Is there risk of STD transmission through non-genital skin-to-skin contact?

[Mdjoot]

I recently visited an erotic massage parlor. I was careful to avoid any genital-to-genital contact, but noticed that the girl (who was fully naked) was grinding her genitals against my upper thigh as she straddled it during the massage session.  At a later point she also sat on my stomach, meaning my bare skin rubbed against her genitals as well.  I did not see any open sores, but I also wasn’t really looking/checking.  I do not have any open sores in any of the areas described.

I assume the skin on my thighs and stomach are thicker and that there is little or no risk of exposure to the skin-to-skin STDs (herpes, HPV). However, I’ve also read on these forums that the “boxer shorts area”
is the at-risk zone for herpes exposure, and wonder if that might include my thighs.

Bottom line: is it possible to contract herpes or HPV through incidental contact between her exposed genitals and my thighs or stomach?  Are the thighs in particular an at-risk region for STD transmission, particularly given that herpes sores can appear on the thighs?

Thank you.

[auntiejessi]

The skin on your thighs and stomach are too thick, as you thought, to become infected with an STD.

When referring to the "boxer shorts area" in regards to herpes, that's the area that you can get outbreaks, not the area you can get infected.

You're at no risk from this encounter. :)

[Mdjoot]

Hello.  Thank you for your prompt response.

For the sake of clarification -- and for the potential benefit of others who may come across this thread -- I assume it's worth nothing that the "boxer shorts area" is an unlikely site of STD infection *absent* any breaks in the skin, such as a sore, cut, or rash.

[auntiejessi]

Yes, that's correct. The concern is mucous membranes - the penis, anus, vagina, labia, etc. - the thin skin in the area. Your thighs and butt, hips, etc., are all fine unless there is a break in the skin.