f bi and cndmized or not . . .

About a year ago, I started a thread asking a question on this topic at maxfisch, but almost no one said much. Not sure if that meant that people were being private or if it meant that they just assumed I was a bit dumb to be asking.

But . . .

a year ago . . .

I was reading the blog of a mistress in North America and the mistress was describing one of the first times she had done fb with or of a client.

Anyway, the way I read it, I don't think there were cndms in use at the end for one of the parts. Obviously, I also see clips on the Net and there are plenty of the fb and probably most fb clips on the Net that are without condms.

Anyway, I just began to assume that for most dommes, fb meant a significant part of the session, or all of it, would be without cndm, even though I have read of parties in which it is clear that cndm was used for this type of semi-public session.

Anyway, does anyone wish to confirm my "guess" that most fb sessions are significantly without cndm in a place?

At the same time as it is my guess, there is mistress T who films a lot of her live sessions and includes this type among them . . . and one of her subs threw up partway through the visit! And several of the dommes who post or who have posted at max have or had clips for sale of fb and the clips are pretty obviously, for the most part, without cndms on the guys.

Not trying to start a flame war or trolling . . . not sure if or when any domme might persuade or try to persuade me to do fb but the topic is a little bit mysterious and controversial and so it is fun to learn . . .

z trade, it is controversial and mysterious, and there clearly is not one answer. Some Dommes insist on use of protection against fluid transfers in all instances. Others urge the bottom take his medicine. Mistress Catherine in L.A. once put out a call for stunts to assist Her in teaching Her long term fb sub how to swallow. Mistress Penelope, then in Las Vegas, may have done a similar thing when doing parties with Ms. Venus Divine. If I had to guess, and it would be a guess, of course, many/most Dommes will omit protection when only oral is involved, but not otherwise.

Yes . . . in the blog posting of this particular domme . . . her f b was of several different "types" and the ending was not described explicitly, but by implication, as I understood it to be, oral without protection . . . but maybe I have a mind that takes things a certain way without sufficient evidence.

The domme did not specify things, but what he said was . . . they came together or they came at the same time . . .

at the beginning of her description of the f b part, she says that the sub used his mouth to get the other hard . . . and since people tend to not apply cndm to a soft cock, the implication to me was that there was no . . .

anyway, I am guessing that this domme, for some of her fb, does some of it without protection and I think it seems from videos that there are probably dozens who often do something like that. I suppose I could review some of the mistress t videos . . .

oh, just reviewed some clips . . . if her clips are an indication . . . at least for mistress and bi sessions, some of them are by implication or certainly without protection . . .