Daty be Dammed
Daty be Dammed
- Thread starter Hornybutbroke
- Start date
- Oct 21, 2024
- 719
- 1,314
- 93
- 18
Never come across a dam in Oz and have punted extensively. Had the odd lady who doesn't do Daty full stop but very rare .
- Jun 1, 2024
- 339
- 621
- 93
You would have been better to have quoted s9(1) - rather than misrepresented it - as you have done. Although s9(1) comprises a mere 55 words, these need to be read together for them to give effect to the drafters’ intentions.
Last edited:
- Jun 1, 2024
- 339
- 621
- 93
Another individual who struggles with reading and/or reading comprehension.
By your analysis, kissing, would require mandatory protection.
- Jun 1, 2024
- 339
- 621
- 93
Wrong. Bacterial vaginosis is the name of the condition you are referring to. And, guess what? It is not considered a sexually transmitted condition - although sex can be a causal factor, as can hormonal changes, vaginal ph changes, and various other things.
Last edited:
- Jun 1, 2024
- 339
- 621
- 93
That’s a bit rich coming from you, who clearly doesn’t understand the provisions of the PRA 2003.
What you said about the dam is simply INCORRECT. In NEW ZEALAND, BARRIER protection is legally required for ALL commercial sexual services, including ORAL SEX for both parties. Dental dams are NOT OPTIONAL, they’re part of the legal requirement. This isn’t a debate, it’s LAW. There’s no grey area.
Whether some choose to ignore it or not DOESN’T CHANGE the legal or health risks involved. What happens in the room is entirely up to the worker, her services, and you as a client. We can’t interfere there. So ladies, you are absolutely within your RIGHT to say NO to “no dam” or “no condom” requests and to charge extra if you choose to take that risk. But make no mistake, EVEN IF IT’S A PERSONAL DECISION, IT’S STILL NOT LEGAL. You own the risk. It’s your body, your health, your call, but that does not make it compliant.
ORAL sex can transmit:
Chlamydia, Gonorrhoea, Herpes, Syphilis, HPV (including cancer-linked strains), HIV (lower risk but NOT zero), Hepatitis A, B, and C, Trichomoniasis, and Mycoplasma genitalium.
NEITHER clients, workers, nor brothels can LEGALLY OFFER, REQUEST, or CONFIRM “no dam” or “no condom” services. This includes in ads, online chats, over the phone, or in person. Doing so breaches SECTION 8 OF THE ACT and can result in fines ranging from $2,000 TO $10,000. Asking someone to work unsafely is asking them to risk their health, their licence (if they’re running a business), and their income. If you’re disclosing or confirming that to a client, you’re ALREADY OPERATING ILLEGALLY.
Let’s also be clear. While oral sex carries risk for both parties, WOMEN are often MORE VULNERABLE to infection due to anatomy and how the vaginal environment responds, especially to things like saliva, alcohol, or smoking. CANDIDA, for example (the most common), can easily be triggered this way. If a worker develops it, she often CAN’T WORK, needs treatment, and LOSES INCOME. That’s not just uncomfortable, it’s a BUSINESS DISRUPTION.
And no, don’t assume people in this industry are ignorant. Many of us, particularly those in MANAGEMENT with years of experience supporting workers, have TERTIARY EDUCATION, HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, and LEGAL TRAINING. Plenty of girls, and those who work with them, hold DIPLOMAS, DEGREES, even PhDs outside this industry. For us, this is also a profession, and we run it as such. We expect clients to bring BASIC RESPECT.
If you’re not willing to follow the law or health standards, then you’re NOT THE TYPE OF CLIENT some of us will accept in our premises. And maybe that’s exactly why you’re so bitter, because a lot of girls, especially those with the highest standards, use dams, and maybe that bruises your ego. Can’t handle the idea you won’t get to taste that juicy pussy from an amazing woman? Feeling rejected? Is your ego okay?
PS: Your TONE says more than your point. We’ve seen more STI and STD cases than you’ve probably had clean tests. This isn’t theory, it’s REALITY. Ignoring safety doesn’t make you better. It just shows POOR JUDGEMENT, IGNORANCE, and frankly…
YOUR CAT IS PROBABLY WISER THAN YOU.
COMMON MISTAKE: People think the law only counts “penetration” as just regular sex like penis in vagina or anus. But that’s not true. Under the PRA 2003, oral sex IS legally considered penetration. That means mouth on vulva, penis, or anus, all of it counts.
- Jun 3, 2025
- 161
- 209
- 43
Dude I don't have the patience to read this autistic rant. Can you run it through CGPT and send me the highlights?
- Jun 3, 2025
- 161
- 209
- 43
Cuttjng through all this aspie word salad, once again - the fix is simple. PUT IT IN YOUR BIO (the fact that you keep sidestepping this shows you know that the use of DAMs for a GFE experience is not what is expected as standard GFE service ). And as I said before - I've been fucking girls paid and unpaid since before you were born - never used a DAM, never will. May die of throat cancer but that's my risk to take. I suspect you are on the named list above and have seen your bookings tank as a result. That should tell you all you need to know about who is right here and who is wrong. Now off you pop...
clear enough?
- Sep 11, 2024
- 47
- 76
- 18
Setting aside the law and not wanting to get into that aspect of this debate. Back to dental dams and more the overall concept of services offered and services accepted.
Ladies advertise their services, many if not most offer mutual oral if the service is Full Service. Rarely is there explicit mention in the ad that dental dams are required or not required. The gentleman responds to the ad and makes a booking.
On entering the room services are offered on the ladies terms and accepted or not accepted by the gentleman. Two consenting adults making personal choices. If the lady insists on a dam then that is her choice, the gentleman can agree, or leave. If the lady offers oral services on her without a dam, that is her choice, the gentleman can agree or leave.
I have never had a lady offer oral services and require a dam to be used. I have never had a problem with that or declined on that basis. So if that makes me less wise than my cat, you are probably right.
On a slightly different aspect of this, just contact through touching or kissing carries the risk of passing/receiving contagious or infectious diseases, so if we are on the whole health angle then best to avoid any contact with other humans and live in a world like covid lockdowns and stay the hell away from all other humans.
Hornybutbroke
Man of Culture
- Aug 10, 2024
- 1,880
- 2,056
- 113
. Gotta say this thread is not how I imagined would progress. Learning that there’s potentially lots of legally aware, qualified or couch lawyers out there.
- Jun 1, 2024
- 339
- 621
- 93
Where are you getting your information? You are definitely not getting in front of the PRA 2003, which is silent in these points.
One thing that’s obvious from your rants is your lack of legal qualification.
Obviously, women are free to add conditions/covenants to their services, as they so wish.
Just quit misrepresenting section 9 of the PRA.
Last edited:
- Jun 7, 2024
- 789
- 1,376
- 93
They are correct to the extent that they are saying that the proscribed acts extend beyond anal/vaginal penetration (s 9(1) references "oral penetration").
Whether all forms of oral sex are within the definition of "oral penetration" is yet to be interpreted/adjudicated and somewhat academic given the words after "or another activity".
The post confuses me regardless as noone is arguing that a SW should be forced to do anything. We all agree that what they offer is entirely their decision.
Lastly, the $10k penalty is for owners/operators, a punter's / SW's penalty for breaching the safe sex requirement is capped at $2k for each offense.
Last edited:
- May 29, 2024
- 185
- 344
- 63
This point on TONE surely has to go BOTH WAYS.
Might have to ask MY CAT.
For clarity Section 9 para (1) of the PRA below. Make of it what you will but it's about more than penetration.
A person must not provide or receive commercial sexual services unless he or she has taken all reasonable steps to ensure a prophylactic sheath or other appropriate barrier is used if those services involve vaginal, anal, or oral penetration or another activity with a similar or greater risk of acquiring or transmitting sexually transmissible infections.
9Sex workers and clients must adopt safer sex practices
(1)A person must not provide or receive commercial sexual services unless he or she has taken all reasonable steps to ensure a prophylactic sheath or other appropriate barrier is used if those services involve vaginal, anal, or oral penetration or another activity with a similar or greater risk of acquiring or transmitting sexually transmissible infections.
It’s interesting that Australia across the ditch doesnt have these rules and allows bbbj, ***. Its not like they’re a 3rd world shithole with loose rules
Scientifically the absolute risks from unprotected oral are pretty low
I think women are more likely to blindly follow and obey the rules, so if the law says compulsory dams they’ll just go with it. Same reason why girls are better behaved and compliant at school, followed covid rules etc
Scientifically the absolute risks from unprotected oral are pretty low
I think women are more likely to blindly follow and obey the rules, so if the law says compulsory dams they’ll just go with it. Same reason why girls are better behaved and compliant at school, followed covid rules etc
- Jun 3, 2025
- 161
- 209
- 43
Ok I was loathe to get into his but the industry standard has established (by accepted industry precedent) that "all reasonable steps" amounts to the use of condoms for F2M oral sex, vaginal and anal sex. Unlike your incorrect absolutist reading, there is actually a large grey area of what is considered to fall out side of "reasonable steps" particularly as it pertains to M2F oral sex. I (and almost every other active industry participant) would suggest requiring dam use (for non penetrative / non penetrative m2F oral) is in fact not a "reasonable step".
Indeed, I don't see you advocating for condom use for finger penetration (which is probably actually a good idea given the state of alot of dudes finger nails) but saying it is compulsory and there is no grey area for using the fingerdoms or rubber gloves, and that everyone must do it no questions asked you dirty simps is pretty analogous...
As an aside, punted today and ate delicious raw pussy and loved every minute of it no dam in sight. Loves me that girl juice...
- Jun 7, 2024
- 789
- 1,376
- 93
It's just a copy/paste of the provision along with a plain reading of it, everything after "or another activity" confirms that it's broader than penetration.
- Jun 1, 2024
- 339
- 621
- 93
‘Oral penetration’ is fellatio
Cunnilingus, involves stimulation of the clitoris/labia with the tongue/lips, but, in its usual performance, cannot be considered a penetrative activity.
Last edited:
