WOW!!! HIV is resurgent among Homosexual men, "reaching epidemic"

A poster who has a long history of trolling this subforum with threads framed in a way that do not seek respectful discussion, but which are thinly disguised flamebaits that seek to denigrate gay people collectively. This thread is no different, and it's having the expected result.

When those personal motivations are the reason behind creating a thread for a purpose that is the opposite of having a respectful discussion, they are fair game as I see it.

There it is again, right on cue: the inability to talk to us as individuals. Instead it's necessary to lump us all into one big faceless group. Much easier to rage against the abstract than to talk to real people.

I would say for many, the proof is self-evident. Your avatar, for instance, tells us what you're all about before you even post.

This, from the guy with an avatar that screams disrespect for gay people. Mutual respect is a two-way street. When you come to the discussion without having any for us, don't expect us to accord you any in return.

 

What it tells us is that you've created a reputation for youself. Trying to hide from it or pretend that you have respectful intentions in posting threads like this doesn't fool us in the least.

What would you like us to discuss? Can you frame the topic as something other than an attack on us that immediately provokes exactly the kind of response you received (and, as I accuse, sought)?

I don't think you're capable of doing so. I think you're out to provoke people here as much as possible, probably hoping we'll post something that will get us banned. I think your ultimate goal is to shutdown this subforum and get all the gay members booted so that you can have free reign to spew all the bigotry you like, unchallenged.

 

Lets talk about the fact that 1,148, 200 people are infected with the AIDS virus in the US and the great majority of those are gay men.

How is, that the OP's fault?

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html

 

If somebody's modus operandi is numerous WEEKLY obsessive posts attacking gays....at some point, doesn't it become difficult to have a "respectful discussion" with them????

 

Here is my response on the first page. A serious topic indeed, which i responded to seriously. And you ignored. Very telling indeed.

Unfortunately human beings are stupid when it comes to sex.

Most Single Adults Not Using Condoms
British study finds less than half of people in 30s, 40s use them when with a new partner
http://health.usnews.com/health-news...-using-condoms

http://health.usnews.com/health-news...adults-over-40

Yet more than 90 percent of men over 50 didn't use a condom when they last had sex with a date or casual acquaintance, and 70 percent didn't do so when they had sex with a stranger. Among women over 50, a majority also report having sex without a condom. By contrast, 70 to 80 percent of teens say they used a condom during their last sexual encounter. All age groups were more likely to use condoms with casual partners than in monogamous relationships.

The risk of HIV infection is greater with gay men- but apparently all adults are playing the odds. HIV doesn't care whether a person is gay or straight, nor does Hep C or Herpes- but people continue to have unprotected sex even with new partners.

The question is- why would any adult risk having unprotected sex with a new sex partner? Because a whole lot of gay men, and straight men, are doing just that.

 

Why would ANY reasonable person not be offended by the things you say?

I'm not wasting anymore time on your nonsense.

You're in the 'ignore' category.

Goodbye.

 

that is probably best for you. I do not agree with most of your opinions and do not insult you either. I am constantly insulted so perhaps it is best for you to ignore me rather than continue to insult me.

 

Counterpoint: How is that the fault of all gay men? Because that's the way this is being framed. I get the sense that there's zero interest in actually discussing the issue despite protestation to the contrary, and every interest in just finding someone to blame.

 

interesting that you feel I have such power.

My sins here

1: I do not support govt involvement in marriage
2: I do not view homosexuals as being any different than me other than how they have sex, thus, no affirmative action or protected status should be offered
3: I believe in personal liberty even at the risk of hurting the feelings of another
4: I do not subscribe to the opinion that one is born hetero or homosexual

those are my sins. If you could do an honest introspective review you would have to ask how that makes one worthy of the venom and vitriol tossed my way, un- moderated I might add, within this subforum.

 

The world's smallest violin plays "my heart bleeds purple peanut butter for you". Your positions, while we disagree, is not the problem. Your using the forum as a weapon to attack gay people is the problem.

I cannot take you seriously because your behavior is consistent, and it does not bespeak someone who is interested in a thoughtful, respectful discussion.

It's up to you to show me that there's a reason to take you seriously, by framing your threads in this subforum in a way that doesn't make each and every one at its core an attack on gay people. Until you can do that, I will continue to question your purpose here.

 

Nobody said ALL. But its rather ludicrous to think HIV spreading in epidemic proportions is the fault of straight men.

 

Good questions. Opponents answers seem to boil down to saying 'gay people are irresponsible and evil and mentally deranged'. Kind of hard to discuss the issue with people who start from that position.

If there are real answers, I think some of it boils down to complacency. Especially if one's circle of friends, acquaintances, and sexual partners doesn't include anyone who is HIV+; it becomes easy to underestimate one's chances of becoming infected. Misplaced trust might be a factor as well.

But these may end up being useless generalizations, as the reason likely varies from person to person. It also depends on the activity. I suppose a person could use a condom regardless of the specific acts they're engaging in or with whom, but I have trouble seeing that as reasonable. If there's no insertion, no exchange of bodily fluids, then we're talking about activity that in practical terms perhaps carries no more risk than casual, non-sexual contact. And if it's taking place within a monogamous relationship...well, I know opponents refuse to believe that gay men are ever monogamous, but I don't have a cure for their disbelief. I just know from my own experience how ignorant that disbelief is.

Moreover, a person's conduct is going to reflect their understanding of the issues, and applying them to their own circumstances. Some busybody telling them they need to use a condom without having any knowledge of what the person is actually doing or what kinds of relationships they're having is going to fall on deaf ears. People who should be getting the message that they need to protect themselves either aren't hearing it, or they're ignoring that advice for some reason. It's figuring out what those reasons are and how to overcome those barriers that is the hard part.

And I don't see ANY reasonsable solution being proposed by the anti-gay hatemongers. Just a whole lot of blame and condemnation of the entire gay population. Those of us who take responsibility for our own behavior are pretty sick and tired fo bigots blaming us for something we have no role in. We aren't all cut out to be HIV/AIDS educators, for example. Doesn't mean we don't have some other role to play in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Screaming at us that we aren't doing enough, without any knowledge of what we are doing, accomplishes nothing of value. It just breeds a lot of resentment toward outsiders who have appointed themselves our judge and jury.

 

Meanwhile back in reality, the implication of generalizations like the following are clear.

This goes back to what I said earlier about taking responsibility for the things one says. Pretending that making generalizations about gay people doesn't read as "all" is a ridiculous denial.

And since no one ever said or implied any such thing, your resorting to such absurdity tells us that you don't really have any defense to make of your arguments. It's also a very passive-agressive way of re-generalizing that the entire gay community is to blame.

Blame, blame, blame - that seems to be all it's about with you. It's all about finding some way to wound gay people, whether individual members of the gay community have any culpability or not. Apparently all gay people are guilty merely by association in your eyes.

And I think that's a deplorable attitude for anyone to have.

 

... well I'm pretty sure people would be all up in arms with attempts to try except in the context of heterosexual education (and even that is pushing it for many), saying that such education would be "promoting" homosexuality. That said, I had a fair amount of exposure when I attended a gay youth group. Not every gay kid is willing or able to go to such a group though, and most have not had the experience of the 1980's to have first hand experience of the horrors at its height.

Addressing horrors only goes so far, especially when dealing with youth that fancy themselves immune to everything. Other methods need be considered as well.

 

Shhh, they're only looking for a specific type of response that will illustrate what they want to see. You're acting as though they're actually interested in the topic posted about, that was your first mistake. That's not what they want, what they want is to accuse others of not being interested in the topic they're not interested in.

 

Pretty much. The idea that each of us has to be experts on a topic that people spend years of their lives educating themselves over, for when entire social and government institutions are created for, it's a little nonsensical. After more than 5 years on this forum, looking back, it's pretty amazing to me the kinds of things I and others have had to educate ourselves on. Gay rights suddenly means you have to be an expert on such topics as disease control, pedophilia and polygamy. It was pretty mind boggling for me as a 19 year old kid, coming on here every day, looking at the topics and just kinda going "Huh, where did that come from?" For people who believe in "individual responsibility", it's pretty amazing the types of things that apparently the whole gay community has to answer for.

It's so easy for them too, just having to find some obscure article about some topic involving some topic that somehow involves gay people, and then without them hardly knowing a damn thing about it, you have to become an expert to address the topic. One of the many reasons nothing ever gets done here, since more often than not the person isn't really interested in the topic, almost anything you post will be ignored or dismissed anyway. It's all about making someone look bad more than anybody actually looking for a discussion.

Anyway, here's to another 500 threads on pedophilia. Who would have thought I/we would be dealing with that when I walked on to this forum.

 

That pretty much captures it in a nutshell. And I agree with you about having to become an expert on anything and everything linked in any way to gayness - whether it should actually be linked or not. I've learned a LOT, so there are some positives, I guess. But it does get tiresome, spending so much time researching the facts and presenting them, only to be answered with more ignorance and petty bigotry.

 

I think this thread beautifully demonstrates the answer to the question as to why HIV is increasing among gays. They are to busy criticizing anyone who dares point to the problem, to do anything to solve the problem.

 

& quitting homosexuality saves more lives. People who are promiscuous whether it's straight or homosexual will do so because that is what they want to do and not be monogamous. The homosexual AIDS victims chose to be promiscuous because they don't want to be monogamous.

Never have I heard straights blame childhood sex abuse for reasons they do straight sexual behaviors. Yet sometimes, have heard gays and lesbians say childhood sex abuse is reason they do same sex behaviors-it’s about ending same sex conduct even if attractions don’t change. Behavior can be learned. If a boy is homosexually raped repeatedly, it’s more likely he will do gay conduct in adulthood because sex abuse damaged his mind and caused him to behave in ways he wouldn’t. If the boy had not been molested, then it’s less likely he would do gay conduct in adulthood. Only those who are dishonest or deluded deny it.

I am not a religious person but I see something wrong with gay/lesbian conduct-so don’t give me a lecture on how I must be 1 of those Christians. My reasons for being against gay/lesbian behaviors and being against sex changes (transsexuals are worse) are unrelated to any religion. They must abolish sex changes-a surgical mutilation. With homosexuality, if 2 knowing and willing adults want to do gay/lesbian conduct but not tell others what to think, then it’s their life, their choice. But gay/lesbian conduct must be marginalized like smoking.
While they have not conclusively proven same sex behaviors are genes-if that is true, it would be same as alcoholic gene. There are people who become alcoholics because they learn becoming drunkards by seeing this, emulating and getting addicted. Then some people are alcoholics because they have alcoholic gene.

 

There's an unseemly amount of schadenfreude in the thread title. Obscene joy in the suffering of others.

 

The gays have invented a new word to describe their monogamy. Monogamish, which essentially means NOT monogamous.

 

Well, isn't that cute - you think we all got together and invented a new word, and that we all agree with the sentiment behind it.

Pathetic propaganda.

 

The very same people crying crocodile tears about homosexuals and HIV also oppose gay marriage.

And we all know that marriage results in less sexual activity

 

The very same people crying crocodile tears over gay marriage are the ones who pretend AIDS isn't a serious problem in the gay community.

Apathy kills.

 

I was thinking that condoms generally cover the sensitive area of the penis and sexual stimulation to orgasm is therefore more difficult. Homosexual men may be, in part, more accepting of condom-less sex because of this understanding.