My trip to ukraine, and advice on what not to do. What others fail to mention

[KenC]

im guessing not having carnal relations with dirty wimmin would be a better plan.

Sorry neo, in spite of your witty metaphor and your fowl recognition abilities, there is no sure way to determine which women are "dirty" and which are not.  Of course if you lay down with known whores and prostitutes, I would imagine your risks would rise.  But to rely on anything but a quality condom for the girl that might have slept with a dirty needle user just once, is a foolish act.  You can risk your life because of your physic powers if you like but I would not recommend it.  Cover it up until you get the second HIV test.
KenC

[groovlstk]

correction BC, most MEN would not recognise a duck.

Most women i know recognised the difference between a duck and a swan instantly. they can almost always tell who the wives are, who the mistresses are and who the paid escorts or just from first glance.

but you are right, the average guy wouldnt spot a duck if it bit him on the nose.

For Western men visiting Russia or Ukraine this can be especially tricky. Men love the fact that in general the women dress much more provocatively than in the West, but the usual visual and language cues are no help.

[BC]

Of course if you lay down with known whores and prostitutes, I would imagine your risks would rise. 

I wonder which is 'riskier'.. the 'GF' you just met who doesn't care if you use one or the prostitute that insists..

-.. but again here that will get twisted around..

Ok guys.. here's another 'yellow flag'.. If she insists on a condom then she's probably a semi pro or pro...

go figure.. LOL

[neo]

KenC,
I don't disagree with you,

I was merely pointing out that even after the second clear test unprotected sex can be a risky affair if you are in relations with a girl of questionable moral lattitudes. If shes sleeping around after you got the second clear test then she could be putting you at as much risk as if she had something when you met, condoms/tests alone wont protect you from a person who is promiscuous and unfaithful, a girl who treats sex like a recreational activity and jumps into bed with you on the first date is probably more likely to put you at risk than a girl who considers sex part of a long term meaningful relationship, therefore whilst a condom will protect you short term, long term its your partners moral outlook that protects you from further risk.

[KenC]

neo,
Agreed.
KenC

[BC]

KenC,
I don't disagree with you,

I was merely pointing out that even after the second clear test unprotected sex can be a risky affair if you are in relations with a girl of questionable moral lattitudes. If shes sleeping around after you got the second clear test then she could be putting you at as much risk as if she had something when you met, condoms/tests alone wont protect you from a person who is promiscuous and unfaithful, a girl who treats sex like a recreational activity and jumps into bed with you on the first date is probably more likely to put you at risk than a girl who considers sex part of a long term meaningful relationship, therefore whilst a condom will protect you short term, long term its your partners moral outlook that protects you from further risk.

I object!  Irrelevant!!!

In most cases the K1 is long done before any meaningful assessment of 'morality' exists and even still is not a good enough factor to draw sure fire conclusions.

Sounds like one of those which was first, chicken or egg type of thingie.

[SANDRO43]

A free hint to the FSUW interpreters/guides who joined RWD: develop any 'duck-spotting/quack-listening' capabilities of yours to a marketable skill and advertise them: you'll get MANY more WM clients .

[ScottinCrimea]

I object!  Irrelevant!!!

In most cases the K1 is long done before any meaningful assessment of 'morality' exists and even still is not a good enough factor to draw sure fire conclusions.

Sounds like one of those which was first, chicken or egg type of thingie.

It seems most guys here are jumping into bed before any morality issues are discussed, if the woman speaks much English at all and I'm certain AIDS is not a topic brought up with the translator present.  How many men have found out after the sexual adventures and after the K1 is prepared that the woman has had, and continues to have, other boyfriends?  How many have delayed intimacy for the 6 months necessary to have the suggested series of HIV tests?  At least with a local woman you spend more time together, can observe her regular routine and can discuss these issues in a common language. With a long distance relationship you have no idea how she spends her time while you aren't there and who she spends it with.  My opinion has always been that if you aren't willing to take the time to know the woman well, you shouldn't be in this pursuit.

One does have to keep everything in the proper perspective.  The latest HIV rate being reported for Ukraine is 1.6%, so figuring that approximately 1/3 are women, that means maybe one out of every 200 women in Ukraine is HIV positive.  Of these, 80% are due to IV drug use, so if you know the woman is not using IV drugs, we're looking at 1 in 1000 who are HIV positive.  Now you have to understand that this virus is relatively weak and is not so easily transmitted as you might believe.  The male to female transmission rate is 0.3%, meaning on average three of every one thousand episodes of unprotected sex with an HIV positive partner will result in infection.  For female to male transmission, the rate is so low as to be considered rare.  Now add condom use to the mix and the risks are miniscule. There are some reasons why this might be a bit higher, such as concurrent STD's.

So looking at the numbers, the chances that the woman you are having sex with in Ukraine is HIV positive are 1/1000.  The odds you could catch the virus from her, assuming you don't use a condom, are, according to one number, 0.05/1000  (Assuming one event and no high risk behaviors)

We are debating an issue here that is so extremely unlikely that it's hardly worth talking about, other than the fact that should you be so unlucky, the results can be devastating.  There is a much greater possibility that she might become pregnant or that the old geezer might have a coronary event during the process.  Maybe we should focus more on child raising strategies and cardiac disease prevention as ways to moderate the "risk".

[Bart]

Good point, SiC.   All true.

The bigger issue is STDs.  And for that, a condom is a good idea with a girl you are yet committed to.  Not to mention to foil the "shot gun" pregnancies that some FSU women use to snare a western man.

[ScottinCrimea]

Good point, SiC.   All true.

The bigger issue is STDs.  And for that, a condom is a good idea with a girl you are yet committed to.  Not to mention to foil the "shot gun" pregnancies that some FSU women use to snare a western man.

Bart, AIDS IS an STD.

[Bart]

Of course it is. But the data you quoted are in reference to AIDS.

But even at that, and the "low" percentage of contacting AIDS, low percentages mean nothing IF you are the one who contacts AIDS while the vast majority do not.

Use a condom.

[Misha]

Bart well said. It is also true that I won't have a car accident every time I get behind the wheel. I may never have a car accident. Yet, I always wear my seat belt should I ever have one as it will increase my chances of survival. Same logic applies to wearing a condom.