Off Topic Forums > Off Topic Forum

Combative Responses in 'Am I Infected' Forum

<< < (2/5) > >>


--- Quote from: otherplaces on July 18, 2006, 06:51:43 PM ---All your points can easily be conveyed w/o such a condescending tone.

I'm loathe to get into a debate about oral sex other than to say I pretty much disagree with your position on it, and your position does not agree with the "Lessons" section.

--- End quote ---

My "tone" in the AM I INFECTED forum is logical and science based when at all possible. I am sorry if my mannerisms there come across as condescending. They are not intended as such.

As for my position disagreeing with the LESSONS, I find that amusing since I helped research and revise the LESSONS.

From the LESSONS:

--- Quote ---Having unprotected oral sex is a theoretical risk, as it is considered possible, but has never been shown to be an independent risk factor for HIV infection.

--- End quote ---

--- Quote ---There have been a number of studies that have closely followed MSM and heterosexual couples, in which one partner was HIV positive and the other partner was HIV negative. In all of the studies, couples that used condoms consistently and correctly during every experience of vaginal or anal sex but didn't use condoms during oral sex did not see HIV spread from the HIV positive partner to the HIV negative partner.

There have been three case reports and a few studies suggesting that some people have been infected with HIV as a result of unprotected oral sex. However, these case reports and studies all involved MSM men who were the receptive partners (the person doing the "sucking") during unprotected oral sex with another HIV-positive man. There haven't been any case reports or studies documenting HIV infection among female receptive partners during unprotected oral sex. Even more importantly, there hasn't been a single documented case of HIV transmission to an insertive partner (the person being "sucked") during unprotected oral sex, either among MSM or heterosexuals.

--- End quote ---

It is the scientifically accurate and quantifiable position here at that receptive fellatio poses an exceedingly small risk for HIV infection, and many credible HIV counselors (including Andy Velez) would not recommend testing over that single activity. Vanishingly small risk does not mean zero risk, and I have never, ever claimed it as such.

If I seem on a high horse over this, it's because while you claim not to want to get into a discussion of oral sex, thats exactly what you are doing in this forum, which, being off-topic, is likely to be read by worried wells and infected folks alike.

I am absolutely NOT going to argue with YOU about how you got infected. I simply don't care. I will, however, defend the science which shapes our LESSONS section. Maybe that's hubris, since I played a role in shaping that section. So be it. The science is sound, and the LESSONS, to which I subscribe, are valid.

If you do not like my tone, you are under no obligation to read my posts. But I do tend to be very protective of the credibility of the AM I INFECTED forum, and have no intention of modifying my tone, especially when I perceive that the credibility of the forum is being undermined.

As for an apology, Molton, you crossed a line in your private message to me, making references to my posts here about my pets and my other participation in these forums. I take my work, and my research in the AM I INFECTED forum quite seriously.

Please do not PM me again.

I stand by my words in the AM I INFECTED forum, and I stand by the LESSONS, which supports my assertions precisely.

Regardless of Jonathan, this style of responsiveness is rude and unnecessary. You can say what you have to say without coming across with such disrespect. Those that are so disrespectful need to be admonished for doing so and cease such action.

In regards to this supposed line I crossed with you, Jonathan, I did no such thing. You claimed I had an agenda in every post I ever made. I pointed out through examples that when his pet Ringo passed on, I replied with sympathy and caring, and I asked if there was an agenda with that, and I used some other examples. How is that crossing a line? That I brought up the past? Ok, I'll give you that one. Far less on the intrusive scale than claiming someone's sole purpose is to spread a personal story or agenda, don't you think?


--- Quote ---You claimed I had an agenda in every post I ever made

--- End quote ---

I claimed that your posts in AM I INFECTED reflected that. We have an excellent, if a bit cumbersome, "quote" function here. It allows our words to speak for themselves, barring post-editing.

I respectfully wiithdraw from further comversation.



Please...just ease down a bit. My post was most definitely MORE about your tone than your content. Yes, I did state some disagreement with you...quite politely I might add. I think I have every right to do so.

And WATCH me not engage you in a debate about oral sex. :)


I have no intention in ignoring your posts. I find most of them to be quite interesting, which is why I don't quite understand this tone in the smaller fraction of time that you launch into people.

Go forth and be protective of the "am I infected" forum. I already said I don't go there anymore. I just think you could be more respectful at times.



[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version