While the thought of someone intentionally spreading a disease like this is unfathomable and just plain fucked up, you did say he's open about his status and he's on medication.
^You pretty much nailed it. So many people here want to demonize the person with HIV while the HIV- partner in this scenario gets a free pass. No lying took place.
Manipulation of facts is such a skill and it's what you surely must mean by your profile tittle. How about taking responsibility 4 your partner. I am still yet to see a valid reason your BB agenda should be decriminalised.
On the other hand there is plenty of BB going on in the local penitentiary with the other sex offenders.
The personal attacks are getting old. Once again, the OP stated that this person was open about his HIV status.
How ironic that you mention the "manipulation of facts" as you are exquisite at doing just that.
The OP didn't actually say the people who he slept with where informed about his status so you manipulated the facts to suit you. Again I see peope (people, spell check please) using their Stigmata claiming to be a victim when it's clear that the so called persecution is little more than people's care for there own health and placing that above the the rights of HIV positive people who in many cases are recieving public funding and private donations for treatment yet despite this apparently its all up to the poor suckers who hand over their hard earned money to allow people to continue their cycle of unhealthy sexual ethics. (horrible run-on sentence! As usual.) If this is not addressed soon the real consequences throughout the community will engulf your stigmata claims for PLHIV being victims (huh?)
Jesus, what an idiot!
First of all stigmata means: (btw ":" means "the following")
(singular stigma) is a term used by members of the Christian faith to describe body marks, sores, or sensations of pain in locations corresponding to the crucifixion wounds of Jesus Christ, such as the hands, wrists, and feet."
"....it's clear that the so called persecution is little more than people's care for there own health and placing that above the the rights of HIV positive people....." Is that your intended sentence?
If it is, I agree that is true. Negative people's stigma is based on a care for there own health and placing that above the the rights of HIV positive people.
Everyone needs to be their best own advocate. Certainly when it comes to health care. POZ or NEG it shouldn't intrude on my care, or yours. If it does intrude that's where it becomes unhealthy.
Is recreational sex "unhealthy sexual ethics"? If so then ALL gay sex is. None of our sex is for procreative purposes. Or is it your arbitrary definition?
Your economic rambling makes no sense. What about Ebola, Polio, the Flu, Cancer? We treat people with STDs. Why? Because as a society we take care of our ill. It costs money, billions. But the cost of AIDS deaths to society is estimated to be in the billions and trillions. If you are implying we shouldn't take care of people with HIV/AIDS or we make stipulations on, or if, the people are worthy of care, THAT is the worst kind of STIGMA I have ever heard of.
That is not science and it sure as hell isn't medicine (other than practiced in WWII Germany). But you don't acknowledge current science/medicine either. That's what stigma does: it makes people deaf, unyielding, not listening to people who know more than you because they are one of "them".