• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
JoeDavola

AIDS

Recommended Posts

Saw this video on BBC News earlier - only 4 minutes long, check it out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-40953287/how-prep-changed-matt-s-life

Now, please tell me if I'm being unreasonable (really). AIDS is absolutely horrific and I know the gay community in the 80's had a fucking awful time of it when it first hit.

However...

This chap says "like anybody" condoms break, and he sometimes doesn't use a condom. Presumably this is with casual partners, as if it was in the context of a monogamous relationship where you'd both been tested. He then goes on about "slut shaming" from gay men - which of course triggered my SJW-ometer.

He then says this drug which I assume is on the NHS has "changed his attitude to sex" and "freed him from fear". Which I would assume means he's ramped up the risky behavior.

So here's my problem...basically the So-Called BBC and this chap are normalizing a life of decades (judging by this chaps age) of casual sex, in some cases unprotected, with loads of people, as if that's just something that many people have to do.

But I look at this fellow, and the message being put out by the So-Called BBC and think "oh for heavens sake, in all those decades of casual sex could you not have just found a boyfriend and settled down?".

He's acting as if the threat of AIDS was unavoidable when in actual fact if he exercised some responsibility in not banging all round him, or taking every precaution when he does, the risk could have been greatly reduced.

Rant over.

 

Edited by JoeDavola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having HIV and not disclosing it to a sexual partner is dangerous and should be treated at the GBH that it is. Same with any STI that has similar permanent implications. The movement to decriminalise this is scary. We should be attempting to eliminate AIDS.

The worst thing is the "Gift Givers" that intentionally want to pass on HIV. Shocking stuff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, inactionman said:

Having HIV and not disclosing it to a sexual partner is dangerous and should be treated at the GBH that it is. Same with any STI that has similar permanent implications. The movement to decriminalise this is scary. We should be attempting to eliminate AIDS.

The worst thing is the "Gift Givers" that intentionally want to pass on HIV. Shocking stuff...

I visited the GUM clinic a few months back - no symptoms but figured I was of an age and had enough sex (only just) that I should get tested once.

I got the all clear, as expected, but the nurse who worked there told me that if I did have herpes that I was under no obligation to tell anyone who I was having sex with that I was infected. This horrified me - if I had it I'd not be sleeping with anyone, especially unprotected, without letting them know. If I missed out on sex by being honest, so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

18 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

Saw this video on BBC News earlier - only 4 minutes long, check it out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-40953287/how-prep-changed-matt-s-life

Now, please tell me if I'm being unreasonable (really). AIDS is absolutely horrific and I know the gay community in the 80's had a fucking awful time of it when it first hit.

However...

This chap says "like anybody" condoms break, and he sometimes doesn't use a condom. Presumably this is with casual partners, as if it was in the context of a monogamous relationship where you'd both been tested. He then goes on about "slut shaming" from gay men - which of course triggered my SJW-ometer.

He then says this drug which I assume is on the NHS has "changed his attitude to sex" and "freed him from fear". Which I would assume means he's ramped up the risky behavior.

So here's my problem...basically the So-Called BBC and this chap are normalizing a life of decades (judging by this chaps age) of casual sex, in some cases unprotected, with loads of people, as if that's just something that many people have to do.

But I look at this fellow, and the message being put out by the So-Called BBC and think "oh for heavens sake, in all those decades of casual sex could you not have just found a boyfriend and settled down?".

He's acting as if the threat of AIDS was unavoidable when in actual fact if he exercised some responsibility in not banging all round him, or taking every precaution when he does, the risk could have been greatly reduced.

Rant over.

 

Well if it means he is now free to spread other STIs around without worry, the £3000 - £4500 per year cost of the treatment sounds like taxpayer money well spent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

Saw this video on BBC News earlier - only 4 minutes long, check it out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-40953287/how-prep-changed-matt-s-life

Now, please tell me if I'm being unreasonable (really). AIDS is absolutely horrific and I know the gay community in the 80's had a fucking awful time of it when it first hit.

However...

This chap says "like anybody" condoms break, and he sometimes doesn't use a condom. Presumably this is with casual partners, as if it was in the context of a monogamous relationship where you'd both been tested. He then goes on about "slut shaming" from gay men - which of course triggered my SJW-ometer.

He then says this drug which I assume is on the NHS has "changed his attitude to sex" and "freed him from fear". Which I would assume means he's ramped up the risky behavior.

So here's my problem...basically the So-Called BBC and this chap are normalizing a life of decades (judging by this chaps age) of casual sex, in some cases unprotected, with loads of people, as if that's just something that many people have to do.

But I look at this fellow, and the message being put out by the So-Called BBC and think "oh for heavens sake, in all those decades of casual sex could you not have just found a boyfriend and settled down?".

He's acting as if the threat of AIDS was unavoidable when in actual fact if he exercised some responsibility in not banging all round him, or taking every precaution when he does, the risk could have been greatly reduced.

Rant over.

 

To be fair I can see where he is coming from, he looks to be the same age as me and the information spread about AIDS in the 80's had a similar effect on me. If somebody said to me there was a pill I could take that would removal all/most of the risk associated with a certain behaviour then I think it might have a similar effect on me. i.e. I might feel liberated from a deep seated fear (realistic or not)

However not sure why (outside of being prescribed) this drug is available on the NHS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hail the Tripod said:

Well if it means he is now free to spread other STIs around without worry, the £3000 - £4500 per year cost of the treatment sounds like taxpayer money well spent.

Exactly. It's tax payer and state-media funded encouragement of reckless behavior. It's the sexual equivalent of 'body positivity' for fat people.

An underlying current of 'personal responsibility no longer exists'. Hedonism (be it cake or unprotected casual sex) over anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

article-1224832-070A54F8000005DC-680_224

Might be missing the point but if he wants to dress like a walking cliche of gay nightclub partygoer, when he's not a work, surely that's up to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SNACR said:

Might be missing the point but if he wants to dress like a walking cliche of gay nightclub partygoer, when he's not a work, surely that's up to him?

He also went on about "barebacking" on Hampstead Heath; when influential people at the So-Called BBC do something then they are going to try to normalise it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

Saw this video on BBC News earlier - only 4 minutes long, check it out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-40953287/how-prep-changed-matt-s-life

Now, please tell me if I'm being unreasonable (really). AIDS is absolutely horrific and I know the gay community in the 80's had a fucking awful time of it when it first hit.

However...

This chap says "like anybody" condoms break, and he sometimes doesn't use a condom. Presumably this is with casual partners, as if it was in the context of a monogamous relationship where you'd both been tested. He then goes on about "slut shaming" from gay men - which of course triggered my SJW-ometer.

He then says this drug which I assume is on the NHS has "changed his attitude to sex" and "freed him from fear". Which I would assume means he's ramped up the risky behavior.

So here's my problem...basically the So-Called BBC and this chap are normalizing a life of decades (judging by this chaps age) of casual sex, in some cases unprotected, with loads of people, as if that's just something that many people have to do.

But I look at this fellow, and the message being put out by the So-Called BBC and think "oh for heavens sake, in all those decades of casual sex could you not have just found a boyfriend and settled down?".

He's acting as if the threat of AIDS was unavoidable when in actual fact if he exercised some responsibility in not banging all round him, or taking every precaution when he does, the risk could have been greatly reduced.

Rant over.

 

Homosexuality is not normal - I can't remember who wrote that now, but they were gay and it made complete sense to me at the time. It isn't something that "normal" people do, if you apply the norm to be straight people, but it's something that a lot of gay people do - and if you don't agree with it or dare to question it, you'll probably be labelled a bigot.

Personally, I don't understand why so many in the gay "community" feel this is acceptable behaviour. The same community that is constantly vying to have the same rights as heterosexual couples, yet apparently without any of the responsibility. Can someone try to explain? Sleeping around behind your partner's back - or indeed with their full knowledge as is the case here - just destroys any level of intimacy, carries risks and just makes sex with your partner miserable. 

I don't know how many gay couples do this, but if the media representation is accurate, it seems like quite a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bkkandrew said:

Who is in the picture?

Evan Davis

Presenter on news programmes and Dragons Den.

Perfectly reasonable presenter who I don't have a problem with; but when you hear the So-Called BBC trying to normalise dangerous sexual behaviour then I suspect he may have a hand in it. As it were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spunko2010 said:

Homosexuality is not normal - I can't remember who wrote that now, but they were gay and it made complete sense to me at the time. It isn't something that "normal" people do, if you apply the norm to be straight people, but it's something that a lot of gay people do - and if you don't agree with it or dare to question it, you'll probably be labelled a bigot.

Personally, I don't understand why so many in the gay "community" feel this is acceptable behaviour. The same community that is constantly vying to have the same rights as heterosexual couples, yet apparently without any of the responsibility. Can someone try to explain? Sleeping around behind your partner's back - or indeed with their full knowledge as is the case here - just destroys any level of intimacy, carries risks and just makes sex with your partner miserable. 

I don't know how many gay couples do this, but if the media representation is accurate, it seems like quite a lot.

Yes this is what I take issue with - that hyper-promiscuity bareback sex with strangers is 'normal' or standard gay behavior, and that this is a sensible thing to be doing from a physical or mental health perspective. It quite clearly isn't.

I also think that it's encouraging young gay people who might be finding their way in life to be drawn into that lifestyle, instead of just doing what a sensible straight person would do and just go and find a boyfriend/girlfriend, be monogamous and build a life together.

There's a great talk by a sex addiction expert on YouTube; the expert is gay but he says that if anyone says that hyper-promiscity is normal gay behavior, they're wrong, it's the behavior of an addict and should not be normalized.

Edited by JoeDavola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It kind of depends if HIV actually has a cure on the horizon or not if you are saying his views (never heard of him by the way), are dangerous.

 

Also, for the record, I have no idea if HIV/AIDS has a cure coming soon or not.

Edited by Bkkandrew
Missed two words

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

 

There's a great talk by a sex addiction expert on YouTube; the expert is gay but he says that if anyone says that hyper-promiscity is normal gay behavior, they're wrong, it's the behavior of an addict and should not be normalized.

 

The gay 'community' has always been this way I suspect, it has just become more mainstream.

12 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

Evan Davis

Presenter on news programmes and Dragons Den.

Perfectly reasonable presenter who I don't have a problem with; but when you hear the So-Called BBC trying to normalise dangerous sexual behaviour then I suspect he may have a hand in it. As it were.

He doesn't have any obvious agenda on Newsnight or Dragons Den. I don't watch either of them any more, but when I used to, I don't think I even knew at the time he was gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

Yes this is what I take issue with - that hyper-promiscuity bareback sex with strangers is 'normal' or standard gay behavior, and that this is a sensible thing to be doing from a physical or mental health perspective. It quite clearly isn't.

I also think that it's encouraging young gay people who might be finding their way in life to be drawn into that lifestyle, instead of just doing what a sensible straight person would do and just go and find a boyfriend/girlfriend, be monogamous and build a life together.

There's a great talk by a sex addiction expert on YouTube; the expert is gay but he says that if anyone says that hyper-promiscity is normal gay behavior, they're wrong, it's the behavior of an addict and should not be normalized.

Don't kid yourself. If the vast majority of attractive women suddenly became nymphomaniacs, straight men would suddenly find a huge subculture with similar behaviours.

I have never heard a straight man say he has had "Chemsex" but almost all of the gay men I know have. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

Saw this video on BBC News earlier - only 4 minutes long, check it out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-40953287/how-prep-changed-matt-s-life

Now, please tell me if I'm being unreasonable (really). AIDS is absolutely horrific and I know the gay community in the 80's had a fucking awful time of it when it first hit.

However...

This chap says "like anybody" condoms break, and he sometimes doesn't use a condom. Presumably this is with casual partners, as if it was in the context of a monogamous relationship where you'd both been tested. He then goes on about "slut shaming" from gay men - which of course triggered my SJW-ometer.

He then says this drug which I assume is on the NHS has "changed his attitude to sex" and "freed him from fear". Which I would assume means he's ramped up the risky behavior.

So here's my problem...basically the So-Called BBC and this chap are normalizing a life of decades (judging by this chaps age) of casual sex, in some cases unprotected, with loads of people, as if that's just something that many people have to do.

But I look at this fellow, and the message being put out by the So-Called BBC and think "oh for heavens sake, in all those decades of casual sex could you not have just found a boyfriend and settled down?".

He's acting as if the threat of AIDS was unavoidable when in actual fact if he exercised some responsibility in not banging all round him, or taking every precaution when he does, the risk could have been greatly reduced.

Rant over.

 

I have some sympathy with gay people in general regarding promiscuity, especially from my era, not so much now as I don't think being gay is as difficult as it was.

Many have had to deal with coming out to their families, in some cases this means renouncing family ties to a greater or lesser extent. Mostly, they have also renounced the classic "future" that most people still aspire to (even if it is a delusion in most cases) of a family of their own and children. So they live very much in the "now" In addition where young gay men are concerned you then have two sides of any potential coupling that are very easily triggered (as opposed to women who can be easily triggered but by slightly different kinds of stimuli, the brain is engaged a little more).

I know someone who is pretty detached from his family, and knows his future after age 45 is dodgy as he has several uncles and a father who mentally fell to pieces after that age and are mostly dead. So he lives in the now. He's a good-looking chap, has the slight badboy vibe that the young ladies like and he is highly promiscuous(heterosexual) and not a single flying fuck is given. Can't find it in my heart to blame him - a lot of numbskull girls will have learned harsh lessons by falling for him but otherwise he hasn't done that much lasting harm to my knowledge. Am I the only one who sees parallels in this to the behaviour of young gay promiscuous males? The only thing that may be different is that afaik he's only ever impregnated one, early in his "career", so he's probably protecting himself and them.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Carl Fimble said:

The tax payer should not he paying for these pills for him. If he wants to have risky sex that's up to him, he can pay for the pills himself though.

Agreed in principle but am not sure of the maths - how much is it to treat a person infected with HIV? It's a bit like the argument of whether obese people should pay for diabetic treatment. Where there is free stuff, whatever it may be, someone will be taking the piss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, swissy_fit said:

I have some sympathy with gay people in general regarding promiscuity, especially from my era, not so much now as I don't think being gay is as difficult as it was.

Many have had to deal with coming out to their families, in some cases this means renouncing family ties to a greater or lesser extent. Mostly, they have also renounced the classic "future" that most people still aspire to (even if it is a delusion in most cases) of a family of their own and children. So they live very much in the "now" In addition where young gay men are concerned you then have two sides of any potential coupling that are very easily triggered (as opposed to women who can be easily triggered but by slightly different kinds of stimuli, the brain is engaged a little more).

I know someone who is pretty detached from his family, and knows his future after age 45 is dodgy as he has several uncles and a father who mentally fell to pieces after that age and are mostly dead. So he lives in the now. He's a good-looking chap, has the slight badboy vibe that the young ladies like and he is highly promiscuous(heterosexual) and not a single flying fuck is given. Can't find it in my heart to blame him - a lot of numbskull girls will have learned harsh lessons by falling for him but otherwise he hasn't done that much lasting harm to my knowledge. Am I the only one who sees parallels in this to the behaviour of young gay promiscuous males? The only thing that may be different is that afaik he's only ever impregnated one, early in his "career", so he's probably protecting himself and them.

 

 

 

The problem is the numbers of 'womanising' men are vanishingly small the media grossly distorts reality with its constant tales of 'womanising' male celebrities. If the phrase womaniser is ever used in the same sentence as a male celebrity then they are closeted gay, there are no exceptions however unlikely it would seem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MrPin said:

Only faith in Jesus prevents AIDS. Nobody wants to share a bed with a religious nut.

That's a religious hate crime. You have been added to the CPS list of haters. It's a long list, about 60 million on it so far. But then they only started it today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, spunko2010 said:

He doesn't have any obvious agenda on Newsnight or Dragons Den. I don't watch either of them any more, but when I used to, I don't think I even knew at the time he was gay.

Never miss Newsnight, Evan is the best presenter by far, especially for interviewing, something at which Wark and Maitlis are hopeless. Munchetty is coming along well, Kamal Ahmed same although allegedly he can't count, O'Brien more tolerable than LBC.

He doesn't usually push any gayness.

Whatever the topic Evan can be trusted to make a decent fist of it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, the gardener said:

That's a religious hate crime. You have been added to the CPS list of haters. It's a long list, about 60 million on it so far. But then they only started it today.

Not if he was referring to christians it's not... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.