This was posted 6 years 3 months 14 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

[NSW] FREE Safe Sex Play Pack (Condoms, Lube, Gloves) @ EndingHIV & ILoveClaude Delivered NSW Only & [At Risk LBGTI ONLY]

16555
[NSW] FREE Safe Sex Play Pack (Condoms, Lube, Gloves) @ EndingHIV & ILoveClaude Delivered NSW Only & [At Risk LBGTI ONLY]
Go to Deal
tightarse on 06/01/2018 - 21:21 ozbargain.com.au (6922 clicks)
Last edited 08/01/2018 - 11:38 by 4 other users

Update 8 Jan 2018 9:00am and 10:30am: Take-down request received from ACON to remove both items

Deal has been updated to link to discussion thread. Please continue discussion there.

Whether it’s a one-on-one session or group play with many, it’s important to keep yourself stocked up with condoms, lube and other things that can help you and your playmates stay safe. Get yourself a Play Pack before your next session. They are free and mailed-out to you discreetly! Each Play Pack comes with plenty of:

  • Condoms
  • Lube
  • Gloves
  • Info on where to get tested & access PEP
  • The latest sexual health & well-being info

As pointed out by sqeeksqeek, these packs are meant for gay & trans men.

↓

This is an initiative from ACON, a registered charity that is targeting at risk members of the LGBTI community. If you are not part of this community don't order.

↑

Mod: Our community is made up of people of all races, rich, poor and those of varying sexual orientation. We have made clear in the title and description of the deal that this is meant for those members. Similar to this deal where we made the same point. We will continue to follow the discussions on this deal and seek feedback from the community.

Update: Please voice your feedback in this thread

Health & Beauty Condom Lubricant

Related Stores

acon.org.au
acon.org.au
OzBargain
OzBargain

closed Comments

        • Chroma on 08/01/2018 - 23:45

          "it’s an initiative to help certain groups in society that may be more vulnerable to disease like HIV" -> if you are at risk of HIV, who gives a shit what 'group' you are in? Risk is risk, and discrimination is discrimination.

        • Chroma on 08/01/2018 - 23:57
          +1

          From the signup form:

          How many people do you think are coming to your private play party?*
          Please provide a number so we can ensure we provide you with the right amount of supplies.

          When you're a 'certain group' who is more vulnerable because you are engaging in group sex, your lifestyle shouldn't be subsidised by others. You seriously think that for any given GROUP of men you can't find one person who can afford a pack of condoms?

          If you can't afford to pay, you can't afford to play.
          Role the dice, pay the price.

    • coxymla on 06/01/2018 - 22:24
      +1

      It's probably mostly taxpayer money anyway.

      • ihavecentsnotsense on 06/01/2018 - 22:33
        +13

        So? Do you want your tax dollars wasted by indirectly paying for some loser to order a condom online for a laugh, or would you rather your tax dollars help the more vulnerable in society? This ‘deal’ should not have been posted.

        • Scab on 06/01/2018 - 22:37
          +1

          some loser to order a condom

          Losers don't use them, only winners wear condoms.

        • ihavecentsnotsense on 06/01/2018 - 22:40
          +3

          @Scab: I didn’t say they’d actually use them.

        • Scab on 06/01/2018 - 22:42

          @ihavecentsnotsense:

          I'm going to be a winner, winners are grinners.

    • joelmuzz on 07/01/2018 - 08:24
      +2

      If people answer the questions truthfully to qualify then it's fine and helping them find target market.

      If people lie to qualify then it's theft and they should hope karma never catches up with it.

  • Uzb9811 on 06/01/2018 - 22:03
    +28

    I agree, it bothers me to think this isn’t some company running a promotion, it’s a charity trying to get scarce resources (donor funds) to the best use in preventing HIV… which won’t be the case if people just order it to save a dollar or for the sake of it.

    • tightarse on 06/01/2018 - 23:26

      As a charity, why are they paying for SEO & Google Adwords to ensure ‘free condoms’ search is the number one Google hit, even ahead of Ansell?

      • Uzb9811 on 06/01/2018 - 23:35
        +21

        Who would be searching for free condoms? The people who need it the most and would go without them otherwise - you really want to make sure those people get it, especially if they’re in a high risk group.. that’s possibly why. The page for the initiative itself is what makes it clear who the target group is.

        In any case, feel free to question the judgment of the charity in this initiative or in paying Google to promote it.. but I don’t think that justifies using it against its intention to save a dollar or for a cheap ‘joke’

        • BartholemewH on 07/01/2018 - 09:24
          +1

          I would want people searching for them to get them, regardless of gender and orientation.

      • ihavecentsnotsense on 06/01/2018 - 23:41
        +4

        So this justifies exploiting their resources for your upvotes, does it? If you don’t agree with how they spend their money, don’t donate to them. You shouldn’t deliberately waste the money they have.

      • bargainparker on 07/01/2018 - 00:01
        +1

        Unless you have insider knowledge you can not go on cherry-picking. If you have the facts why they are doing so, put them up here so we can decide whether it is right or not and then decide if we should get it for free.

        Are you saying that Ansell condoms are free, yet the charity pays so people would see them first and get free condoms from them instead of Ansell?

      • AlanI on 07/01/2018 - 00:55
        +9

        Google gives out a lot of Adwords credits for free to non-profits - so they likely haven't actually paid money for them.

      • itsDANNY on 07/01/2018 - 22:23
        -8

        Seeing as you posted this 'deal', weren't even aware that this organisation is a registered charity and made a naive comment like this, is so disappointing.

        • itsDANNY on 08/01/2018 - 00:51
          -1

          Neg all you want - I really don't care - exemplifies the attitude I'd expect from the same group of people who exploit initiatives like these.

        • Scab on 08/01/2018 - 06:50
          +4

          is so disappointing

          Oh no, someone I've never heard of, that's never posted a single deal and barely made any contribution to this place is disappointed?

          Please, is there anything I can do to make it up to you?

        • itsDANNY on 13/01/2018 - 18:13
          -2

          Yes, just remain as a scab. Tell me when your wounds heal.

    • tryagain on 08/01/2018 - 09:07
      +4

      I am not suggesting that anyone who it isn't intended for should order but from their last financial report they received about 13mil in Gov funds last financial year and have almost 7mil in the bank. It's not what I would classify as scarce resources.

  • Skramit on 06/01/2018 - 22:05
    +2

    Thanks ordered one for the mother in law.

  • ireadtermsofuse on 06/01/2018 - 22:08
    +2

    Thanks! Dinner sorted

  • khued on 06/01/2018 - 22:15

    How to answer: Are you a man (cis or trans) who has sex with men? yes/no

  • klyvenator on 06/01/2018 - 22:20
    +39

    This post is inappropriate, the site is a charity or something to help higher risk groups (like gay men) prevent HIV. There are limited resources so people who don't fit that demographic shouldn't be taking away from the people that need it.

      • klyvenator on 06/01/2018 - 22:30
        +10

        I'm not, yet there is no message in the title saying that these packs should be reserved for gay men, trans people. And in the post content this comment here:
        "As pointed out by sqeeksqeek, these packs are meant for gay & trans men. Use your imagination :)" is basically encouraging people to put down fake details.

        • yannyrjl on 06/01/2018 - 22:49

          I'm helisexual hence qualifies !!!!

        • Matt P on 07/01/2018 - 00:34
          +3

          @yannyrjl: Do you also identify as an attack hellicopter?

        • Jackson on 07/01/2018 - 15:07

          I thought it was encouraging people to be gay

        • yannyrjl on 08/01/2018 - 09:20

          @Matt P: to be precise a Boeing AH-64 Apache (made in the USA baby !!!)

    • Bunsen on 06/01/2018 - 22:52
      -7

      Any gay men I know earn double $$$ that I do!! But they really need the financial help yeh?

      • yannyrjl on 06/01/2018 - 22:55
        +1

        for sure, backed by stats but they are oppressed

        Gay couples also have higher incomes than straight couples. Married gay couples, with an average household income of about $US115,000, make slightly more money than unmarried gay couples, whose average is $US111,223. For straight couples, the gap between married and unmarried couples is much higher. Married straight couples make $US101,487 per year on average, compared to just $US69,511 for unmarried straight couples

        • Uzb9811 on 06/01/2018 - 23:08
          +2

          The ‘deal’ and the underlying charitable initaitive has nothing to do with oppression, the relevant stats are health stats which indicate a higher rate and risk of HIV transmission among men who have sex with men.

        • yannyrjl on 08/01/2018 - 09:22

          @robbegong: so they can't they buy their doms like everyone else? and normal men are excluded? Isn't that the very definition of prejudism?

        • Uzb9811 on 08/01/2018 - 09:48

          @yannyrjl: Every charity has a charitable purpose, and to achieve the purpose It’s often going to involve targeting particular groups and this is to be expected.

          Ultimately the idea behind what ACON is doing isn’t to give a ‘special’ group a freebie.. it’s to reduce the overall incidence of HIV and therefore the cost on all society of medical care etc. Everyone benefits. They’ve chosen this strategy which I assume is informed by data and experience. If you disagree with their strategy that’s fine - don’t donate, but also I suggest we shouldn’t actively undermine their efforts by posting it here and encouraging excessive requests from people that really don’t need it.

          Almost anyone can afford condoms, I agree but there could be other barriers to getting them. These packs come with additional information and other components too. And for whatever reason the data shows some men who have sex with men are at higher risk of not using condoms and of transmitting HIV and this charity is trying to address it.

          There really isn’t a prejudicial or divisive motive or result here. Also, I’m going to give you the benefit or the doubt and assume you didn’t mean to cause offence by contrasting men who have sex with men against ‘normal’ people but it could be interpreted as stigmatising this group and this stigma is part of the problem.

        • yannyrjl on 08/01/2018 - 10:00

          @robbegong: thanks for the benefit of the doubt, no offence, simply using the normal definition of "normal" being the majority.

          I do disagree with this strategy and I wish it was "my money my choice" then all the power to them but unfortunately I pay taxes and given they get supposedly $13 million from the government (I'm presuming NSW given this program is for NSW only) so I can't opt out like you suggested. Which makes me an impacted party, hence voicing my opinion.

      • Uzb9811 on 06/01/2018 - 23:04
        +4

        It’s not financial help as it’s not about saving the recipients a dollar or two, which is why it’s also not a bargain.

        It is a public health initiative targeted at groups that undertake riskier sexual behaviour (in terms of contracting HIV). It’s nothing more or less than that and has nothing to do with anyone’s income.

    • hasher22 on 06/01/2018 - 23:22

      Well, there are posts about female and male clothing which is gender specific. How is this post any different targeting the gay community?

    • [Deactivated] on 07/01/2018 - 00:26

      Totally disagree. Next time I have to read a case of someone complaining about catching HIV in Australia due to their own neglience (after knowing what safe sex is) I will scream.

      This is proof that that you gay/bi/abcdefghi…uvwxyz person there is absoultely no excuse to play safe.

    • dsar on 07/01/2018 - 01:59
      +7

      I agree. I don't think this needs to be ozbargained.

    • ndro777 on 07/01/2018 - 05:48
      +8

      I agree. This is wasting the charity’s limited resources to do what it’s supposed to do.

      • arcticmonkey on 07/01/2018 - 09:29
        +10

        I agree. Anyone that lies on the form is cheating the charity out of their limited funding.

        • yannyrjl on 08/01/2018 - 09:23

          i wonder how much of this is government funded vs privately funded

          edit: missed the post earlier, looks like the tune of 13 million

  • binatang on 06/01/2018 - 22:20
    +1

    Can't find XXXXL size. No good for moi

  • imahapyboy on 06/01/2018 - 22:22

    gloves??? for???

    • MrRevhead on 06/01/2018 - 22:33

      Cleaning the shower

    • Friendly Troll on 06/01/2018 - 22:34
      +2

      Do you truly want to know?

    • [Deactivated] on 07/01/2018 - 00:27
      +5

      … handling eneloops

  • hluu0111 on 06/01/2018 - 22:23

    free to protect the New Wales from the South …

  • GregRust on 06/01/2018 - 22:24
    +1

    Ordered. For a friend.

  • ozbjunkie on 06/01/2018 - 22:33
    +2

    Some people need prophylactics, I just rely on my personality.

  • [Deactivated] on 06/01/2018 - 22:37
    +13

    Been a while since I've done any work in the field of HIV although I did do a stint as the Sexual Health/HIV clinic registrar for a tertiary hospital infectious disease unit, but I'd question the accuracy of + to + sex being listed as 'safe'. It does acknowledge that you're at risk of other STIs (so its hardly 'safe' in that regard) but it ignores the risk of HIV Superinfection with multiple viral strains. This can lead to more rapid progression of the disease in the untreated or complicate your treatment for example by contracting a new strain that has resistances to drugs in your current treatment regimen. Maybe evidence has changed since then, I don't really stay up to date with HIV treatment as ID isn't my area.

    'Why wear a raincoat if you're already wet' is a pretty silly strategy when it comes to sexual health. Can't see an easy way to contact them about that.

      • airal3rt on 07/01/2018 - 00:57

        You don't want science and research? What do you base your opinions and belief on then?

    • Save Medicare on 06/01/2018 - 23:02

      throw the book at them my friend

  • onlyletters on 06/01/2018 - 22:57

    I'm 12 what is this

    • MrRevhead on 06/01/2018 - 22:59
      +9

      A great way to get a free gift for your parents anniversary!

  • Tnetennba on 06/01/2018 - 23:00

    Why has this got 7 reports for illegal/inappropriate? Are people that immature?

    • Scab on 06/01/2018 - 23:11

      Special snowflakes are easily triggered.

    • zwolf on 06/01/2018 - 23:15

      because these aren't "go have safe fun kids" condoms, they're intended for prevention of disease to those at high-risk.
      as you could discern if you read a few comments.

    • hasher22 on 06/01/2018 - 23:23

      There will always be people who report/neg just because it's the LGBT community. It's a shame that people can't get over it and it doesn't affect them in any way.

      • grasstown on 06/01/2018 - 23:35
        -7

        How can you say this doesn't affect me???? I would never speak like the language on that site. No one I know would. No one I went to school with, ever worked with, drank with, no one. But to me this post and that site will normalize "play packs" and "sessions". Which are currently not normal or mainstream. And if you think they are you are kidding yourself. And if you agree they are not you should see how this affects me. And the OP has pasted it on this site for a wider and younger audience to read.

        • bobbified on 07/01/2018 - 01:13
          +6

          But to me this post and that site will normalize "play packs

          What's wrong with play packs?

          I'm not into that stuff myself, but whatever anyone else likes to do in their bedroom is none of my business.. or yours!

        • grasstown on 07/01/2018 - 08:21

          @bobbified: so why has the OP pasted that text it on this site?

        • bobbified on 07/01/2018 - 08:38
          +1

          @grasstown:

          I'm actually trying to work out what your offended by.

          There's no swearing, there's no violence and there's no pictures, etc.

          It's about Safe Sex. Condoms, lube, etc.
          They've been teaching this kind of stuff pretty early on at schools and with the recent change in marriage laws, Im pretty sure the teachings will become a little more colourful.

        • grasstown on 07/01/2018 - 12:35
          -1

          @bobbified: there was a reason this kind of language and content was left out of the marriage law campaign. Swearing is cleaner than what the op posted. Pornographic or violent pictures are not the baseline for what is considered inappropriate.its about gloves (not gardening) and orgies. Nothing wrong with condoms and lube. OP can't even write what the gloves are for- he knows but can't bring himself to say on the post. Even you ignore those bits and say is condoms and lube

        • This Guy on 08/01/2018 - 07:56

          @bobbified:

          Do the survey!

        • bobbified on 08/01/2018 - 08:31

          @grasstown:

          Have you ever watched the Simpsons?

          It's a very popular cartoon that's targeted at kids that was on for many years, but there are a stack of adult jokes in there.

          No-one ever complained about it because the only people that understood the jokes are the ones that had already been exposed the similar content. That meant that it was only the adults that understood the jokes.

          The younger kids who heard the jokes didn't understand the context because they'd never been exposed to it before.

          I think we're in a similar situation here and unless kids have already been exposed to this kind of thing previously, the wording that's used might take a bit of imagination to really understand what's going on. Terms like "Play packs" and "Sessions" alone don't really mean anything.

          Besides, we're on the internet - one wrong click and a whole lot comes up.

        • grasstown on 08/01/2018 - 13:11
          -1

          @bobbified: you have selective listening/understanding. It's orgies and gloves. They know what the packs are for and we are defining it as "play". Simpsons analogy is irrelevant.

        • bobbified on 08/01/2018 - 13:57
          +1

          @grasstown:

          you have selective listening/understanding. It's orgies and gloves.

          How is that selective listening/understanding when your own post when it's you that refers to "play packs" and "sessions"?

          From YOUR earlier post:

          But to me this post and that site will normalize "play packs" and "sessions".

          If you had no idea about sex, what would those terms mean to you?

        • grasstown on 08/01/2018 - 14:27

          @bobbified: I'm not talking about children, I'm talking about the younger audience who are still forming their morals. We all learn about sex before we are old enough to have it

        • bobbified on 08/01/2018 - 14:48
          +1

          @grasstown:

          I'm talking about the younger audience who are still forming their morals.

          Let's not try and pretend we can stop young adults from exploring the different facets of the topic.

          When you put curiosity and internet together, there's no point trying to hide these things.

          You also seem to be suggesting that groupies and fisting is immoral. I personally don't do that kind of thing, but I don't think we should judge people for doing something they enjoy in the bedroom.

          You seem to be the kind of parent who doesn't allow their kid(s) to sleepover with friends at night because they could end up having sex.
          But did you know it's possible to have sex in the day time too? lol!

        • grasstown on 08/01/2018 - 15:09

          @bobbified: just because you make moral choices does not mean you judge others.

        • bobbified on 08/01/2018 - 15:32
          +1

          @grasstown:

          From your earlier post, you're calling their behaviour "not normal". If that's not judging, I'm not sure what is!

        • grasstown on 08/01/2018 - 15:50

          @bobbified: normal is the norm . You need a dictionary

        • bobbified on 08/01/2018 - 16:07
          +3

          @grasstown:

          What's not normal to you may be normal to other people. The world doesn't revolve around what you think.

        • grasstown on 08/01/2018 - 18:08

          @bobbified: Do you have morals? Do you judge everyone who thinks and acts differently to yours? I think morals are personal and try to live by my morals no matter what is going on around me or if I sometimes fall short. My morals might be different to yours.

          I said "But to me this post and that site will normalize "play packs" and "sessions". Which are currently not normal or mainstream. And if you think they are you are kidding yourself. And if you agree they are not you should see how this affects me. And the OP has pasted it on this site for a wider and younger audience to read." Play packs and sessions are not normal. Do you think play packs with gloves, orgies and sex as "sessions" are the norm?

    • ihavecentsnotsense on 06/01/2018 - 23:39
      +7

      There are some who probably reported it as ‘inappropriate’ because it’s exploiting a charity.

    • folktaliesin on 07/01/2018 - 00:19
      +46

      I'm wondering how people would feel if the deal was 'free water for those affected by bushfires' and all OzB jumped on and claimed all the water for themselves. Those negging (including me) aren't doing so because we're special, fragile snowflakes. It's just that it's a targeted, charitable offer for a subset of the population, and I don't think we should be pushing people to reduce the resources that these non-profits are trying to put towards a good cause (reducing the infection rate of HIV).

      • rlay3 on 07/01/2018 - 09:09
        +2

        Good analogy. This reminds me of the black lives matter vs all lives matter argument.

      • Tnetennba on 07/01/2018 - 19:04

        You know, I agree. I hadn't looked into what the organisation that is offering this deal is. I have now added a neg.

  • Sage on 06/01/2018 - 23:04
    +1

    69 votes currently, haha.

  • ESPLTD on 06/01/2018 - 23:10
    +53

    This is an initiative, not a deal.

    This is as much a deal as getting a free feed by claiming to be homeless etc.

    • Scab on 06/01/2018 - 23:15
      +6

      I'd probably do that if the food was KFC.

  • Windows7forever on 06/01/2018 - 23:11
    +30

    I'll pass. This is not right to take it.

    • ronnknee on 10/01/2018 - 09:34
      -3

      Exactly this. Late to the discussion but it's just distasteful taking freebies which are targeted to those who actually need them.

      • WatchNerd on 10/01/2018 - 10:31
        +3

        The deal is marked as expired, link removed, title clearly says it's a freebie for a specific group & you still neg?

      • PJC on 10/01/2018 - 10:48
        +3

        OP was originally unaware this is a charity initiative.

      • Savas on 10/01/2018 - 19:12
        +3

        what does the neg have to do with some people abusing the deal?

  • Talsek on 06/01/2018 - 23:14
    +4

    Got the confirmation email. It specifies that I'll be receiving a cockring as well.

    Good to know,better add that to the OP

    • Lukian on 06/01/2018 - 23:18
      +1

      Gasp! That's an adult toy, which is forbidden on ozbargain, quick, take this deal down :p

      • triever on 07/01/2018 - 19:31

        Hear hear! My post for sex toys got deleted!!!

    • PJC on 07/01/2018 - 00:37
      +2

      They should send this instead.

  • NEEDHELP on 06/01/2018 - 23:21

    Willing to test the waters for a free pack! lol

  • userid007 on 06/01/2018 - 23:59
    +1

    I am just here for comments

  • sleet on 07/01/2018 - 00:02
    +10

    If you guys really want free condoms, go and get an STI check up and grab some at the sexual health clinic instead.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join