question about the danger of anal sex

[blabon]

if the person being bottomed performed enema before the sex, then does it mean that any HIV viral load that
may be inside his rectum is reduced? is there usually a lot of HIV viral load inside the rectum (I am not talking about
the blood vessels or cuts, only the lining)?

[Paxiled]

It seems you're looking to engage in risky sex, meaning without a condom.  Why?  Without getting into scientific articles, just be logical.  Enemas cause more stress on the bowel and intense evacuation, so isn't that just likely to cause some problems in that area for some people?  Obviously, yes.  You also can have no idea if there are no cuts, nor can you know if you're causing cuts during sex.  So again, why are you trying so hard to justify unprotected risky sex?  That's the question you want to ask yourself.

[blabon]

I am not trying to justify unprotected risky sex. I always do protected sex, but a condom can break, and I was just wondering is HIV transmission possible to the person at the top position only if there are cuts and blood is flowing into his penis or are there any other fluids inside the ass that can flow into the penis that doesn't require cuts to exist inside the ass?

[Kirstie_MHModerator]

Hi - your question about enemas prior to anal sex has been fully answered, and evidence has been presented to you.  There is nothing further for our members to say about the risk associated with using enemas prior to anal sex.

********* THREAD CLOSED **********

[CurfewX]

No.  Administering enemas prior to anal sex is actually associated with a higher risk for HIV and STD transmission. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4011986/

[blabon]

but is there a lot of viral load on the lining inside the rectum? let's say there are no cuts. I know there are a lot of blood vessel inside the rectum but if there are no cuts no blood can enter the penis, so why in this case anal sex is dangerous, as there can be no fluid exchange, am I right?

[CurfewX]

You are wrong.  I don't know why you are attempting to argue with the scientific evidence I posted, which is an actual study, instead citing your own amateur theories.  You are welcome to subscribe to whatever absurd theories you like, but I have no interest in debating two vastly unequal sources of information.

Best of luck to you.