Home Sex & Relationships
At The Mix, we want to make our services as helpful as we can. To do this, we’d love to ask you a few questions about you, your visit to The Mix and its impact. It should take only about 5-10 minutes to complete. Take this survey and get a chance at winning a £200 Amazon voucher​.
Come and join our Support Circle, every Tuesday, 8 - 9:30pm! Sign up here

massage and condoms

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
I want to give my boyfriend a massage tonight when i go over BUT since we're using condoms when we have sex i guess igotta be careful with what i massage him with..??

I obviously havent got time to go out and buy something from ann summers, but he goes away tomorrow so i wanted to do something a little bit different.

can i use like a body moisturiser? or would that have the same effect as baby oil? is there a certain chemical i should be looking out for...??

if not i suppose i should think of some other way... :chin:

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    body moisturisor can work well, as it gets soaked in alot better by the skin+so isn't slimy to the touch afterwards (you wont slip off each other, lol). Also, he gets the added benefit of having smooth skin!!!
    sounds like a plan to me!!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    and that def wont effect the condoms??
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    never has with me before!!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Run a test. Blow up a nodder to the size of a 3 litre bottle of coke; then rub it with the moisturiser. leave for a couple of hours.


    Personally, I would recommend talc
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    some one jus told me it had to be water based....dont suppose many moisturisers are :(
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Personally, I would recommend talc
    was thinking the same thing. stay with a dry massage rather than wet, not as much fun but just to be on the safe side if i were you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Have you considered maybe giving the massage *then* sexual things?
    Plus, with waterbased, they say that for lube, things going on the condom. Moisturizer is fine.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    my_name wrote:
    Have you considered maybe giving the massage *then* sexual things?
    Plus, with waterbased, they say that for lube, things going on the condom. Moisturizer is fine.
    So provided you clean up and wash your hands between the massage and the other, no problem
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So provided you clean up and wash your hands between the massage and the other, no problem


    I ment have a shower inbetween. I forgot to type that part, thought I did.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Anything oil-based can rot latex. If you wash your hands, and don't massage his genitals, then you should be OK, but just be careful.

    Are you on the contraceptive pill? It's normally a good idea for young women to take a secondary form of contraception.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This is the reply I got for pretty much the same question from AskTheSite

    The "test" that Carriage Return suggested isn't a good one since the damage can be microscopic but hopefully they were only joking.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Randomgirl wrote:
    The "test" that Carriage Return suggested isn't a good one since the damage can be microscopic but hopefully they were only joking.
    Air molecules are much smaller than viruses, let alone sperm. If no air gets out over a few hours, The chances of a virus getting through are fairly small - even if it managed to align with a site damaged in that way

    The mechanical stress at the suggested inflation is also quite high, and I would expect it to approximate to the stresses experienced a condom in normal use. (most noticably absent is the constant mechanical action and heat)

    I could be wrong, but I've not knowingly had a condom failure; while pregnancy isn't an issue for me, infection is. I would be interested to discover a sustance that compromises a condom when encountered in trace amounts, but would pass the test I proposed.

    ETA
    Randomgirl wrote:
    This is the reply I got for pretty much the same question from AskTheSite

    My concern with this is to my knowlege polyurethane has only been tested with respect to pregnancy, not STIs. Hmm, perhaps I should AskTheSite
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Air molecules are much smaller than viruses, let alone sperm. If no air gets out over a few hours, The chances of a virus getting through are fairly small - even if it managed to align with a site damaged in that way
    So was she meant to measure the volume of the contents before and after too? Using what exactly? Nothing "household" would provide a sufficient degree of accuracy.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Randomgirl wrote:
    So was she meant to measure the volume of the contents before and after too? Using what exactly?
    it will visibly deflate, if it manages to stay whole - based on tests I performed using only the tip of a 30 gauge needle - holes small enough to pass the water leak test usually caused catastophic failure (4 times), or led to 50% deflation within 1/4 of an hour (once).
    Nothing "household" would provide a sufficient degree of accuracy.
    You are perhaps confusing my quick'n'dirty test with a standard air leak test, which barely inflates the test item (0.1bar - enough to fill it out, but not stretch it), and then looks for pressure changes within one minute - you do need fairly sensitive equipment to do that

    I remain confident in the test as proposed to test wether something is safe to be used in the sex setting, but not as a lubricant.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You are perhaps confusing my quick'n'dirty test with a standard air leak test, which barely inflates the test item (0.1bar - enough to fill it out, but not stretch it), and then looks for pressure changes within one minute - you do need fairly sensitive equipment to do that
    No I'm not confused I'm thinking back to volumetric gas experiments I've done in the chemistry lab at university and the type of analytical equipment I used when I worked in a chemistry lab. I used to be very involved with the accurate measurements of fluid volumes at work, nothing in my house would be able to test for such small volumes. Also you would have to ensure constant room temperature and pressure which in standard non-lab conditions is virtually impossible.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Randomgirl wrote:
    I used to be very involved with the accurate measurements of fluid volumes at work, nothing in my house would be able to test for such small volumes.
    the volumes involved are not small. Any hole large enough to fail the water leak test (considered to be indiciative, but not conclusive) leads to a rapid deflation or catastrophic deflation.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the volumes involved are not small. Any hole large enough to fail the water leak test (considered to be indiciative, but not conclusive) leads to a rapid deflation or catastrophic deflation.
    Not necessarily.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Randomgirl wrote:
    Not necessarily.
    I only had 10 condoms to hand, I puctured 9 of them, leaving one as a control. 4 failed the water leak test, and suffered catastophic failure on inflation, of the reamining 5 that passed the test, 3 suffered catastrophic failure on inflateion, the remaining two suffered at least 50% deflation within 1/4 hour. The control condom did not deflate noticably in 6 hours. The results are made obvious by the stretching that occurs during inflation - which normal air and water leak tests try very hard to avoid.

    It is my firm belief, that a substance, when applied liberally to the surface an inflated condom, fails to weaken that surface to the point of a noticable deflation, wont, when applied in a trace amount (with 99% certainty) won't cause sufficent damage to allow a virus to pass.

    name on substance that will, in trace amounts, cause suffient damage to a condom to make it unsafe, that passes my test.

    I readily acknowlege that I'll get false positives, and that the test isn't 100%, however I assert you're more likely to be infected/impregnated by somthing transfered from the penis to the outside of the condom by the hands putting it on, than by something passing through it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My concern with this is to my knowlege polyurethane has only been tested with respect to pregnancy, not STIs.
    I now understand that the testing they undergo pretty much rules out STIs, but isn't explicity stated to do so.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Randomgirl wrote:
    The "test" that Carriage Return suggested isn't a good one
    While I shall continue to use this method to to determine the safety of novel substances, I must agree with random girl and advise people to ignore the suggestion, as I am not aware of any detailed study that demonstrates it's efficacy or otherwise.
Sign In or Register to comment.