The data were from a content analysis study of one of the largest Internet websites specificallytargeting MSM looking for partners for unprotected sex. A totalof 1,316 profiles on the site were analyzed and selected randomly based on users’ ZIP codes. Felching was mentioned as a sought-after practice in approximately one-sixth of the men’s profiles. Men who wanted to find felching partners were significantlymore likely than those not searching for felching partners to seekother types of risky sex, including unprotected oral and unpro-tected anal sex, and various enhanced risk preferences (e.g., hav-ing sex while high, multiple-partner sex, unwillingness to with-draw the penis prior to internal ejaculation). Multivariate anal-ysis revealed several factors that were related to an interest inidentifying partners online for felching, including race/ethnicity, indifference to sex partners’ HIV serostatus, several sensation-seeking measures (e.g., wanting‘‘wild’’ or ‘‘uninhibited’’sex,self-identification as a‘‘bug chaser’’), and eroticizing ejaculatoryfluids
Introduction
Felching is a sexual practice, fairly common among men whohave sex with other men (MSM) but not limited to this popu-lation, about which little has been written and, scientifically,about which little is known. Behaviorally speaking, felchingentails sucking or eating semen out of someone’s anus. Among heterosexual or bisexually involved couples, felching occa-sionally occurs as well, and entails sucking or eating semen outof someone’s anus or vagina. In terms of actual practice among MSM, however, what usually happens is that one man performsunprotected anal sex on another man, ejaculates inside of thatman’s anus, sucks out the semen from that man’s anus, and thenswallows the semen. Sometimes, this process is taken one stepfarther by then feeding the semen back to the original recipient by drooling it on toor into his mouth or exchanging it back and forth with him orally with a series of deep kisses (i.e., Frenchkisses).
The last part of this process—the oral exchange of thesemen between the partners—is sometimes referred to as‘‘snowballing’’and is, for many men who engage in felching, anintegral part of the felching act. It is the part that conveys thegreatest interpersonal intimacy through the semen exchange,and it is also a behavior that enhances the chances for HIV andother sexually transmitted infections (STIs) to be transmittedfrom one man to the other. Among MSM, another variation onfelching—one that carries with it considerably greater risk—entails several men performing unprotected anal sex on thesame man, all of them ejaculating into that man’s anus, and thenone man (who may or may not have been a participant in the analsex/ejaculation activities) coming along to eat the semen fromthe group of men out of the recipient’s anus, often concludingthe activities by sharing the semen with the original recipient viakissing.In terms of health risk, felching may involve several typesof risk. First, if the anal insertive partner is HIV-positive, the snowballing component of the felching act increases the chan-ces that the receptive partner will become infected because he isbeing double exposed to the HIV-infected semen (first throughreceiving it anally, second by accepting it orally). Although thechance of becoming HIV-infected by receiving semen orally isgenerally considered to be low, it is not a‘‘no risk’’or a ‘‘safe sex’’behavior (Campo et al.,2006; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006; Hawkins, 2001).
Second, if the person per-forming the unprotected anal sex has other sexually transmittedinfections, such as gonorrhea, chlamydia, or syphilis, these, too,can be transmitted to the person receiving the semen both throughthe unprotected anal sex act and through the felching act (Emerson et al.,2007; Morrisetal.,2006; Templeton et al., 2008). Likewise, hepatitis may also be transmitted via fel-ching if the person(s) originally providing the semen is/arehepatitis-infected (Turner et al.,2006).Yet, despite these health risks attendant with felching, little,if anything, has been documented in the scientific literatureregarding this behavior. Little is known about how common thispractice is among men who have sex with other men or abouthow common it is for them to report a desire to engage in fel-ching. Little is known about the types of men who like to engagein felching or if there are differences between those who do andthose who do not practice this behavior. Little is known abouthow involvement in this particular sexual practice is related toinvolvement in other risky sexual behaviors. The main purposeof the present study was to examine these particular issues ina sample of men who use the Internet specifically to find sexpartners with whom they can engage in unprotected sex. Fiveresearch questions were examined:
How prevalent is fel-ching among the sexual practices being sought by men who usethe Internet to identify potential partners for unprotected sex? What characteristics are associated with expressing a desirefor felching in one’s online profile? How, if at all, is a desirefor felching related to other sexual risk practices in this popu-lation? How, if at all, is a desire for felching related to sexualrisk preferences among men who use the Internet to find othermen for unprotected sex? What factors differentiate menwho look for felching partners online and those who do not,when the effects of other factors are taken into account?
Resarch Results
Prevalence of Characteristics Associated with Wanting to Find Felching Partners Approximately 1 man in 6 (16.5%) expressed a desire to findpartners with whom he could engage in felching. Men who werelooking for felching partners were younger, on average, thanthose who did not post profiles expressing such an interest(34.5 years of age vs. 36.1, t=2.41, p=.016), with particulardifferences noted between men under and those over the age of30. African American men were considerably less likely thanmembers of other racial/ethnic groups to express a desire forfelching (4.7% vs. 17.6%; OR =0.23, CI95=0.08–0.60, p.001) and, conversely, Caucasian men were substantially morelikely than members of other racial/ethnic groups to have pro-files indicating an interest in felching (18.0% vs. 11.5%; OR =1.69, CI95=1.13–2.54, p=.007).There was no difference inprofiles mentioning or not mentioning felching based on thepopulation density of the area where the men resided or on theirsexual orientation.Felching was more commonly sought by men who self-iden-tified as sexual bottoms or versatile bottoms than it was amongthose who self-identified as being versatile, versatile tops, or tops(20.2% vs. 13.6%; OR =1.60, CI95=1.18–2.17, p=.002). Men who said that they were HIV-negative were significantly lesslikely than those who were HIV-positive or unsure about their HIVserostatus to post profiles saying that they wanted to find partnersfor felching (14.3% vs. 19.7%; OR =0.68, CI95=0.50–0.92, p=.009). Finally, men who had paid for a site membership, whichgave them access to additional features and allowed them morecomprehensive usage of the site than those without such a mem-bership, were more likely than those who had not paid for a sitemembership to say that they were looking for partners for felching(20.5% vs. 15.3%; OR =1.43, CI95=1.02–2.01, p=.031).
For more results abouit the study, check the link below
www.researchgate.net/publication/51128181_Felching_Among_Men_Who_Engage_in_Barebacking_Unprotected_Anal_Sex#pfa
