HIV Still Divides Gay Men. It Doesn’t Have To.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 1:20 AM GMT
    "The HIV ÷ message comes just as gay men are grappling with a host of new scientific realities that are altering the social landscape."

    "The increased adoption of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has re-energized activists and provided a way for HIV negative gay men to participate fully in their own HIV prevention. Meanwhile, research has definitively shown that people living with HIV who are on treatment and maintain an undetectable viral load have no chance of infecting their sex partners. A new group, Prevention Access Campaign, is aggressively promoting the message that undetectable HIV positive people pose no risk to others."
    http://www.queerty.com/hiv-often-divides-gay-men-doesnt-20160710

    The response on RJ will be "Why WOULD I have anything to do with an HIV man?" For many people that has already occurred: people in sero-discordant relationships that already exist. HIV+/Undetectable has been studied more extensively that HIV transmission through kissing, touching, mosquito bits, or eating......things well assume by now to be no risk. And that "probably ZERO" has not changed since the Partner's Study. Exactly ZERO still.

    I expect Art Deco to come on with his usual shock and disinformation: "we can't KNOW if someone is undetectable!" (Yes, you can. I CAN. Kaiser-Permanente just started doing a compliance sheet of my medications. All HIV meds were 98.7 or above. It's determined by pill count. Unless of course I just throw them out and don't use them, pretty stupid!) And viral load tests every 3-4 months, which BTW some say is too often for the long term stable patients. He (and others) have called me dangerous, I should be banned, I'm causing more infections (???), blips, spikes, the objections and insults were voluminous.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 1:55 AM GMT
    TIMinPS said
    The response on RJ will be "Why WOULD I have anything to do with an HIV man? For many people that has already occurred: people in sero-discordant relationships that already exist. HIV+/Undetectable has been studied more extensively that HIV transmission through kissing, touching, mosquito bits, or eating......things well assume by now to be no risk. And that "probably ZERO" has not changed since the Partner's Study. Exactly ZERO still.

    I expect Art Deco to come on with his usual shock and disinformation: "we can't KNOW if someone is undetectable!" (Yes, you can. I CAN. Kaiser-Permanente just started doing a compliance sheet of my medications. All HIV meds were 98.7 or above. It's determined by pill count. Unless of course I just throw them out and don't use them, pretty stupid!) And viral load tests every 3-4 months, which BTW some say is too often for the long term stable patients. He (and others) have called me dangerous, I should be banned, I'm causing more infections (???), blips, spikes, the objections and insults were voluminous.

    Your post is unfair to me on a number of points. First, you neglected to mention that I knowingly married a guy who was HIV poz. And bankrupted myself taking care of him daily when he developed AIDS, and was at his side until the moment he died. How many negative guys do that? I really resent you badmouthing me in that regard.

    Second, my point remains. You do NOT know a strange guy's HIV status this minute. Not him, not any one.

    I don't care about undetectable loads, debatable percentages, PrEP, or any of that happy horseshit. A guy who's telling you that could just as well be telling you he doesn't have HIV at all, that he's negative. And you're gonna believe what some guy says, so he can have sex with you? Good luck!

    Safe sex means assuming he's positive, and infectious. You can still have sex with him, but safe sex only, if you think you know how to do it. And have the balls for it. As I did.

    If you don't, then I suggest you try some other safer options.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 6:13 PM GMT
    You still can't know for sure, and it's my own body, if I choose to discriminate and not have sex with someone who has HIV it's my prerogative and no amount of work on your part will change my mind. If you're that upset that you can't have sex with as many negative men as you want, then you should have been more careful before you got AIDS. If I get HIV today and someone says sorry I don't want to have sex with you due to safety reasons, i'm not going to call them ignorant because i'm a selfish positive guy wanting to fuck as many people as possible. Do you know how many positive guys I see online who say they are pigs and into BB sex? that's exactly why many have aids, because they fuck like rabbits, act irresponsibly, and view men as sex objects instead of getting to know who they really are and being satisfied with 1 partner: they need countless.

    While we're on topic, even if your disease is at bay and undetectable, your body still isn't clean, because if you go off of the medication, it comes back and you die, so fuck off with your#wereallclean Bullshit, because we're not all equally clean as people who make wise choices with their sexual lifestyle. So many pandering pussies in the gay community, try eating some dirt and toughening up. Having the status of "clean" requires work and practice, it's not a given right for fuck sake.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 6:58 PM GMT
    Someone really close to me was just diagnosed as being HIV+... came to me for advice on a few aspects of the social ramifications, and some general support. My advice was basically what's being said here. He's really young, so I told him the real challenge for him will be 20+ years from now when he's been taking the meds for so long that he may lose perspective on how it ranks as a priority, and maintaining his health insurance. Socially, the stigma will likely take a couple generations. Even if the threat is being managed, the fear was real..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 7:08 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    TIMinPS said
    The response on RJ will be "Why WOULD I have anything to do with an HIV man? For many people that has already occurred: people in sero-discordant relationships that already exist. HIV+/Undetectable has been studied more extensively that HIV transmission through kissing, touching, mosquito bits, or eating......things well assume by now to be no risk. And that "probably ZERO" has not changed since the Partner's Study. Exactly ZERO still.

    I expect Art Deco to come on with his usual shock and disinformation: "we can't KNOW if someone is undetectable!" (Yes, you can. I CAN. Kaiser-Permanente just started doing a compliance sheet of my medications. All HIV meds were 98.7 or above. It's determined by pill count. Unless of course I just throw them out and don't use them, pretty stupid!) And viral load tests every 3-4 months, which BTW some say is too often for the long term stable patients. He (and others) have called me dangerous, I should be banned, I'm causing more infections (???), blips, spikes, the objections and insults were voluminous.

    Your post is unfair to me on a number of points. First, you neglected to mention that I knowingly married a guy who was HIV poz. And bankrupted myself taking care of him daily when he developed AIDS, and was at his side until the moment he died. How many negative guys do that? I really resent you badmouthing me in that regard.

    Second, my point remains. You do NOT know a strange guy's HIV status this minute. Not him, not any one.

    I don't care about undetectable loads, debatable percentages, PrEP, or any of that happy horseshit. A guy who's telling you that could just as well be telling you he doesn't have HIV at all, that he's negative. And you're gonna believe what some guy says, so he can have sex with you? Good luck!

    Safe sex means assuming he's positive, and infectious. You can still have sex with him, but safe sex only, if you think you know how to do it. And have the balls for it. As I did.

    If you don't, then I suggest you try some other safer options.


    You RESENT it?

    After all the SHIT you dished at me? Go fuck yourself. Do you remember saying Dr. Fauci was a quack? Do you remember accusing me of spreading HIV? DO you remember trying to ban me?

    You also said he didn't have AIDS and died while having normal blood work, that it was just HIV. You said anyone with HIV could come down with something at a anytime. Even when suppressed.

    Your narrative changes on a whim.

    II have saved some of you vile on my old computer . You are a despicable person. You lie about your dead ex to get sympathy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 7:16 PM GMT
    TO23 saidYou still can't know for sure, and it's my own body, if I choose to discriminate and not have sex with someone who has HIV it's my prerogative and no amount of work on your part will change my mind. If you're that upset that you can't have sex with as many negative men as you want, then you should have been more careful before you got AIDS. If I get HIV today and someone says sorry I don't want to have sex with you due to safety reasons, i'm not going to call them ignorant because i'm a selfish positive guy wanting to fuck as many people as possible. Do you know how many positive guys I see online who say they are pigs and into BB sex? that's exactly why many have aids, because they fuck like rabbits, act irresponsibly, and view men as sex objects instead of getting to know who they really are and being satisfied with 1 partner: they need countless.

    While we're on topic, even if your disease is at bay and undetectable, your body still isn't clean, because if you go off of the medication, it comes back and you die, so fuck off with your#wereallclean Bullshit, because we're not all equally clean as people who make wise choices with their sexual lifestyle. So many pandering pussies in the gay community, try eating some dirt and toughening up. Having the status of "clean" requires work and practice, it's not a given right for fuck sake.


    CLEAN? Really?
    "Wise choices"?

    Wow, "selfish, pigs, fuck like bunnies, irresponsible" etc. what a bunch of stigmatizing CRAP. Stereotype much? Besides that describes a lot of online profiles, regardless of HIV status.

    It isn't about me having sex with neg guys. It's about reducing the HIV pool.
    On one end of the pool is the PrEP and UVL.....they are not transmitting HIV. On the deep end is the majority who think they are Negative. You've surrounded yourself with piranhas, yet lambast the gold fish.

    The more stigma, the less people will test. And the more unknown HIV+ transmissions will occur.

    You sleep with whoever YOU like. But when stupid people sleep with other stupid people SHIT happens.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 7:33 PM GMT
    Do you all really go through life thinking everyone is a liar?

    It's my perspective (me being POZ) if someone tells you they are POZ......they probably are!

    In CA most of those who are POZ are also UVL. Less in oppressive states.

    I can trust people. We are in the same club, of sorts. We talk about it. "Who's your doctor? What meds? How long? What's your Ts? " Sometimes I see them at the pharmacy.

    You see it as us vs them. "Clean" vs dirty. You pat yourself on the back for being Neg, even if its just dumb luck. I see it as those that know, and DO something about it (ART, PrEP)...and those that don't.

    Sometimes I think it's easier to be POZ than worry all the time about getting "it". It has caused the rift in our community. It's not the people on ART or PrEP. It's the people who hang on to the antiquated notion that POZ guys want to infect others. Half of the benefits of TasP is it PREVENTS transmission. Yet people like art deco accuse us of being irresponsible.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2016 9:44 PM GMT
    What is the "divide"? That someone simply doesn't want to fuck you?

    "A new group, Prevention Access Campaign, is aggressively promoting the message that undetectable HIV positive people pose no risk to others."

    And how are guys supposed to know who is undetectable and who isn't? Trust their word? Thought that was a no-no. Rely on their most recent blood labs? That was also previously frowned upon. This is so clearly more poz propaganda released with the intention of getting more neg meat.
  • ANTiSociaLiNJ...

    Posts: 1168

    Jul 13, 2016 1:03 AM GMT
    Well, this thread wasted no time in getting ugly at lightning speed. icon_lol.gif
  • David3K

    Posts: 231

    Jul 13, 2016 2:36 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    TIMinPS said
    The response on RJ will be "Why WOULD I have anything to do with an HIV man? For many people that has already occurred: people in sero-discordant relationships that already exist. HIV+/Undetectable has been studied more extensively that HIV transmission through kissing, touching, mosquito bits, or eating......things well assume by now to be no risk. And that "probably ZERO" has not changed since the Partner's Study. Exactly ZERO still.

    I expect Art Deco to come on with his usual shock and disinformation: "we can't KNOW if someone is undetectable!" (Yes, you can. I CAN. Kaiser-Permanente just started doing a compliance sheet of my medications. All HIV meds were 98.7 or above. It's determined by pill count. Unless of course I just throw them out and don't use them, pretty stupid!) And viral load tests every 3-4 months, which BTW some say is too often for the long term stable patients. He (and others) have called me dangerous, I should be banned, I'm causing more infections (???), blips, spikes, the objections and insults were voluminous.

    Your post is unfair to me on a number of points. First, you neglected to mention that I knowingly married a guy who was HIV poz. And bankrupted myself taking care of him daily when he developed AIDS, and was at his side until the moment he died. How many negative guys do that? I really resent you badmouthing me in that regard.

    Second, my point remains. You do NOT know a strange guy's HIV status this minute. Not him, not any one.

    I don't care about undetectable loads, debatable percentages, PrEP, or any of that happy horseshit. A guy who's telling you that could just as well be telling you he doesn't have HIV at all, that he's negative. And you're gonna believe what some guy says, so he can have sex with you? Good luck!

    Safe sex means assuming he's positive, and infectious. You can still have sex with him, but safe sex only, if you think you know how to do it. And have the balls for it. As I did.

    If you don't, then I suggest you try some other safer options.

    +1

    Thats common sense
  • David3K

    Posts: 231

    Jul 13, 2016 2:42 AM GMT
    CODY4U saidWhat is the "divide"? That someone simply doesn't want to fuck you?

    "A new group, Prevention Access Campaign, is aggressively promoting the message that undetectable HIV positive people pose no risk to others."

    And how are guys supposed to know who is undetectable and who isn't? Trust their word? Thought that was a no-no. Rely on their most recent blood labs? That was also previously frowned upon. This is so clearly more poz propaganda released intention of getting more neg meat.


    Totally agree. OP expects people to blindly trust someones "undetectable status". Who knows what they really are. Should we trust on the ones saying "im neg, lets bareback" too?
  • David3K

    Posts: 231

    Jul 13, 2016 2:44 AM GMT
    TO23 saidYou still can't know for sure, and it's my own body, if I choose to discriminate and not have sex with someone who has HIV it's my prerogative and no amount of work on your part will change my mind. If you're that upset that you can't have sex with as many negative men as you want, then you should have been more careful before you got AIDS. If I get HIV today and someone says sorry I don't want to have sex with you due to safety reasons, i'm not going to call them ignorant because i'm a selfish positive guy wanting to fuck as many people as possible. Do you know how many positive guys I see online who say they are pigs and into BB sex? that's exactly why many have aids, because they fuck like rabbits, act irresponsibly, and view men as sex objects instead of getting to know who they really are and being satisfied with 1 partner: they need countless.

    While we're on topic, even if your disease is at bay and undetectable, your body still isn't clean, because if you go off of the medication, it comes back and you die, so fuck off with your#wereallclean Bullshit, because we're not all equally clean as people who make wise choices with their sexual lifestyle. So many pandering pussies in the gay community, try eating some dirt and toughening up. Having the status of "clean" requires work and practice, it's not a given right for fuck sake.


    +1000
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 13, 2016 5:31 AM GMT
    I just want to know who is paying for all your meds and treatment? If you lose your job who is going to pay for all of it? Is a 20 something, that wants to use Truvada , paying the $20k + that it costs per year? Research the projected financial collapse of your utopia. Who are you taking funds from to support your lifestyle?

    Your arguments like most gay issues are throughly selfish and frighteningly unsustainable. As Money is diverted from the needs of society to the need of the privileged individual civilization collapses. Rich gay white kids that want to BB on Truveda steal an education and subsequent job from a black kid. We are seeing the effects of that now.
  • ANTiSociaLiNJ...

    Posts: 1168

    Jul 13, 2016 9:32 PM GMT
    MaleElement saidI just want to know who is paying for all your meds and treatment? If you lose your job who is going to pay for all of it? Is a 20 something, that wants to use Truvada , paying the $20k + that it costs per year? Research the projected financial collapse of your utopia. Who are you taking funds from to support your lifestyle?

    Your arguments like most gay issues are throughly selfish and frighteningly unsustainable. As Money is diverted from the needs of society to the need of the privileged individual civilization collapses. Rich gay white kids that want to BB on Truveda steal an education and subsequent job from a black kid. We are seeing the effects of that now.


    Oh boy. So now this is becoming a race issue? White against black? May I ask - what do you do for black people to help them survive such harsh and racist times? Hym? icon_rolleyes.gif You're doing nothing more than pandering.

    You obviously have no concept of governmental fund allocation. If you did you'd easily realise how something so minor like the expense of Truvada pales in comparison to everything else we waste money on.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2016 2:38 AM GMT
    TIMinPS said
    You also said he didn't have AIDS and died while having normal blood work, that it was just HIV. You said anyone with HIV could come down with something at a anytime. Even when suppressed.

    Your narrative changes on a whim.

    My narrative hasn't changed. But rather, your relating of it does.

    I said nothing remotely like he died while having normal blood work. How did you invent that crazy thing?

    I have said, and it remains true, that an opportunistic AIDS disease can unexpectedly strike an HIV person, who has excellent blood counts. My late partner had excellent counts, virtually undetectable, doctors were telling him he was doing great. I was sitting right there for his office visits. And they never said he had developed AIDS.

    After his death I discovered an earlier doctor's report that suggested he did have AIDS, before I met him. But it was unclear, and the term was applied loosely in that time period. I'll never know the truth.

    While we were together he did suddenly contracted a deadly, incurable opportunistic AIDS disease from seemingly out of nowhere. That he didn't have before. Despite his great blood counts. Fast-moving, he was dead within a few months of its first apparent onset.

    Now while HIV suppression methods have improved, and undetectable counts are increasingly common, they are still not a 100% guarantee against all AIDS diseases, that can strike a person with a compromised immune system. Or are you claiming they are?

    Because that would be a medical breakthrough indeed, that merits a lot more exposure than just RJ. Are you saying that undetectable HIV viral blood counts make a person immune to any opportunistic AIDS diseases? Yes or no?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2016 10:15 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    TIMinPS said
    You also said he didn't have AIDS and died while having normal blood work, that it was just HIV. You said anyone with HIV could come down with something at a anytime. Even when suppressed.

    Your narrative changes on a whim.

    My narrative hasn't changed. But rather, your relating of it does.

    I said nothing remotely like he died while having normal blood work. How did you invent that crazy thing? WTF ! Read what you write in the next paragraph! " My late partner had excellent counts, virtually undetectable, doctors were telling him he was doing great.'
    . "Virtually undetectable"? There is no such thing. '

    "Counts" INCLUDE blood work you CRAZY stupid fool. If his T-cells were virtually undetectable.....that's not a good thing.


    I have said, and it remains true, that an opportunistic AIDS disease can unexpectedly strike an HIV person, who has excellent blood counts. My late partner had excellent counts, virtually undetectable, doctors were telling him he was doing great. I was sitting right there for his office visits. And they never said he had developed AIDS.

    He had AIDS. PERIOD. His counts were in the toilet. Without question his T-cells were less than 50, if not 0. That is not "excellent" by any stretch.

    After his death I discovered an earlier doctor's report that suggested he did have AIDS, before I met him. But it was unclear, and the term was applied loosely in that time period. I'll never know the truth.

    While we were together he did suddenly contracted a deadly, incurable opportunistic AIDS disease from seemingly out of nowhere. That he didn't have before. Despite his great blood counts. (you say it again). Fast-moving, he was dead within a few months of its first apparent onset.

    Are you totally whacked? Let's get this straight:
    1) He was diagnosed with AIDS before he met you.
    2) You were together for a period of time. Years?
    3) He didn't "suddenly" contract AIDS. His immune system had declined over years. A rare AIDS opportunistic infection can come out of nowhere, quickly, but it would NOT have affected a healthy HIV person.
    4) The really sad thing is he had to hide it from you. Or you refused to admit it.


    Now while HIV suppression methods have improved, and undetectable counts are increasingly common, they are still not a 100% guarantee against all AIDS diseases, that can strike a person with a compromised immune system. Or are you claiming they are?

    If you start ART before T-cells decline, 350 was the usual marker, now it's 700, 1000, it doesn't matter......you will only have HIV. Not AIDS. There wouldn't be a comprised immune system. So yes, if you are undetectable you can not have an AIDS disease. Even if you had KS, it wouldn't be AIDS related. Negative people can get it too.

    Now if you have AIDS, say with 70 T-cells, and start ART you may rebound. But your immune system was already compromised. And still susceptible until T-cells are at least 200. I think they still use Bactrim for pneumonia at that point. And T-cells usually do increase on ART, slowly.


    Because that would be a medical breakthrough indeed, that merits a lot more exposure than just RJ. Are you saying that undetectable HIV viral blood counts make a person immune to any opportunistic AIDS diseases? Yes or no?


    Geez, really???? RJ? LOL!
    That's why it was called one of the medical breakthroughs of the decade! That's why they say we can live a normal life span now.
    http://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/17594
    Of the year 2011:
    http://www.sciencemag.org/site/special/btoy2011/

    I really hope this isn't news to you. For someone who thinks they have a knowledge of HIV, not knowing that is really pathetic. But then every time I post something about TasP you act like it's heresy. I've posted many links of "merit" on just this subject.

    As I explained above it is not a yes or no answer. No one is immune from getting KS or pneumonia. No one. But that doesn't make it AIDS related. You could still have AIDS with an undetectable viral load, hypothetically. You don't actually lose an AIDS diagnosis, you are stuck with that label for life. You could still DIE of AIDS complications if you waited too long. That's why the CDC, WHO and everyone says to start TasP immediately after diagnosis, not to wait.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2016 10:22 AM GMT
    ANTiSociaLiNJUSTICeWarior said
    MaleElement saidI just want to know who is paying for all your meds and treatment? If you lose your job who is going to pay for all of it? Is a 20 something, that wants to use Truvada , paying the $20k + that it costs per year? Research the projected financial collapse of your utopia. Who are you taking funds from to support your lifestyle?

    Your arguments like most gay issues are throughly selfish and frighteningly unsustainable. As Money is diverted from the needs of society to the need of the privileged individual civilization collapses. Rich gay white kids that want to BB on Truveda steal an education and subsequent job from a black kid. We are seeing the effects of that now.


    Oh boy. So now this is becoming a race issue? White against black? May I ask - what do you do for black people to help them survive such harsh and racist times? Hym? icon_rolleyes.gif You're doing nothing more than pandering.

    You obviously have no concept of governmental fund allocation. If you did you'd easily realise how something so minor like the expense of Truvada pales in comparison to everything else we waste money on.


    I would just like to add, since so many say it selfish to do PrEP or TasP, it is still only in a small percentage of the US population. It's easier to contain it before it gets into the wider population as it is in Africa. Then it could be a major drain on the economy.

    Sadly, Black youths are less likely to be on TasP or PrEP.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2016 7:35 PM GMT
    The PARTNER STUDY is now in it's 6th year. It's an ongoing study with results released periodically.



  • ANTiSociaLiNJ...

    Posts: 1168

    Jul 19, 2016 1:03 AM GMT
    TIMinPS saidThe PARTNER STUDY is now in it's 6th year. It's an ongoing study with results released periodically.





    Thanks for that video. One thing I'd like to point out about that study which I think the self-hating RJ-gays will happily try to downplay or flat out ignore is that 62% of those serodiscordant couples were straight. And only 38% were gay. So basically, let's remember that there are plenty of heterosexuals living with the disease. It's not limited to just gay men - and as a means for you to attack your fellow brethren for being so "irresponsible and reckless." I know you self-loathing gays wish you were straight because you think your lives would be so much easier but that just shows how little you know about the world outside of your bitter bubble.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 19, 2016 5:05 AM GMT
    ANTiSociaLiNJUSTICeWarior said
    TIMinPS saidThe PARTNER STUDY is now in it's 6th year. It's an ongoing study with results released periodically.





    Thanks for that video. One thing I'd like to point out about that study which I think the self-hating RJ-gays will happily try to downplay or flat out ignore is that 62% of those serodiscordant couples were straight. And only 38% were gay. So basically, let's remember that there are plenty of heterosexuals living with the disease. It's not limited to just gay men - and as a means for you to attack your
    fellow brethren for being so "irresponsible and reckless." I know you self-loathing gays wish you were straight because you think your lives would be so much easier but that just shows how little you know about the world outside of your bitter bubble.


    Bullshit buddy it's not me advocating that infected men have BB sex with other men. Unlike vaginas and anus can rip and or tare much more easily but you perpetuate that BB male2male anal sex should be accepted despite this. You are the self loathing one buddy. Their is a 92% assurity or up to 8% risk factor quoted by the agency staff at ACON where I am regularly tested.

    Please understand that any increase in the number of people willing to have sex with an openly Poz person is not the primary objective of TasP, though many of you BB warriors who all seem to be HIV Poz oddly enough, hmmmmm. Maybe those who aren't and wish to stay that way should embrace the official TasP and current safe sex strategy which actually works rather than listen to vested interests like yourself and TiMnPIps
  • ANTiSociaLiNJ...

    Posts: 1168

    Jul 19, 2016 6:38 AM GMT
    ^ Dang, look at how you jump to conclusions because I comment on self-hating gays. Gay men (mostly here) are always shit talking other gay men in any way they can. I wasn't even thinking of you when I created my post to this thread. But apparently you've personalized what I've said and overreacted. Quote me once anywhere on this site as someone who supports BB sex. And believe it or not, a gay man free of HIV can have an opinion on the matter that doesn't align with yours.

    By the way, there's no such word a "assurity." But keep on typing as you continue to look dumber than you look with every post you contaminate the site with as I find you mostly amusing. That is, when you're not spreading lies, of course.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 19, 2016 1:59 PM GMT
    ANTiSociaLiNJUSTICeWarior said^ Dang, look at how you jump to conclusions because I comment on self-hating gays. Gay men (mostly here) are always shit talking other gay men in any way they can. I wasn't even thinking of you when I created my post to this thread. But apparently you've personalized what I've said and overreacted. Quote me once anywhere on this site as someone who supports BB sex. And believe it or not, a gay man free of HIV can have an opinion on the matter that doesn't align with yours.

    By the way, there's no such word a "assurity." But keep on typing as you continue to look dumber than you look with every post you contaminate the site with as I find you mostly amusing. That is, when you're not spreading lies, of course.


    I didn't personalise it all, however I know Thier are more gay Poz men than ever who are advocating TasP as an excuse for BB sex and can't understand why people don't just accept their way of thinking. My stats are from ACON AIDS council of NSW who administer the rapid testing and general STI check testing for free in Sydney and regional centres. I'll believe them above any poster on here. Maybe cease your personalising of people's reactions as it doesn't help, just creates an us V them mentality more suited to contact sports not sexual health
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 19, 2016 2:14 PM GMT
    TIMinPS said
    TO23 saidYou still can't know for sure, and it's my own body, if I choose to discriminate and not have sex with someone who has HIV it's my prerogative and no amount of work on your part will change my mind. If you're that upset that you can't have sex with as many negative men as you want, then you should have been more careful before you got AIDS. If I get HIV today and someone says sorry I don't want to have sex with you due to safety reasons, i'm not going to call them ignorant because i'm a selfish positive guy wanting to fuck as many people as possible. Do you know how many positive guys I see online who say they are pigs and into BB sex? that's exactly why many have aids, because they fuck like rabbits, act irresponsibly, and view men as sex objects instead of getting to know who they really are and being satisfied with 1 partner: they need countless.

    While we're on topic, even if your disease is at bay and undetectable, your body still isn't clean, because if you go off of the medication, it comes back and you die, so fuck off with your#wereallclean Bullshit, because we're not all equally clean as people who make wise choices with their sexual lifestyle. So many pandering pussies in the gay community, try eating some dirt and toughening up. Having the status of "clean" requires work and practice, it's not a given right for fuck sake.


    CLEAN? Really?
    "Wise choices"?

    Wow, "selfish, pigs, fuck like bunnies, irresponsible" etc. what a bunch of stigmatizing CRAP. Stereotype much? Besides that describes a lot of online profiles, regardless of HIV status.

    It isn't about me having sex with neg guys. It's about reducing the HIV pool.
    On one end of the pool is the PrEP and UVL.....they are not transmitting HIV. On the deep end is the majority who think they are Negative. You've surrounded yourself with piranhas, yet lambast the gold fish.

    The more stigma, the less people will test. And the more unknown HIV+ transmissions will occur.

    You sleep with whoever YOU like. But when stupid people sleep with other stupid people SHIT happens.



    Timm I agree this guy TO23 goes way to far. I'm all for educating people that sex with PoZ guys and with precautions so outright discrimination is wrong full stop. You need to stop lashing out though at people and accept that you yourself have made people like TO23 guy feel justified in their views by making insane comments like "sex with a random UVL guy is safer...........". That's what myself and others object to not the science based stuff, pity you can't grasp that buddy
  • ANTiSociaLiNJ...

    Posts: 1168

    Jul 20, 2016 1:21 AM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said
    ANTiSociaLiNJUSTICeWarior said^ Dang, look at how you jump to conclusions because I comment on self-hating gays. Gay men (mostly here) are always shit talking other gay men in any way they can. I wasn't even thinking of you when I created my post to this thread. But apparently you've personalized what I've said and overreacted. Quote me once anywhere on this site as someone who supports BB sex. And believe it or not, a gay man free of HIV can have an opinion on the matter that doesn't align with yours.

    By the way, there's no such word a "assurity." But keep on typing as you continue to look dumber than you look with every post you contaminate the site with as I find you mostly amusing. That is, when you're not spreading lies, of course.


    I didn't personalise it all, however I know Thier are more gay Poz men than ever who are advocating TasP as an excuse for BB sex and can't understand why people don't just accept their way of thinking. My stats are from ACON AIDS council of NSW who administer the rapid testing and general STI check testing for free in Sydney and regional centres. I'll believe them above any poster on here. Maybe cease your personalising of people's reactions as it doesn't help, just creates an us V them mentality more suited to contact sports not sexual health


    Earlier you quoted me and addressed me directly. How is that not personalizing?

    In this thread I was merely expressing my relief that people aren't getting HIV. And then, out of nowhere, you made the assumption that I am advocating bareback sex? Just look at yourself. Not only do you take it upon yourself to 'invent' new vocabulary but your comprehension skills are evidently lacking.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 20, 2016 6:04 AM GMT
    At the risk of receiving a vitriolic response, I will say that I choose to not have sex with someone who is HIV positive, regardless of their undetectable status.

    I'm not apologetic about it either-I value my negative status, and since it is my body I can honestly do with it whatever I please, with whomever I please. I know this may sound like a cruel reality to those who are working hard to maintain their healthy HIV+ status...

    Sorry, not sorry.