AIDS: The Facts.
http://www.whatisaids.com/wwwboard/messages/368.html
In the commentary of Ron Jeremy's movie, Ron said AIDS was mostly a homosexual male's disease and IV drug users' disease in North America. He explained that at the HIV clinic he would get his monthly tests at, ( Read more... )
In the commentary of Ron Jeremy's movie, Ron said AIDS was mostly a homosexual male's disease and IV drug users' disease in North America. He explained that at the HIV clinic he would get his monthly tests at, ( Read more... )
Notice how he skirts around the issue and in no spot mentions that straight males are at high risk? He simply runs that whole spiel along saying straight men "may" contract the virus. Yeah - and I "may" get struck by lightning.
It's a gay man and IV drug users' disease in North America. Not sure what part of this people don't get, but with brainwashing being as it was, we are conditioned to think it is not.
Usually people will see the facts and just want to say they are wrong, knowing how silly that would be. It's hard to undue years of programming telling us something else was true.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Female-to-female HIV transmission is SO RARE, that even this guy (who is biased because he works for the AIDS foundation) actually points out that it is rare. That means it is so rare it is probably like one in 1,000,000,000. So rare that you couldn't possibly try to scare lesbians about HIV because then the propaganda would be too much of a joke even for that.
I also like how he says "Bottom line -- what you "believe" is really of no consequence when weighed against scientific facts" then provides NO scientific facts in favour of what he says.
In Africa, so many straight men get AIDS because of Compromised immune systems brought about by other diseases. Something rarely spoken about.
Believe me, I know what I'm talking about on this one and I can show you peer reviewed literature until you are blue in the face.
Notice the risk for anal sex is 40 times higher than vaginal sex?
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
No straight men ever has anal receptive sex. It is a homosexual act, so if you're doing it you aren't technically straight. The odds of transmission for the person receiving anal sex is 40 times higher than vaginal insertive sex - the kind of sex I would be having and other straight men would be having. The risk is about 20 times higher than for anal insertive sex compared to vaginal insertive, but that doesn't concern me since I won't be doing it. All I know is that for the particular type of sex that I have as a straight male, the odds are very low of contracting HIV.
As a straight women, even if you did have anal sex, as long as you did it with a heterosexual man (not bi or homosexual), the odds of getting HIV are also very low. That is, a straight man who has not done IV drugs. But then again, you can never know what a guy has done.
I'm not worried about HIV - well, not to any degree greater than I am by getting struck by lightning. The odds are about 1 in 5,000 if I were to have sex WITH a woman with HIV - they are about 1 in 5,000,000 in general (not every woman has HIV, so it makes the odds much lower). The odds of getting struck by lightning are 1 in 7,000,000. If I wear a condom, my odds become one in 50 million.
I'm just trying to present the facts here. Now this isn't to say I encourage unsafe sex. I just want people to know what the real statistics are and the truth of the matter is - I don't like how some people have heavy misconceptions regarding STDs.
In short:
Safe sex and knowing the facts are good, but propaganda and lies are bad.
Now I think that is fair and that most would agree with it.
Reply
But thats just an observation.
Reply
Look at Geoff's quote here:
"In any population where unprotected sex with many different partners is the norm, you're going to have a much higher rate of STD spread. And that was the norm for a lot of the gay male community in America in the 1970s and 1980s. Which is a perfectly logical thing to happen when you tell hundreds of thousands of horny men that can't have open, socially accepted relationships, and instead have to seek gratification furtively."
Notice the politically correct liberal spin he throws in there? Trying to blame the heterosexual community for the promiscuity in the homosexual community? This isn't difficult to figure out either: homosexuals don't have more unprotected sex because they are somehow being oppressed by the heterosexual community. Condoms are freely available and it's not like they can't be used just because homosexuals are under more social pressure to hide their sexuality and sexual activity. Like I said, that is a typical politically correct liberal spin. I take deep offence to it, since it is essentially blaming people like myself for problems within the homosexual community. The reason why homosexuals have more unprotected sex is because there is no risk of pregnancy, NOT because they need to be stealthy about their sexual activity. That's just a copout to not take personal responsibility in this matter. Pregnancy is a much more pragmatic disincentive for me to have unprotected sex because the odds of pregnancy are much higher than contracting an STD if a woman is not on BCP (and I have no way of knowing 100% for sure). Without the risk of pregnancy being present, there is one less reason to have protected sex.
"AIDS isn't a "gay disease", it's an "unprotected promiscuity" disease."
True in some sense. Other than the slight detail that anal receptive sex transmits HIV at a 40 times greater efficiency rate and basically every homosexual male has anal receptive sex. Of course this isn't a slight detail at all, and explains the much higher prevalence of HIV in the homosexual community.
What's funny here is that I'm going on this big spiel when it was you who informed me of some of these statistics a few months ago. It's nice to speak with someone educated in the matter since there is a lot of misinformation going around. Another point is that I'm not really expressing my opinion here, but simply stating scientific fact. I can flood this entry with proof within the scientific community of every statement I've made. It's not open to debate because it's not a matter of opinion. My intent was never to start a debate, but simply to put the facts on the table.
Rya made an excellent post giving actual reasons to have protected sex if you scroll up you can check that out.
Reply
Leave a comment