Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

super condoms

totm

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 Fikri

Fikri
  • submissive


  • 4,433 posts


Users Awards

Posted 15 May 2016 - 11:19 PM

source: http://www.dailymail...ympic-team.html

Extra-strong condoms for Aussie Olympic team

 

Sydney (AFP) - Australia's Olympians will be issued with free super-strength condoms in Rio to minimise any infection from the Zika virus, officials said Monday. :flex:

Brazil has been the epicentre of the outbreak of the mosquito-borne disease, which is blamed for birth defects in babies born to women infected with the virus. :help:

While condoms will be available in dispensing machines in the Olympic village, Australia is taking no chances, providing extra protection by supplying their own extra-strong variety "for peace of mind". :shifty:

They have teamed up with manufacturer Starpharma, which says its condoms contain a lubricant that protects against sexually-transmitted diseases and has "near-complete anti-viral protection against Zika virus in laboratory studies". :hug:

"The health and well-being of the team comes first," said the Olympic team's chef de mission Kitty Chiller. :lookaround:

"Our association with Starpharma will provide extra protection for everyone on the team, and is a commonsense approach to a very serious problem we are facing in Rio."

There has been widespread anxiety globally surrounding the threat of Zika, which is rampant in Brazil. :unsure:

As well as causing the birth defect microcephaly in babies born to women infected with the virus, it has also been linked to the rare but serious neurological disorder Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

Last week, the World Health Organisation advised pregnant women not to travel to Rio and urged athletes and visitors to take precautions to avoid infection by Zika. cry.gif

 

 

 

should the athletes just be like idk, BANNED, from having sexual relations during the games?



#2 Daria

Daria

  • 419 posts


Users Awards

Posted 15 May 2016 - 11:34 PM

should the athletes just be like idk, BANNED, from having sexual relations during the games?


That was my initial thought
Shouldn't they be focused on breaking world records in their sport rather than how many ladies they can get into (and how many guys can get into them) lol

#3 Kate

Kate
  • 🐟🐳


  • 7,373 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 03:43 AM

That was my initial thought
Shouldn't they be focused on breaking world records in their sport rather than how many ladies they can get into (and how many guys can get into them) lol

That's ridiculous. Why should they be forced to be celibate during training or competitions? I think practicing safe sex should suffice. 



#4 DonValentino

DonValentino
  • Neocodex Handegg League Champion/Daddy

  • 2,462 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 03:43 AM

You want to make usernames permanent and now you want to ban sex? What the fuck is wrong with you?

#5 Daria

Daria

  • 419 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 03:49 AM

That's ridiculous. Why should they be forced to be celibate during training or competitions? I think practicing safe sex should suffice.

I'm not forcing anyone to be celibate haha don't know where you got that idea from.
Having sex is fun but isn't being the first in the world in something better js haha they are participating in the olympics not in the sex games.
All I'm saying is that sex shouldn't be their priority that's all

#6 Kate

Kate
  • 🐟🐳


  • 7,373 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 03:56 AM

I'm not forcing anyone to be celibate haha don't know where you got that idea from.
Having sex is fun but isn't being the first in the world in something better js haha they are participating in the olympics not in the sex games.
All I'm saying is that sex shouldn't be their priority that's all

I didn't say YOU were doing anything. You made a suggestion and I told you why it's silly. Who says that sex is their priority? Sex is a part of life, they shouldn't have to abstain from it in order to compete. Would a normal person be expected to abstain from sex by their employers to be able to "focus on their work"? Stop taking the discussion so personally and use logic. 



#7 Daria

Daria

  • 419 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 04:08 AM

I didn't say YOU were doing anything. You made a suggestion and I told you why it's silly. Who says that sex is their priority? Sex is a part of life, they shouldn't have to abstain from it in order to compete. Would a normal person be expected to abstain from sex by their employers to be able to "focus on their work"? Stop taking the discussion so personally and use logic. 

replying to what i had said in the way you did made me think thats what you meant thats all. i agree with you that sex is a part of life and the sportsmen and women shouldnt have to cease their sexual relations while they are doing whatever they do. i understand that the condoms were designed for their own safety but to me, the article seemed to make the sportsmen and women like they were sex-crazed because the condoms were designed especially for them. thats where my logic came from and thats why i spoke my PERSONAL opinion. isnt that what someones opinion meant to be? something personal..?

i apologise that i may not sometimes word my sentences properly and things come off a lot more harsh than i intended them to. perhaps i made you think something other than what i actually meant. happens to me a lot and i do apologise 



#8 Kate

Kate
  • 🐟🐳


  • 7,373 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 04:14 AM

replying to what i had said in the way you did made me think thats what you meant thats all. i agree with you that sex is a part of life and the sportsmen and women shouldnt have to cease their sexual relations while they are doing whatever they do. i understand that the condoms were designed for their own safety but to me, the article seemed to make the sportsmen and women like they were sex-crazed because the condoms were designed especially for them. thats where my logic came from and thats why i spoke my PERSONAL opinion. isnt that what someones opinion meant to be? something personal..?

i apologise that i may not sometimes word my sentences properly and things come off a lot more harsh than i intended them to. perhaps i made you think something other than what i actually meant. happens to me a lot and i do apologise 

You don't need to apologize to me. :) You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, I just felt you were taking my response too personally, so I wanted to make sure you understood that this isn't about you, it's about the article. 
I think the issue with your post above is the assumption that the athletes are sex crazed based on an implication that you drew from it. Personally, I don't think that was implied at all, but we are obviously reading the article in different contexts. My point was and remains - that people should practice safe sex and not be required to abstain. That's it. 



#9 jinq

jinq
  • 1,548 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 04:15 AM

good idea but I'd be more worried about safety in Brazil. I hope they are hiring some extra security guards for this.



#10 HiMyNameIsNick

HiMyNameIsNick
  • Shitlord


  • 1,719 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 04:31 AM

 they are participating in the olympics not in the sex games.

 

 

You know nothing about the olympics then :p



#11 Swar

Swar
  • com muito orgulho, com muito amor <3


  • 9,100 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 04:37 AM

good idea but I'd be more worried about safety in Brazil. I hope they are hiring some extra security guards for this.


This. Rio is dangerous as fuck, safe sex should be the least of their worries :p

#12 Tammy

Tammy
  • 430 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 05:46 AM

I'm surprised that they went ahead and let Rio host, they should have moved the Olympics elsewhere, Zika is not a joke D;



#13 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16,889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 07:10 AM

I didn't say YOU were doing anything. You made a suggestion and I told you why it's silly. Who says that sex is their priority? Sex is a part of life, they shouldn't have to abstain from it in order to compete. Would a normal person be expected to abstain from sex by their employers to be able to "focus on their work"? Stop taking the discussion so personally and use logic.


Yes, a private employer can dictate terms and conditions set out in a contract. Anything that could possibly hamper their career, the business or bring anything into disrepute, can be grounds for dismissal, so yes. This can apply to anything, from drugs, smoking, partying etc

It used to be an old wives tale that sex before a completion would drain you of energy and testosterone, which is now scientifically untrue. So most professional athletes can keep banging til their hearts content.

#14 Elindoril

Elindoril
  • Weeaboo Trash

  • 9,012 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 07:18 AM

Hey, Australia. Wanna mail me a couple boxes? 😏

#15 Kate

Kate
  • 🐟🐳


  • 7,373 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 07:18 AM

Yes, a private employer can dictate terms and conditions set out in a contract. Anything that could possibly hamper their career, the business or bring anything into disrepute, can be grounds for dismissal, so yes. This can apply to anything, from drugs, smoking, partying etc

It used to be an old wives tale that sex before a completion would drain you of energy and testosterone, which is now scientifically untrue. So most professional athletes can keep banging til their hearts content.

They definitely can :p But how often have we seen it in regards to sex. 



#16 jinq

jinq
  • 1,548 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 07:19 AM

I'm surprised that they went ahead and let Rio host, they should have moved the Olympics elsewhere, Zika is not a joke D;

Not nearly as scary as the ebola crisis



#17 Tammy

Tammy
  • 430 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 07:26 AM

Not nearly as scary as the ebola crisis

 

Yeah but no one is planning huge sporting events in west africa :p



#18 jinq

jinq
  • 1,548 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 07:52 AM

Yeah but no one is planning huge sporting events in west africa :p

If zika had 50%+ mortality rate and spreads in the air then they'd have reason to change the venue.


Edited by jinq, 16 May 2016 - 07:53 AM.


#19 Tammy

Tammy
  • 430 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 08:01 AM

If zika had 50%+ mortality rate and spreads in the air then they'd have reason to change the venue.

 

Not a lot is known about zikas long term effects, it could potentially affect future pregnancies of women who are carriers. 

 

Also just because there is a more lethal epidemic elsewhere in the world doesn't make Rio a safe haven for the Olympics. They are totally unrelated things and the potential risks of one epidemic should not be ignored because there is a different epidemic somewhere else that makes that specific place seem worse by comparison. No one is going to move the olympics to west africa so why even use "it's worse there so it's okay to have it here" as an argument?



#20 jinq

jinq
  • 1,548 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 08:11 AM

Not a lot is known about zikas long term effects, it could potentially affect future pregnancies of women who are carriers. 

 

Also just because there is a more lethal epidemic elsewhere in the world doesn't make Rio a safe haven for the Olympics. They are totally unrelated things and the potential risks of one epidemic should not be ignored because there is a different epidemic somewhere else that makes that specific place seem worse by comparison. No one is going to move the olympics to west africa so why even use "it's worse there so it's okay to have it here" as an argument?

Either way, the venue was decided in 2006 I believe. It would not be fair to Brazil to lose out on the potential revenue after all the investment they've made.



#21 KyloRen

KyloRen
  • Snoke says I'm special.



  • 5,125 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 08:28 AM

Either way, the venue was decided in 2006 I believe. It would not be fair to Brazil to lose out on the potential revenue after all the investment they've made.

Doesn't the city that hosts the Olympics actually end up not making a ton of money or losing money? Since they have to pay for the stadium(s) to be built, the olympic village to be built, and all the other stuff that comes with hosting the olympics. At least I think I heard something like that, I can't remember exactly. 



#22 Adam

Adam
  • Coffee God


  • 4,361 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 08:35 AM

Doesn't the city that hosts the Olympics actually end up not making a ton of money or losing money? Since they have to pay for the stadium(s) to be built, the olympic village to be built, and all the other stuff that comes with hosting the olympics. At least I think I heard something like that, I can't remember exactly. 

http://www.nytimes.c...ly-pay-off.html



#23 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16,889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 09:31 AM

They definitely can :p But how often have we seen it in regards to sex.


Very rare, I couldn't imagine McDonald's gives a shit about your sex life unless you're making your own special sauce for customers.

#24 Salade

Salade
  • 520 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 09:33 AM

Super condoms sounds like a great name for a superhero.

 

And no, not banned but definitely made aware of the possible consequences. Whenever I was really into fitness my libido was way up there, nothing would have deterred me from doing it 24/7. Funny, that. You'd think your body would be too tired, but no. There's always energy for that.



#25 Kate

Kate
  • 🐟🐳


  • 7,373 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 09:33 AM

Very rare, I couldn't imagine McDonald's gives a shit about your sex life unless you're making your own special sauce for customers.


Thanks for the visual XD



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: totm

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users