![gay cum in me no pull out gay cum in me no pull out](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Vps9AdaIRag/maxresdefault.jpg)
653 Berg in press) ‘intentionally seeking or engaging in unprotected anal sex among HIV-positive gay men’ ( Elford et al. Other researchers defined it as: ‘intentional anal sex without a condom with someone other than a primary partner’ ( Mansergh et al. Some researchers chose ‘intentional condomless anal intercourse in HIV-risk contexts’ ( Carballo-Diéguez and Bauermeister 2004, p.1 Suarez and Miller 2001), noting two key elements-intention and risk-that might distinguish the term from other less precise definitions. This attracted the attention of researchers who saw in most cases the need to define the term. Early debates within the gay community focused on the risk of HIV transmission that the practice entailed for both HIV-seroconcordant and serodiscordant partners (see Carballo-Diéguez and Bauermeister 2004, for an earlier review see also Junge 2002). However, by the time Silverstein and Picano published a new edition of the iconic The Joy of Gay Sex in 2003, bareback was defined simply as condomless gay sex. It initially referred to intentional condomless anal intercourse, mainly among HIV-infected gay men ( Gendin 1997). The term ‘bareback’ appeared in the gay press in the mid-1990s. To help focus HIV-prevention efforts, we propose a re-conceptualisation that contextualises risky condomless anal intercourse and distinguishing between behaviours that are intentional and may result in HIV-primary transmission from those that are not. Any identification as barebacker appeared too loose to be of use from a public health prevention perspective. Results showed overall agreement with a basic definition of bareback sex as condomless anal intercourse, but considerable variation on other elements.
![gay cum in me no pull out gay cum in me no pull out](https://66.media.tumblr.com/1367b336df21cf2a97078a9cc7301bae/tumblr_p2tq92ddY41rq74gpo2_r1_400.gif)
Using in-depth, face-to-face interviews with an ethnically diverse sample of 120 HIV infected and uninfected men, mainly gay-identifying, and recruited online in New York City, this study explored respondents’ definitions of bareback sex, the role that intentionality and risk played in those definitions, and whether respondents identified as ‘barebackers’.
![gay cum in me no pull out gay cum in me no pull out](https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2706080/gsb7fi_11guys.1361334346.jpg)
The terms bareback and bareback identity are increasingly being used in academic discourse on HIV/AIDS without clear operationalisation.