

If WP:Reliable sources mention the term bareback sex, or discuss its concept, with regard to heterosexuality, that can be included in this article; that is my point. Right now, the section in question has two sources. About.com's reliability is a case-by-case matter, going by the archives on it at the WP:Reliable sources noticeboard and the WP:BLP noticeboard; see here and here. And PinkNews, while not a scholarly source or good source for this topic (unless specifically about cultural issues), passes as a WP:Reliable source.

If you look at the first source currently in the article, it doesn't define bareback sex with regard to sexual orientation. If you look at this 2010 Handbook of Sexuality, Health and Rights source, from Routledge, pages 391-400, you'll see that while the source is clear that the term bareback sex usually refers to condomless sexual activity between men, especially when it's anal sex (penile-anal), its definition varies in the gay/bisexual/MSM community; some in the community think it means any sexual activity, including vaginal penetration, without a condom. This 2013 Sex as Crime? source, from Routledge, page 158, relays, "It is worth stating here that extreme bareback sex is also popular in the heterosexual community where it has been applied to describe any type of penetrative sex without the use of a condom." The source goes on to assert that the term bareback sex is understood by many people, and to continue its discussion of bareback sex between men. Flyer22 (talk) 17:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Lack of images

The article lacks any images. I think it would be appropriate to add at least two visual illustrations given the current length of the article.80.188.7.84 (talk) 20:10, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Bareback and pre-condom have two different distinct meanings

Neither the article nor the talk section make this clear.

Bareback gay pornography was standard in "pre-condom" films.

No, it wasn't - pre-condom films just didn't use condoms. Standard for the time. 'Bareback' implies (or specifically means) a deliberate choice in post-HIV times not to use a condom.

Cannonmc (talk) 14:16, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Cannonmc, what are you requesting the article to say? And do you have a WP:Reliable source for it? Also, no need to WP:Ping me if you reply since this article is on my watchlist. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:24, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

I was trying to say that 'bareback' and 'pre-condom' in gay porn are not synonymous. Before condoms became (almost) mandatory in adult movies, there was no such thing as 'pre-condom' or 'bareback', there was just porn. In recent years there has become a distinct genre of porn where people have chosen to have sex 'bareback' despite any consequences and some people prefer to watch that.

I just think it is misleading to equate the two Cannonmc (talk) 22:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)