- Joined
- Jan 12, 2006
- Posts
- 19,175
- Media
- 37
- Likes
- 26,288
- Points
- 368
- Location
- Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
- Sexuality
- No Response
It's Shallow to Always Decline any Sexual Contact with Someone Who is HIV+?
- Thread starter AlteredEgo
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2006
- Posts
- 809
- Media
- 1
- Likes
- 317
- Points
- 383
- Location
- London (Greater London, England)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 99% Gay, 1% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Isn't it really a moot point though considering what is shallow is personal and highly subjective? There is no universal norm for what shallow means.
I think it's been established ad naseum on this thread that people have the right to control their own body and decide with whom to have sexual relations. Everyone has the ability and freedom to decide their own personal risk thresholds that are correct for them. The context rests more in the way communication is delivered in the discussion about HIV status and the subsequent decisioning and response. Maybe the question shouldn't be 'is it shallow to decline", rather it would be better framed in the positive as 'what's the best way to decline sex with someone who is HIV+'.
- _E_,
wow....
I will not be divulging my view on HIV as a whole as it is definitely in the minority and would make this entire discussion pointless.
However, I am in agreement with Brisler. For a hookup, You don't willingly expose yourself to a life-altering health issue that could lead to your early death, let alone a possibly lower quality of life, but that's just common sense. If you found that person to be more than just a hookup and you actually care about them, then you manage the risk and figure out ways to reduce the possibility of transmission.
Here's the twist on my view. Yes it is shallow to reject someone because of their HIV status, because there are ways to manage risk. Just as it is shallow to reject someone with any other infectious disease, again there are ways to manage risk. For that matter, it is shallow to reject someone for a multitude of reasons like height, weight, skin, eye color, etc. People like to throw around the word preference as an excuse because they find being considered shallow offensive.
Guess what, hooking up just for sex is pretty shallow period. So if you have a preference in your hookups, then yeah it's shallow. If you see nothing wrong with hooking up and being seen as shallow in that manner and therefore having preferences that may include managing risk in being exposed to an STI/STD, then yeah it's shallow. The whole game of hooking up and being discriminatory with preferences though is a shallow activity.
Think of it this way. Because there are ways to manage risk of infection of any STD, and even if you do get it, there are ways of living a long life with it.
In this way, as it being a preference, I would equate having it to being the same as a guy who has a small penis, the word small is subjective and the whole penis size issue is whole huge discussion in itself. Stay with me though. So when someone clicks well and wants to fuck small penis guy but rejects him only after discovering he has a small penis, that is shallow. Small penis guy did not ask to be born with a small penis. HIV person did not ask to contract HIV. Rejecting someone for something they cannot change, after you already click and want to fuck, is shallow.
My question is why is being shallow wrong when all you are looking to do is get off, aka engage in a shallow activity?
The premise of the notion of it being shallow is flawed because hooking up itself is shallow.
It does not mean you are a shallow person, it just means you are a normal human being who gets horny and wants to fuck. I will gladly engage in a shallow activity and fuck my brains out until the cows come home. If people view me as shallow and see that as wrong, good, then one less person I have to screen out, they will not be getting my dick.
Hooking up is shallow, having preferences in hookups is shallow.
Is engaging in shallow behavior wrong? No. Does engaging in a shallow activity make you a shallow person. No.
I would rather someone view being shallow as wrong and see me as a shallow person if it means I don't want to willingly have sex with them because of yet one more "preference" on a list of many, that could save my life or the quality of my life.
Wonder how many times I used the word shallow....SHAAAALLLOOOWWW.
I will not be divulging my view on HIV as a whole as it is definitely in the minority and would make this entire discussion pointless.
However, I am in agreement with Brisler. For a hookup, You don't willingly expose yourself to a life-altering health issue that could lead to your early death, let alone a possibly lower quality of life, but that's just common sense. If you found that person to be more than just a hookup and you actually care about them, then you manage the risk and figure out ways to reduce the possibility of transmission.
Here's the twist on my view. Yes it is shallow to reject someone because of their HIV status, because there are ways to manage risk. Just as it is shallow to reject someone with any other infectious disease, again there are ways to manage risk. For that matter, it is shallow to reject someone for a multitude of reasons like height, weight, skin, eye color, etc. People like to throw around the word preference as an excuse because they find being considered shallow offensive.
Guess what, hooking up just for sex is pretty shallow period. So if you have a preference in your hookups, then yeah it's shallow. If you see nothing wrong with hooking up and being seen as shallow in that manner and therefore having preferences that may include managing risk in being exposed to an STI/STD, then yeah it's shallow. The whole game of hooking up and being discriminatory with preferences though is a shallow activity.
Think of it this way. Because there are ways to manage risk of infection of any STD, and even if you do get it, there are ways of living a long life with it.
In this way, as it being a preference, I would equate having it to being the same as a guy who has a small penis, the word small is subjective and the whole penis size issue is whole huge discussion in itself. Stay with me though. So when someone clicks well and wants to fuck small penis guy but rejects him only after discovering he has a small penis, that is shallow. Small penis guy did not ask to be born with a small penis. HIV person did not ask to contract HIV. Rejecting someone for something they cannot change, after you already click and want to fuck, is shallow.
My question is why is being shallow wrong when all you are looking to do is get off, aka engage in a shallow activity?
The premise of the notion of it being shallow is flawed because hooking up itself is shallow.
It does not mean you are a shallow person, it just means you are a normal human being who gets horny and wants to fuck. I will gladly engage in a shallow activity and fuck my brains out until the cows come home. If people view me as shallow and see that as wrong, good, then one less person I have to screen out, they will not be getting my dick.
Hooking up is shallow, having preferences in hookups is shallow.
Is engaging in shallow behavior wrong? No. Does engaging in a shallow activity make you a shallow person. No.
I would rather someone view being shallow as wrong and see me as a shallow person if it means I don't want to willingly have sex with them because of yet one more "preference" on a list of many, that could save my life or the quality of my life.
Wonder how many times I used the word shallow....SHAAAALLLOOOWWW.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2006
- Posts
- 19,175
- Media
- 37
- Likes
- 26,288
- Points
- 368
- Location
- Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
- Sexuality
- No Response
The dictionary says superficial and lacking depth. My position is the preservation of the longevity and quality of one's life, and decisions made to those ends, are not superficial and lacking depth. If the answer to that question is not subjective, what's the point I asking? I think you've got it backwards, mate.
Perhaps that is your question. It is not mine. To me, the answer to that question is obvious: Politely.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2006
- Posts
- 19,175
- Media
- 37
- Likes
- 26,288
- Points
- 368
- Location
- Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
- Sexuality
- No Response
I'd ask if we could carry on as we had been, minus the idea that our flirtations were going to lead to actual sex. If my request garnered questions from you, I would answer them. If you didn't want to pursue friendship with me, I'd think you quite shallow for being after me exclusively for sex. I would have already been looking for friendship with you, because that's how I roll in my sexual pursuits. I like knowing we'd like to become friends.
FloridaFree
Sexy Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2013
- Posts
- 741
- Media
- 1
- Likes
- 63
- Points
- 63
- Location
- Tampa, Florida
- Sexuality
- 69% Gay, 31% Straight
- Gender
- Male
It's not shallow, it's looking out for your health. Personally, I won't have sex with someone who has an STD. It's not to make them feel bad, it's to preserve my health.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2013
- Posts
- 202
- Media
- 47
- Likes
- 1,852
- Points
- 463
- Location
- The Netherlands
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
I am sorry to have written that a condom will protect you against every std
You are right about that But using one will cut you off from the risk of getting most of them
I think it is shallow to reject sexual contact simply because of HIV status, because a condom will protect you against HIV.. And if the infected individual is on medication and has an undetectable status there is no need to worrie
Here's an article you might find interesting..
STUDY: Undetectable Guys Do Not Transmit HIV To Negative Sex Partners / Queerty
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2006
- Posts
- 19,175
- Media
- 37
- Likes
- 26,288
- Points
- 368
- Location
- Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
- Sexuality
- No Response
Condoms are not 100% protection against anything. There is not one thing a condom has a 100% chance of preventing the spread of. Not one.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2012
- Posts
- 2,769
- Media
- 730
- Likes
- 18,873
- Points
- 543
- Location
- US Midwest
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 90% Straight, 10% Gay
- Gender
- Male
windibundu
Loved Member
I don't really think it should be considered shallow to refuse sex to someone for ANY reason, really, unless maybe if you are in a relationship with them. After all, sex is more than shaking hands with someone, or being friends- it's personal and special, even if you're just having a one night stand. And we all have very personal reasons for choosing who we do and don't have sex with- i think that should be comprehensible to anyone, really.
If you could reverse time, would you still have the encounter that caused you to become infected with HIV, or would you skip that encounter?
I live in South Africa and in my province of Zululand, the incidence of HIV is at least 50%. It is rampant within the black hetrosexual community. There are thousands of children who are being born with HIV, or who contract it though breast milk. There are entire towns where ALL OF THE ADULTS HAVE DIED AS A RESULT OF HIV / AIDS.
Antiretrovirals are available via government clinics, but some of the infected people are unemployed and live rurally, so have absolutely no way of receiving their ARV treatment.
Drug gangs are smoking ARV drugs as another means of getting high.
HIV / AIDS is a very big deal in the black society, but it is impolite to talk about it.
Long distance truckers pick up prostitutes along the national routes, and often contract HIV whilst trucking. The prostitutes are passed backwards and forwards between truckers along the interstate / inter country African highways.
There is also a myth that sleeping with a virgin will cure aids. This has resulted in thousands of children, some younger than a year, being raped.
AIDS / HIV might no longer be a death sentence in countries like the USA, but in the developing nations like Africa, it is STILL VERY MUCH A DEATH SENTENCE.
For some reason, German tourists are very keen on visiting South Africa, and sexually sampling our African maidens. One only has to ask what infection rate is going back to Germany from here.
As far as the African infection within gay males is concerned, the statistics are not clear or meaningful, because homosexuality is still pretty closeted within many African cultures..
Antiretrovirals are available via government clinics, but some of the infected people are unemployed and live rurally, so have absolutely no way of receiving their ARV treatment.
Drug gangs are smoking ARV drugs as another means of getting high.
HIV / AIDS is a very big deal in the black society, but it is impolite to talk about it.
Long distance truckers pick up prostitutes along the national routes, and often contract HIV whilst trucking. The prostitutes are passed backwards and forwards between truckers along the interstate / inter country African highways.
There is also a myth that sleeping with a virgin will cure aids. This has resulted in thousands of children, some younger than a year, being raped.
AIDS / HIV might no longer be a death sentence in countries like the USA, but in the developing nations like Africa, it is STILL VERY MUCH A DEATH SENTENCE.
For some reason, German tourists are very keen on visiting South Africa, and sexually sampling our African maidens. One only has to ask what infection rate is going back to Germany from here.
As far as the African infection within gay males is concerned, the statistics are not clear or meaningful, because homosexuality is still pretty closeted within many African cultures..
HIV itself is pretty offensive as a disease.
I don't quite follow your statement, trade the word HIV with Jew, Black, woman, Hispanic or cancer..
There are HIV positive Jews, Blacks, women, Hispanics and some people with cancer also are HIV positive.
The sad difference between cancer and HIV, is that they can both be fatal diseases, but only one of them can be sometimes cured. ( at this time )
The other sad truth is that with exception of accidental infection due to crime (rape) or medical errors, such as infected blood, the HIV infection occurs by the exchange of body fluids inspite of the person / people exchanging the fluids knowing the actual risk involved..
In the case of cancer, the disease chooses who it will infect.
AIDS came to visit someone in my family, and although we love this person and support him, we are also angry with him for being irresponsible and hedonistic by engaging in activities that will increase the chance of infection, and being another vector for the further spread.
You have it right- but your post above- that it would be a decision made in preservation of ones longevity- is ridiculous. It's a decision made for peace of mind only. By your own admission condoms are not 100% effective- so the only way to get no STDs is to abstain from all forms of sexual contact. If you refuse to have sex with a guy who admits being poz, and you claim to only have sex with neg, what you are really saying is that you only have sex with guys who CLAIM they are neg- since even if they really did receive a neg test even THAT day, the test is out of date.
And as an addendum to this, more and more research is showing that if a poz person has their infection under control- i.e. on meds and undetectable, there is functionally a zero % chance of contracting HIV from them. They are 100% safer to have sex with than someone who claims to be neg but really isnt 100% sure of their status, since HIV is most transmittable in the early stages of infection due to high viral loads
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2006
- Posts
- 19,175
- Media
- 37
- Likes
- 26,288
- Points
- 368
- Location
- Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
- Sexuality
- No Response
It is not purely for peace of mind. It is risk management. There are acceptable risks, and unacceptable risks. You know where I stand.
For the love of God- educate yourself. Re read my posts and come back to me. You are NOT sero sorting for any reason other than peace of mind. You may THINK you are reducing your chance of contracting HIV by refusing sexual contact with those who admit positive status, and only having sex with people who admit to negative status, but you are not. Look up some of the statistics about HIV testing, and the % of guys who do not know their status. And look into the science of HIV seroconversion. I am not putting down anybodys right to refuse sex with whomever they please- but lets all be 100% honest here.
Similar threads
