Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
E-newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 19, 2014, 03:57:42 AM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 620333
  • Total Topics: 46738
  • Online Today: 211
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online
Users: 5
Guests: 209
Total: 214

Welcome


Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and others concerned about HIV/AIDS.  Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning:  Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

  • The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own physician.

  • All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

  • Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

  • We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are true and correct to their knowledge.

  • Product advertisement—including links; banners; editorial content; and clinical trial, study or survey participation—is strictly prohibited by forums members unless permission has been secured from POZ.

To change forums navigation language settings, click here (members only), Register now

Para cambiar sus preferencias de los foros en español, haz clic aquí (sólo miembros), Regístrate ahora

Finished Reading This? You can collapse this or any other box on this page by clicking the symbol in each box.

Author Topic: HIV criminalization escalates  (Read 15249 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,160
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #50 on: March 09, 2012, 05:09:42 PM »
This is the situation that I'm talking about where the lying bastard gets locked up. Nothing more...because if somebody is unaware that they're positive, then there's nothing to tell. But the practice of No Balloons No Party...should be taught and understood by all to protect oneself and their partner from other STD's at the very least. In a case of knowingly exposing another person to HIV, without making them aware is a totally different than exposing them to herpes or some other STD. Regardless of the advances in medicine and HIV being considered a chronic illness instead of the death sentence it once was...it doesn't put it in the same category as genital sores and warts.

If knowingly exposing (and transmitting) somebody to the possibility of contracting HIV without their knowledge can be tried in court and carry the possibility of a life sentence...then those that are already positive would be doing a lot more to inform their potential sexual partner of their status beforehand. Of course it would be up to a prosecutor to prove previous knowledge, but that's easy enough to establish. Let the fuckers guilt or not be decided by a jury of his or her's peers.

Maybe I'm just a complete idiot and can't get past my own beliefs and morals regarding disclosing or not disclosing. I disclose as soon as I see myself or the woman becoming more than friends. Society is ignorant...and if she's going to run, I rather know now than later. The "before I spend $10 on drinks" line was something that I used to see on t-shirts when I was still in my teens...so I'm showing my age here...lol. But if the only possibility of being tried for HIV transmission hinges on previous knowledge and non-disclosure...then I can't see a reason for it not being escalated criminally.

It's kind of like the seat-belt law. Insurance companies got tired of paying medical expenses and death benefits to those involved in car accidents and not wearing their seat-belts. How could they limit their liability in auto insurance policies? They lobbied to make wearing seat-belts the law, and their liability dropped.
I don't know about anybody else...but if it weren't for Ryan White and ADAP, there's no way in hell I could afford my HIV meds...not to mention the other meds I'm on due to side effects of side effects of side effects. Those funds are limited to nonexistent in some states. The only way to decrease, level or possibly increase those resources for those already infected with the HIV virus...is to slow the the number of new infections. So they want to make it a law to make every possible effort to not risk the possibility of transmitting HIV to another individual. It's a money thing...not a moral thing in their eyes.

So if you're reading this and you're already poz...continue, or get used to telling the person your gonna fuck that you're positive, or the likelihood of being locked up in the future may be imminent.

So we differ.

I and most of the other people contributing to this thread are interested in stopping the spread of HIV. We believe that this is best achieved by encouraging everyone to be responsible for themselves. Not in the hardass cantankerous conservative legislator way, but in the liberating, empowering way. Taking control of one's sexual health rather than leaving it in the hands of manipulative sociopaths.

You, on the other hand, want to punish wrongdoers. I'm not sure how you got HIV and I don't really care to review your posting history in an effort to find out but I fancy that is what colours your view of this issue.

Well, whatever.

MtD

Offline Buckmark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,475
  • Would you like to tie me up with your ties, Ty?
    • Henry's Home Page
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #51 on: March 09, 2012, 05:22:22 PM »

It's kind of like the seat-belt law. Insurance companies got tired of paying medical expenses and death benefits to those involved in car accidents and not wearing their seat-belts. How could they limit their liability in auto insurance policies? They lobbied to make wearing seat-belts the law, and their liability dropped.


Bullshit.  It wasn't insurance companies lobbying for HIV criminalization laws to save them money.  It was public health officials in their misguided thinking that it would reduce infections, and prosecutors / legislators bent on showing that they were punishing and eradicting AIDS-infected faggots from their communities.  It's demonstrated by the fact that most of these laws single out of HIV.  Sure, it's not the same as other STDs, but I'd expect a well thought out though still misguided law to address all sorts of STDs (Hep C isn't a picnic).  Why the singular maniacal focus on HIV transmission?  These laws are all just to make some reactionary public official either feel good that they are doing someone about HIV infections, or feel good about punishing people who have HIV.

While most of us here would like to focus on reducing HIV infections, your focus seems to be squarely on punishing people with HIV.   Punishment doesn't stop HIV infection.  Condoms, and encouraging people to take responsibility for their sexual health, does.







"Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things:
     One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell.
     The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love."
- Butch Hancock, Musician, The Flatlanders

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #52 on: March 09, 2012, 06:17:24 PM »
I recall having several conversations shortly after I tested positive.
 
Tested positive while in a "monogamous" relationship with someone who took the extra effort to go get tested together with me before we took off condoms for sex. Of course in those dark, dim days of yore, same-sex couples could not receive their test results together. I was negative. He was too, he said.

Key words, those.

So long story short, I acquired my infection despite jumping through the right "hoops." We waited three months, tested together, and only then used condoms. But I still acquired HIV.

That event took three things to happen. Three things which, in my opinion, were of equal value- seeing as how if ANY of the things had not happened, I would likely be a rich sitcom writer living in some balmy California suburb of the Greater Los Angeles Area, snorting cocaine off prostitutes' asses and complaining about the traffic.

The three things were:

A) My chosen Love Of My Life had to lie to me.

B) I had to believe that lie.

C) I had to allow sex without a condom.

Had any of these three events not transpired, I would be negative still. But they did. Was I super young and naive? Absolutely. Was he at best a frightened and insecure man? In my most charitable moments, yes. But HIV doesn't give passes for youth, self esteem or naivete. HIV is a virus.

I had friends who asked me if I was going to pursue him through the courts. The thought never occurred to me until I was directly asked. And I really didn't have to think about it very much at all. I was responsible, ultimately, for my infection. I made a choice, an unwise choice.

Did he do a shitty thing? Of course he did. Hell, he could have kept lying about his status, so long as we used condoms - and barring extraordinary events, I would still be driving a series 4 Mercedes and letting calls from Chuck Lorre go to voicemail.

But to blame him in some lopsided way, to say that HIS behavior caused my infection to a degree greater than my own? Ludicrous.

Of course I was too naive to see the signs that all was not well in our world. But that's what happens in the land of Grownups. We often are saddled with paying full retail plus interest for our life lessons.

My best friend has routinely barebacked, even with HIV positive boyfriends. And he remains negative. And despite my whinging about it and throwing him Truvada and condoms. To date, he has crossed the viral street over and over again with blindfolds on and has not been struck. I was not lucky in that regard. It happens.

And were I to blame my ex for my infection, I would have skirted the very important life lesson that my infection taught me. My life is my own responsibility. My infection was and remains my own responsibility.

People sometimes annoy me when they talk about HIV having a positive (puns included if not intended) impact on their lives. Personally, I would trade any life lessons learned from my 19 years with HIV/AIDS for the alternative. But I will concede this: A life lesson was handed to me, and I chose to accept it.

Criminalization of HIV works completely against that valuable notion: that our lives are our responsibility.

The only way to prevent HIV infection is to reduce the stigma of HIV infection.

(huh? What?)

If people are too scared to get tested, they won't. This has been borne out tima and again by study after study. And if the KNOWLEDGE of your positive status makes you a pariah, then the logical (if short-sighted and immature) reaction is to simply not know.

That shit obviously needs to stop. HIV needs to be given the respect and concern it is due. But no more, not a scintilla more.

Untreated HIV is deadly. So is untreated syphilis. Yet there are no laws pertaining to syphilis disclosure. Why is that? Because though primary syphilis is fairly easy to cure, secondary and tertiary syphilis can be disastrous. Fatal, even. And often, the damage done by that pathogen is irreversible, from blindness to insanity.

We as a society have lumped all our fears, our loathing, our dark lustful judgment, onto one pathogen; HIV. And that shit needs to stop.

 It will not stop so long as we single out HIV infection as a criminal act. I say this with absolute certainty, having worked in HIV prevention and education since 1995. I say this in the knowledge that, at it's core, fear and rage fuel the pro-criminalization argument.

This is not about deterrence, because we know that is bullshit.

This is not about saving society from predators, because we know that is bullshit as well.

This is about the boogeyman, whom we have indeed met, and who is us.
 
"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline klipsch

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #53 on: March 09, 2012, 06:34:11 PM »
Look...the truth of the matter is that we would all like to reduce the spread of HIV. But yes...I do feel that if transmission is criminalized, it could reduce exposure. Shooting people is criminalized. If it were not...then there would be a lot more dead people due to road rage and PMS. Am I equating transmitting HIV to shooting somebody? Yeah...I guess I am. Life as they knew it, is over. Premeditated manslaughter carries certain punishment. Not knowing the gun was loaded carries different punishment.
If you don't want to believe that any of this is money driven at all...you need to wake up. I've often become very angry at the fact that I can get completely free/funded healthcare...while others with what I consider worse conditions are on their own. Why are we so privileged to goes as far as to even receive free massage treatments? Because some maniac with HIV could go on a bender and infect half a city block in a sex crazed murder spree. Half a block more people that will receive free treatment so as to diminish the possibility of them transmitting HIV to somebody else. Perhaps where ever you folks live, there are doctors that are working pro bono. But it's not like that around the North East. Less infections means less necessary free care (free to the patient...not to the state). How many states are decreasing their AIDS assistance programs due to funds? Come on! The less the state needs to outlay cash for free care to HIV/AIDS patients...the less the necessity to cut spending in other areas or look for ways to tax the rock salt people are using to melt the ice on their sidewalks. How do you get backing for legislature? Tell the people in the state that free healthcare for the HIV community is being decreased so they won't increase taxes.
They can wrap this shit in whatever shiny paper they want to...but it comes down to one person trying to get in a position of power so that they can eat shrimp 4 times a week instead of twice. Criminalizing HIV transmission satisfies the tax payer that is thinking "Dirty Gay Disease"...It WILL make a few people think twice before barebacking their uninformed club hook-up...and if new infections are decreased...then there's less coin that's going to have to be budgeted for free care. I don't know about anybody else...but after being seen at a well known medical facility in the HIV community for about 3 years, my medical insurance lapsed after being laid off. I was told..."We're sorry, but you're going to need to go over to the free clinic from now on". When I got to the "free clinic"...I told them what I had been told, and their response was "we're free?".

Why it matters how I was infected...I don't understand. I'd say I fall into the category of transmission by somebody that probably had no idea she was positive.

Going back to the previous knowledge, non-disclosure qualifier...why wouldn't anybody stand behind a mandate that says "If you're positive...you better fucking tell the person you're about to lay down with, so they can decide if they really want to or not". Why keep your status a secret, if your really ok with it? Actually...I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?


when shit has value...the poor will be born without assholes...

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #54 on: March 09, 2012, 07:13:03 PM »
I do feel that if transmission is criminalized, it could reduce exposure.

But here's the rub: That's your feeling. There is no proof. There is. however, proof of the exact opposite.

I would have liked to address the other things you said, but you seem to ignore that one, singular, dramatic piece of information.


*modified to add:

You appear intent on making this a disclosure argument. It is not. It is a criminalization argument.

A woman can agree that abortion should be a legal choice, yet hold the passionate opinion that she, herself, would never choose it. That is not a dichotomy.

I might totally agree with you about disclosure, but I do not think it should be a criminal act prosecuted by a governmental agency. See how those are different things?


« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 07:15:59 PM by jkinatl2 »
"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 10,732
  • red pill? or blue pill?
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #55 on: March 09, 2012, 08:29:29 PM »

If knowingly exposing (and transmitting) somebody to the possibility of contracting HIV without their knowledge can be tried in court and carry the possibility of a life sentence...then those that are already positive would be doing a lot more to inform their potential sexual partner of their status beforehand.

Call me dense but I don't understand this sentence or exactly what your opinion is.

You are in favor of laws and punishment for the lack of disclosure, even if there is no transmission???

A HIV+ person has safe sex, there is no transmission, and its a crime if there is no disclosure???

Well, if so, there are some states you can move to, and feel right at home.   righteously at home....

"If knowingly exposing (and transmitting) somebody to the possibility of contracting HIV"

?????
« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 08:31:38 PM by mecch »
“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Offline spacebarsux

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,350
  • Survival of the Fittest
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #56 on: March 09, 2012, 10:39:11 PM »
Look...the truth of the matter is that we would all like to reduce the spread of HIV. But yes...I do feel that if transmission is criminalized, it could reduce exposure. Shooting people is criminalized. If it were not...then there would be a lot more dead people due to road rage and PMS. Am I equating transmitting HIV to shooting somebody? Yeah...I guess I am. Life as they knew it, is over. Premeditated manslaughter carries certain punishment. Not knowing the gun was loaded carries different punishment.

And this ^^ reflects your prejudices with which you paint all poz people.

Other than those ‘rarest of rare’ cases where someone has a clear and malicious intent to transmit HIV, and does in fact transmit it (which has its own serious legal difficulties of proof, hearsay, failing the test ‘proving beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law’ and therefore the real risk of miscarriages of justice) criminalization of HIV, not only makes NO SENSE but runs contrary to principles of human rights and throws water over public health efforts that emphasis use of condoms (if you’d care to read the UNAIDS article I linked earlier).

It is counterproductive in that it heightens stigma and prejudice by painting all of us as monsters in the eyes of the public (as you so vividly elucidated). Consequently, it severely sharpens the fear of people testing themselves which only serves to fuel the epidemic rather than contain it.

As for your shooting someone with a gun and your HIV transmission analogy- it is wholly nonsensical and incomparable. People don’t get erections and sexual urges to shoot someone in the head, but they do (all the f*&^*# time!) for sex. Sex is a primal urge.

Would you toss someone in jail for sneezing next to you and giving you a cold (which is also a viral infection btw)? What about second-hand smoke which has been attributed to cancer in people who've been subjected to it a long time? Or Syphllis, HPV, HBV that can also be fatal if left undiagnosed?

Going back to the previous knowledge, non-disclosure qualifier...why wouldn't anybody stand behind a mandate that says "If you're positive...you better fucking tell the person you're about to lay down with, so they can decide if they really want to or not". Why keep your status a secret, if your really ok with it? Actually...I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?

If you read what others and I stated (in my previous post), you’d hopefully appreciate that everything isn’t dressed up as black and white as you’d like. There are many shades of grey.

Not every situation warrants disclosure. Also you seem to totally ignore how difficult disclosure is for many people and that no one intends to harm anyone.

And lastly: Beware of the law of unintended consequences and the cascading effect. You may look no further than what they did in France recently (as Ann stated before).

Wear a condom, protect yourself. It’s as simple as that.
Infected-  2005 or early 2006; Diagnosed- Jan 28th, 2011; Feb '11- CD4 754 @34%, VL- 39K; July '11- CD4 907@26%,  VL-81K; Feb '12- CD4 713 @31%, VL- 41K, Nov '12- CD4- 827@31%

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,036
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #57 on: March 09, 2012, 11:02:14 PM »
I feel sorry for those who can't differentiate between disclosure and criminalizing.  The MAJORITY here believe in full disclosure before sex.  But when we start legislating morality, we take many steps backward. 

For many of us who lived through the persecution years, this seems so obvious.  We can't let feelings and emotions dictate the course of events.  This is just another ultra conservative method of once again persecuting those with HIV (which they believe are still mainly queers and IV drug users).

Can't believe I jumped in another debate here about this topic.  Oh wait, it wasn't about disclosure.....What was the main topic again?   ;D ;D

Wolfie
Judging someone does not define them, it defines you. 

True peace is not merely the absence of war, it is the presence of justice.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,160
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #58 on: March 09, 2012, 11:21:05 PM »
For many of us who lived through the persecution years, this seems so obvious.  We can't let feelings and emotions dictate the course of events.  This is just another ultra conservative method of once again persecuting those with HIV (which they believe are still mainly queers and IV drug users).

Homos, Haemos and Haitians. :)

MtD

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,259
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #59 on: March 09, 2012, 11:36:12 PM »
Why criminalize only HIV?  There are many potentially fatal diseases that one can pass on to another -- many that are far easier to pass on than HIV.

For instance --

Say I find me a hot little trick.  I disclose my HIV status and have safe sex...  all is well, right?  Wrong -- I also had a bit of a cold, but neglected to tell him of this.  Now, he not only catches my cold -- he has an underlying lung issue that ultimately causes him to develop pneumonia and die.  Would I be arrested and thrown in jail for not disclosing the fact that I harbored this virus?  Of course not -- yet the man not only caught it, but died of it.
Now -- say I didn't have a cold, but also didn't disclose my HIV -- had safe sex, but refused to call him back.  He's a bit miffed -- and finds out I have HIV from a mutual acquaintance.  He goes to the police -- and because I live in the enlightened state of Virginia, my ass gets thrown in jail.  He NEVER got infected, but I didn't disclose, so off to the slammer I go.

One scenario results in death and no legal issues for me.  The other causes no harm but I land in jail.

Now, can you see the idiocy of criminalizing HIV?  Why treat it differently from other diseases, many of which can kill you just as dead.   

So, as others have said -- the question here is NOT disclosure -- it is holding people with THIS virus to a different standard and inflicting penalties that aren't in line with other viruses or diseases.  PLUS -- throwing people in jail will only cause a false sense of securtiy and, likely, increases in infection (my educated opinion).

Mike
(who's scenarios above are complete fiction -- told to make a point)
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,036
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #60 on: March 09, 2012, 11:37:56 PM »
Homos, Haemos and Haitians. :)

MtD

Don't know what that implies but I might agree.  :o

Wolfie
Judging someone does not define them, it defines you. 

True peace is not merely the absence of war, it is the presence of justice.

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,036
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #61 on: March 09, 2012, 11:48:46 PM »
OH, and BTW.  Just wondering how that conservative sex ed is going?  Achieved the results they were expecting?  Telling a horny teenage boy that abstinence is the way to go when he is willing to fish in any pond....Oh my! 
Judging someone does not define them, it defines you. 

True peace is not merely the absence of war, it is the presence of justice.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,160
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #62 on: March 09, 2012, 11:55:37 PM »
Don't know what that implies but I might agree.  :o

Wolfie

And you're an LTS?  :o

MtD

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,036
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #63 on: March 10, 2012, 12:07:37 AM »
And you're an LTS?  :o

MtD

And once again, when I don't understand your humor and try and make an effort.....Not sure what this comment even means.  I've been plagued with a lot of nuero-cognitive issues and don't always pick
up on things for a while.  It takes me a while to process things, but if this another slam that I don't understand, I'll just glady bow out.

Judging someone does not define them, it defines you. 

True peace is not merely the absence of war, it is the presence of justice.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,160
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #64 on: March 10, 2012, 12:09:14 AM »
And once again, when I don't understand your humor and try and make an effort.....Not sure what this comment even means.  I've been plagued with a lot of nuero-cognitive issues and don't always pick
up on things for a while.  It takes me a while to process things, but if this another slam that I don't understand, I'll just glady bow out.

It's all good Wolfie. I wasn't having a go at you.  :-*

MtD

Offline Solo_LTSurvivor

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Twerk Baby Twerk
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #65 on: March 10, 2012, 02:42:03 AM »
Exactly Wolfie, Matty wasn't being snarky towards you at all.

Maybe you would've caught on faster if he'd said:

Chimpanzees, Africans, and faggots - since (some) people think those are also the real origins (carriers) of teh aids  ::)

Anyway, these disclosure threads are starting to be quite reductive every other week. (And) the only good thing is that they reveal the true colors of the advocates who want to propose harsh punishments for people who don't yell their status from the rooftops for everyone to hear prior to fucking.

PS: Wolfie, thanks for bringing up the scenario/analogy I asked about the last time we went round and round about disclosure, which seems to never produce any logical answer from the dissenters

I wonder if anyone has ever considered criminalizing unplanned pregnancies when one partner lies and says she's on the pill.  Why should straight men pay the price when a one-nighter lies to them.  Same concept. 

Wolfie
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 02:48:31 AM by Solo_LTSurvivor »
don't equate intelligence with lack of masculinity
Jim Phelps, Mission Impossible
____________________________

Seroconverted: Early 80s
Tested & confirmed what I already knew: early 90s

Current regimen: Atripla. 
Last regimen:  Epzicom, Sustiva (since its inception with NO adverse side effects: no vivid dreams and NONE of the problems people who can't tolerate this drug may experience: color me lucky ::))
Past regimens
Fun stuff (in the past):  HAV/HBV, crypto, shingles, AIDS, PCP

Jan 2012: 818/21%
Apr 2012: 964/22%
Jul. 2012: 890/21%
Oct. 2012: 920/23%

Still UD after all these years

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 10,732
  • red pill? or blue pill?
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #66 on: March 10, 2012, 06:55:19 AM »
Supposedly Santorom yammered on about just that in the 90's. That single mothers couldn't get welfare unless they identified the father.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/08/rick-santorum-single-mothers-unwed-moms_n_1333302.html

"What we say is that in order for Mom to be able to go on welfare if she has a child out of wedlock, you have to tell us who the father is," Santorum said at an event in Carlisle, Pa., on April 1, 1994. "If you don't tell us who the father is, you're not eligible for any welfare benefits, none, not even medical care. You tell us who the father is or you don't receive benefits."

Santorum argued that his proposal could persuade single women to slow their sex lives, which, in turn, would lead to less out-of-wedlock parenting. "If Mom knows that she isn't gonna receive welfare if she doesn't tell us who Dad is, y'know maybe she'll be a little more careful, maybe," he said.

"Or maybe she gives us a list, say 'Well it could be one of five,'" Santorum went on. "I mean, y'know, I don't know what she's gonna do, but at some point we're gonna see her cooperate."

_____________

Say the above with a German accent.

You can't make this stuff up.

I think everyone's eyes are opening?
“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 27,947
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #67 on: March 10, 2012, 08:56:25 AM »

Am I equating transmitting HIV to shooting somebody? Yeah...I guess I am.


The two things are absolutely nothing alike.

Bullets can kill from yards/meters away. You can be killed by a bullet when you never even saw the shooter, much less knew them.

But hiv is up-close and personal. It cannot be transmitted from yards away - or inches away for that matter.

You have to be in extremely close contact with that person to the point where either a part of your body is INSIDE them or a part of their body is INSIDE you.

You HAVE to consent to either penetrating another person or allowing them to penetrate you. (Except in the case of rape, but we're not discussing rape here, we're discussing consensual sexual intercourse.) 

If you're going to consent to putting a part of your body INSIDE someone else's, or allowing them to put a part of their body INSIDE you, it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT YOURSELF.

People do not consent to being shot. People do, however, consent to having unprotected intercourse. 

Transmitting hiv is NOTHING like shooting a loaded gun at someone.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 08:57:59 AM by Ann »
Condoms are a girl's best friend

Condom and Lube Info  



"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Offline spacebarsux

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,350
  • Survival of the Fittest
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #68 on: March 10, 2012, 09:15:19 AM »
@Ann- I also can't recall the last time I developed a raging hard on to kill someone with a gun, unlike for sex.

One is a natural, primal act with NO ILL-INTENT. The other is premeditated murder.

Vastly different.

Infected-  2005 or early 2006; Diagnosed- Jan 28th, 2011; Feb '11- CD4 754 @34%, VL- 39K; July '11- CD4 907@26%,  VL-81K; Feb '12- CD4 713 @31%, VL- 41K, Nov '12- CD4- 827@31%

Offline klipsch

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #69 on: March 10, 2012, 10:00:21 AM »
"If you're positive...you better fucking tell the person you're about to lay down with, so they can decide if they really want to or not". Why keep your status a secret, if your really ok with it? Actually...I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?

And with every bodies wit at trying to pick apart every other part of everything I've posted in this thread...not a single person answers this question for me. Or does the phrase "by the way...I'm HIV+" act like kryptonite to even the stiff dick without conscience?  :o

I can only hope that these attitudes are restricted to a handful of people on an internet forum.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 10:04:32 AM by klipsch »
when shit has value...the poor will be born without assholes...

Offline Hellraiser

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,110
  • Semi-misanthropic
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #70 on: March 10, 2012, 10:08:50 AM »
And with every bodies wit at trying to pick apart every other part of everything I've posted in this thread...not a single person answers this question for me. Or does the phrase "by the way...I'm HIV+" act like kryptonite to even the stiff dick without conscience?  :o

I can only hope that these attitudes are restricted to a handful of people on an internet forum.

No one said not to disclose.  The problem they had was with you shifting all of the responsibility for someone's infection onto the person who is positive.  When two people agree to have sex it is precisely that, 2 people agreeing to have sex.  That means that 2 people should be responsible for sexual safety not one.

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 10,732
  • red pill? or blue pill?
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #71 on: March 10, 2012, 10:10:56 AM »
Klipsch are you baiting us?

We got your opinion now, loud and clear.  Most do not agree. 

What the point of continuing this debate with Klipsch? 

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Offline klipsch

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #72 on: March 10, 2012, 10:23:46 AM »
I'm not baiting anybody. I've attempted to express my opinion on the matter, and clarify that the only individuals that would be subject to trial should be those who act irresponsibly or in malice. Instead of an intelligent discussion about those like the person I know who feels that he doesn't need to tell anybody shit about his status...everybody has instead picked apart the wording or phrasing of my point of view.

But I'm done. I've made every attempt to clarify my view point...and everybody that's responded has done the same. We can agree to disagree...  ;)
when shit has value...the poor will be born without assholes...

Offline spacebarsux

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,350
  • Survival of the Fittest
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #73 on: March 10, 2012, 10:37:38 AM »
You equate non-disclosure (even if precautions are taken and in cases where there is no intent to transmit, nor does transmission occur) with being malicious and think that such a person should be sent to jail, and hold a totally different standard for all other infections (even if transmission takes place and the infectee dies as a result- eg. Hep B). How is that intelligent, reasonable or humane?

Because I am sure it smacks of inhumanity to most people on these boards.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 10:47:57 AM by spacebarsux »
Infected-  2005 or early 2006; Diagnosed- Jan 28th, 2011; Feb '11- CD4 754 @34%, VL- 39K; July '11- CD4 907@26%,  VL-81K; Feb '12- CD4 713 @31%, VL- 41K, Nov '12- CD4- 827@31%

Offline denb45

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,051
  • "1987 Classic Old School POZ+"
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #74 on: March 10, 2012, 10:58:11 AM »
klipsch....Who infected you w/ the AIDS..

 who lied to you about thier status?

and lastly, who do you want to be thrown in jail...

it's apparent you have some kinda axe to grind here...

if you do, and someone did this to you, I'm sorry THIS happened to you...

so with that being said, you really need to move on and get on with your life

like everyone else has done in this forum w/ the AIDS ::)
"it's so nice to be insane, cause no-one ask you to explain" Helen Reddy cc 1974

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,259
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #75 on: March 10, 2012, 11:05:20 AM »
I've attempted to express my opinion on the matter, and clarify that the only individuals that would be subject to trial should be those who act irresponsibly or in malice.

Wouldn't you agree that having unsafe sex with someone who you don't really know is pos or neg is irresponsible??  So -- shouldn't BOTH parties by subject to trial by your definition?

You say we aren't getting your point -- but I think we all do - it is YOU who is missing our point.  It takes 2 to tango -- so if the poz guy is on trial, so should the neg guy be.............   Of course, the general sense is that (in most cases) NEITHER should be.

Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline Joe K

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,181
  • 30 Years Poz
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #76 on: March 10, 2012, 11:33:28 AM »
I'm not baiting anybody. I've attempted to express my opinion on the matter, and clarify that the only individuals that would be subject to trial should be those who act irresponsibly or in malice. Instead of an intelligent discussion about those like the person I know who feels that he doesn't need to tell anybody shit about his status...everybody has instead picked apart the wording or phrasing of my point of view.

But I'm done. I've made every attempt to clarify my view point...and everybody that's responded has done the same. We can agree to disagree...  ;)
..

But you are baiting everyone, because you refuse to admit that this issue is much more involved than what you present.  I just finished reading this entire thread and with your every comment, it's apparent that you possess fear and loathing for being poz yourself.  My guess would be that some form of deception was involved in your becoming poz, or at least that is what you believe and in doing so, you are looking for retribution or revenge against those who did you wrong.

You make comments degrading entire classes of people, such as "Society is ignorant" and the idea that if someone finds out your are poz, they wont' want to have anything to do with you.  These are your "feelings" and not facts.  However, you are allowing your feelings to color your views on what YOU BELIEVE should be laws concerning disclosure, because you are angry and seeking to place the blame for your being poz, with anyone but you.

Joe
Life is what happens, when you are busy making other plans.

Though you may be only one person in the entire world, to one person, you may be the entire world.

I wish to become half the man, that my dog thinks I am.

Remember me with simple acts of kindness and I will live forever.

Offline klipsch

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #77 on: March 10, 2012, 12:12:06 PM »
klipsch....Who infected you w/ the AIDS..
Best answer I've been able to come up with is a woman that I can't find, and if she was positive, she didn't know it

who lied to you about thier status?
Nobody. I only know of others that are running around fucking anything that moves, that don't feel it necessary to disclose. My issue with that...safe sex or not...what happens if that person finds out that they slept with somebody that was positive later on? It's each persons responsibility to protect themselves...but the mind fuck of being infected or knowing that you exposed yourself to possibly becoming infected...in some ways can be as bad as, or worse (the stigma) than the actual physical condition.


and lastly, who do you want to be thrown in jail...
That's not my decision. That would be up to a jury of ones peers. Of course that may be one sided with the ignorance around HIV/AIDS. What I will try to clarify again is this. If TRANSMISSION carried a stricter sentence...the obvious (to me) defense is whether or not the person being charged disclosed their status. If the answer to that is YES...then the person charging them doesn't have a leg to stand on, because they knew without question that they were having sex with a person that was HIV+. If the answer is NO...then it gets more complicated. But...if the law mandated a stricter sentence..."maybe" that person would have thought to disclose so that they wouldn't be faced with bullshit of a "more complicated" trial.
Like I said...I'm just addressing the easiest way I see to avoid being involved in this type of trial at all. I'm not saying sentencing would be black or white...just how to avoid it nearly completely. If that simple act of disclosure could have a case thrown out of court as quick as a $5 hookers handjob...then why subject oneself to the possible bullshit?


it's apparent you have some kinda axe to grind here...

The only axe I have to grind is with a person that puts somebody's physical or mental health in jeopardy out of cowardliness to be honest with them. The girls that I know have been involved with this douche bag I've mentioned...will never really understand that the reason he tossed them aside was so that he didn't need to face the fact of eventually telling them that he's positive. And...he's made it very clear that he will NEVER admit to being positive if ever questioned. Be a fucking man already, and suck it up...

if you do, and someone did this to you, I'm sorry THIS happened to you...
I've dealt with the same feelings as everybody else who's been living with HIV/AIDS for any length of time. If I can see a way to help somebody else to not have to go through such feelings, I'll try to do so. That's all...

so with that being said, you really need to move on and get on with your life like everyone else has done in this forum w/ the AIDS ::)

Yeah...I'm still coming to terms with the fact that the world does not in fact revolve around me...lol

when shit has value...the poor will be born without assholes...

Offline newt

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,868
  • the one and original newt
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #78 on: March 10, 2012, 12:33:20 PM »
I'm sorry but I disagree, I don't want the State interfering in my consensual grown-up personal relationships, even if I make stupid decisions. There are circumstance where I would elect to have them involved eg domestic violence, but these are really (theoretical in my case) non-consensual situations.

If in sex I am hopeful/I fuck up I am adult enough to sort it out and get real about the choices I made, even if the risks were outside limit risks. Why are other people not? There are many ways besides HIV to make optimistic/bad choices in a relationship and come a cropper but happily these generally just leads to sadness, start again, not 25 years prison for some guy/girl.

If you are on the pull, like buying a car, the Romans had a great saying, caveat emptor.

- matt
"The object is to be a well patient, not a good patient"

Offline Solo_LTSurvivor

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Twerk Baby Twerk
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #79 on: March 10, 2012, 12:54:10 PM »

If that simple act of disclosure could have a case thrown out of court as quick as a $5 hookers handjob...then why subject oneself to the possible bullshit?

 
The only axe I have to grind is with a person that puts somebody's physical or mental health in jeopardy out of cowardliness to be honest with them. The girls that I know have been involved with this douche bag I've mentioned...will never really understand that the reason he tossed them aside was so that he didn't need to face the fact of eventually telling them that he's positive. And...he's made it very clear that he will NEVER admit to being positive if ever questioned. Be a fucking man already, and suck it up...

If that is the case, and you are privy to this information regarding this chap, why don't you just call the authorities and leave an anonymous tip?  After all, regarding your logic either he could try to prove he disclosed before fucking all those women and be absolved of any wrong doing or just be buried under the jail. Simple as that.  Two choices.  Case closed. Or even better, if you have some type of rapport with this person just fucking threaten him and tell him that you plan to report his ass and maybe he will be scared straight and start doing the right thing.  Either man up or let karma do its job, because if this person is as abhorrent as you claim he is - he will get his due at some point.

I don't get why you're in such an uproar over his behavior, unless he happens to be closer to you than you are willing to let on, as sometimes people will talk about others (in some context) when in all actuality they are referring to themselves  :o   (Then again, he may be someone you share consanguinity with so that's why you're being protective?)
don't equate intelligence with lack of masculinity
Jim Phelps, Mission Impossible
____________________________

Seroconverted: Early 80s
Tested & confirmed what I already knew: early 90s

Current regimen: Atripla. 
Last regimen:  Epzicom, Sustiva (since its inception with NO adverse side effects: no vivid dreams and NONE of the problems people who can't tolerate this drug may experience: color me lucky ::))
Past regimens
Fun stuff (in the past):  HAV/HBV, crypto, shingles, AIDS, PCP

Jan 2012: 818/21%
Apr 2012: 964/22%
Jul. 2012: 890/21%
Oct. 2012: 920/23%

Still UD after all these years

Offline Joe K

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,181
  • 30 Years Poz
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #80 on: March 10, 2012, 12:58:05 PM »
Nobody. I only know of others that are running around fucking anything that moves, that don't feel it necessary to disclose. My issue with that...safe sex or not...what happens if that person finds out that they slept with somebody that was positive later on? It's each persons responsibility to protect themselves...but the mind fuck of being infected or knowing that you exposed yourself to possibly becoming infected...in some ways can be as bad as, or worse (the stigma) than the actual physical condition.

The only axe I have to grind is with a person that puts somebody's physical or mental health in jeopardy out of cowardliness to be honest with them. The girls that I know have been involved with this douche bag I've mentioned...will never really understand that the reason he tossed them aside was so that he didn't need to face the fact of eventually telling them that he's positive. And...he's made it very clear that he will NEVER admit to being positive if ever questioned. Be a fucking man already, and suck it up...

Obviously this is very personal for you and the presumptions you make are mind numbing.  How can you know all the thoughts and actions of another person, to make such accusations?  And to claim that worrying about the status of who you slept with, is equal to actually being infected is incomprehensible.  This is why your argument has no merit.  You are unable to remove your personal feelings, from a discussion about disclosure/criminal acts.  If you insist on seeing this as a "black OR white" issue, you will never understand the intent of the other posters here.

Regarding this guy you reference, you have already tried and convicted him and now you merely want the state to administer the punishment for you.  Again, your personal feelings prevent you from acknowledging the reasonableness of the arguments made in this thread.  You are not looking to save anyone from anything, you are looking for revenge, plain and simple.

Joe
Life is what happens, when you are busy making other plans.

Though you may be only one person in the entire world, to one person, you may be the entire world.

I wish to become half the man, that my dog thinks I am.

Remember me with simple acts of kindness and I will live forever.

Offline LM

  • Member
  • Posts: 409
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #81 on: March 10, 2012, 02:01:02 PM »
You are not looking to save anyone from anything, you are looking for revenge, plain and simple.

Exactly. I don't see any reason in his argument, just anger. It's just ridiculous to try to impose one's morality on others.

If you feel like disclosing before sex is the way to go, good for you, no one will say otherwise. But if you want to send to jail those who don't think like you, that's just childish. It only contributes to the stigma of HIV.

As I see it, apparently, only people who have a lot of issues with having HIV that have these extreme opinions regarding disclosure, criminalization, etc. They try so much to be different from the other "trash" who have HIV that they turn into bigots. It's just sad.

Offline klipsch

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #82 on: March 10, 2012, 03:09:26 PM »
Since I'm getting so much attention here and everybody seems to know me so well...let's get back to a previous post that everybody is still skirting around.

I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?

And with every bodies wit at trying to pick apart every other part of everything I've posted in this thread...not a single person answers this question for me. Or does the phrase "by the way...I'm HIV+" act like kryptonite to even the stiff dick without conscience?  :o

I can only hope that these attitudes are restricted to a handful of people on an internet forum.


Everybody I associate with knows my status. Why is disclosure such a big issue for everybody that feels they need to chime in on my statements with ridiculous attempts to put the focus back on me instead of facing their own apparent denial? What is it that YOU'RE ashamed of?

Wait...I really don't give a fuck what you're reasoning is. I've said my peace and I'm done.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 03:17:03 PM by klipsch »
when shit has value...the poor will be born without assholes...

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #83 on: March 10, 2012, 03:23:16 PM »
Since I'm getting so much attention here and everybody seems to know me so well...let's get back to a previous post that everybody is still skirting around.

I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?

And with every bodies wit at trying to pick apart every other part of everything I've posted in this thread...not a single person answers this question for me. Or does the phrase "by the way...I'm HIV+" act like kryptonite to even the stiff dick without conscience?  :o

I can only hope that these attitudes are restricted to a handful of people on an internet forum.


Everybody I associate with knows my status. Why is disclosure such a big issue for everybody that feels they need to chime in on my statements with ridiculous attempts to put the focus back on me instead of facing their own apparent denial? What is it that YOU'RE ashamed of?

Wait...I really don't give a fuck what you're reasoning is. I've said my peace and I'm done.



OK I will take the bait. If I meet a guy and we are just hooking up for some mutual masturbation or I'm just giving oral sex and deep kissing, there is absolutely zero reason to disclose.

Am I a monster now? Or not monster enough?

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline LM

  • Member
  • Posts: 409
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #84 on: March 10, 2012, 03:40:58 PM »
Allow me to be the monster then. If I'm having safe sex with a trick, I don't disclose. Simple as that. I would disclose if there was the discussion for unprotected sex.

Regardless, the thread is about HIV criminalization, which we are against. Disclosure is another issue, and one should do what one feels is the best course to take. No one should dictate anything about that, especially not the government.

Offline Joe K

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,181
  • 30 Years Poz
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #85 on: March 10, 2012, 03:49:30 PM »
Since I'm getting so much attention here and everybody seems to know me so well...let's get back to a previous post that everybody is still skirting around.

I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?

And with every bodies wit at trying to pick apart every other part of everything I've posted in this thread...not a single person answers this question for me. Or does the phrase "by the way...I'm HIV+" act like kryptonite to even the stiff dick without conscience?  :o

I can only hope that these attitudes are restricted to a handful of people on an internet forum.


Everybody I associate with knows my status. Why is disclosure such a big issue for everybody that feels they need to chime in on my statements with ridiculous attempts to put the focus back on me instead of facing their own apparent denial? What is it that YOU'RE ashamed of?

Wait...I really don't give a fuck what you're reasoning is. I've said my peace and I'm done.


I was wondering just how long it would take for you to play the "victim" card.  Nobody here is ashamed of being poz, not so sure about you.  Either way, you can't claim foul just because you have no foundation to your argument.

Joe
Life is what happens, when you are busy making other plans.

Though you may be only one person in the entire world, to one person, you may be the entire world.

I wish to become half the man, that my dog thinks I am.

Remember me with simple acts of kindness and I will live forever.

Offline newt

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,868
  • the one and original newt
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #86 on: March 10, 2012, 04:56:34 PM »
Quote
I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?

1. Where you might be subject to violence, summary illegal but effective eviction, economic disempowerment etc and/or perhaps there are other people to consider, eg children who depend on you?

2, Where the rules of engagement are disclosure is not on the cards (qv BJs and random parking lots).

Do these count?

- matt
"The object is to be a well patient, not a good patient"

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 10,732
  • red pill? or blue pill?
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #87 on: March 10, 2012, 07:42:32 PM »
Since I'm getting so much attention here and everybody seems to know me so well...let's get back to a previous post that everybody is still skirting around.

I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?

And with every bodies wit at trying to pick apart every other part of everything I've posted in this thread...not a single person answers this question for me. Or does the phrase "by the way...I'm HIV+" act like kryptonite to even the stiff dick without conscience?  :o

I can only hope that these attitudes are restricted to a handful of people on an internet forum.


Everybody I associate with knows my status. Why is disclosure such a big issue for everybody that feels they need to chime in on my statements with ridiculous attempts to put the focus back on me instead of facing their own apparent denial? What is it that YOU'RE ashamed of?

Wait...I really don't give a fuck what you're reasoning is. I've said my peace and I'm done.



Read the thread carefully. People have explained but its not computing in your head.

Your argument about 100% disclosure is moral.  But you are trying to base it on a flawed assumption.  You seem to think ANY and EVERY contact between an HIV+ and HIV- person is a risk for transmission. And involved a injury to the HIV- person if he/she is unaware of the status of the +.
Yet, safe sex between people presents no risk.
And you can double that (illogically, since its already no risk) if the + is undetectable.

People have explained some situations in which HIV+ people have sex without disclosing and they are willing, morally, to live with it, because there is NO RISK.

You need to acknowledge that otherwise your argument falls apart - its purely moral and emotional.

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Offline Dr.Strangelove

  • Member
  • Posts: 202
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #88 on: March 10, 2012, 07:51:01 PM »
Great, another disclosure thread!
I'm relatively new in the game and I am still looking for the right disclosure strategy for me.
When I started having sex again after my diagnosis at first I disclosed to everybody before having sex. I felt it was a 'fair' thing to do. When I was still neg, I would have appreciated it (btw, nobody ever disclosed to me). But after having some poor reactions I see things differently now.
I'll never forget the reaction of one particular guy: "Congratulations, you are aware that you will be dead in 5 years from now."
Seriously, how does a person like this deserve my disclosure? The problem I see is that many people can't deal with that information properly, either because they are poorly educated or excessively scared beyond reason. Or they are just assholes.
I'll happily start disclosing to everybody when that changes.

And by the way, I don't lie about my status. My online profile says 'HIV status: Ask me' and if someone does ask me he gets to know that I am positive. But this has practically never happened. If the guys really care that much about about my status they can ask.

Do I also need to disclose any other things that my sex partner might potentially feel uncomfortable about?

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,259
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #89 on: March 10, 2012, 08:07:38 PM »
People are not skirting your question -- we've said that disclosure and criminalization are different topics.  I do disclose, but I don't feel I should go to jail if I didn't -- especially if I don't disclose and have safe sex.

What you have skirted is this:

Why should HIV be treated any differently than other, potentially, fatal disease?

I'll tell you why it is, not that it should be -- it is due to hysteria, homophobia and self-loathing.  it is a virus, nothing more, nothing less -- many viruses have the potential to kill, yet this is the only one people get put into jail for.

Mike
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 08:39:45 PM by bocker3 »
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline AdonisSMU

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #90 on: March 10, 2012, 11:30:11 PM »
I'm sorry to offend guys but people need to take responsibility for their own health. That and that alone will help HIV rates go down to undetectable status. Criminal laws only deter people from getting testing and treatment.

Disclosing your status to someone you don't even know is irresponsible. You don't know what people are going to do with your medical information. They could make your life miserable.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 11:45:05 PM by AdonisSMU »

Offline AdonisSMU

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #91 on: March 10, 2012, 11:43:20 PM »
Read the thread carefully. People have explained but its not computing in your head.

Your argument about 100% disclosure is moral.  But you are trying to base it on a flawed assumption.  You seem to think ANY and EVERY contact between an HIV+ and HIV- person is a risk for transmission. And involved a injury to the HIV- person if he/she is unaware of the status of the +.
Yet, safe sex between people presents no risk.
And you can double that (illogically, since its already no risk) if the + is undetectable.

People have explained some situations in which HIV+ people have sex without disclosing and they are willing, morally, to live with it, because there is NO RISK.

You need to acknowledge that otherwise your argument falls apart - its purely moral and emotional.
It's not even a good moral argument. The moral argument is you are responsible for your own health. Taking personal responsibility for your own health is the moral thing to do.

I notice that people who are still blaming others for their HIV predicament on these forums are the ones who believe that someone else is responsible for their health. They caught HIV because they chose not to use protection and that's the bottom line. There is no one else to blame but yourself.

Everything that guy said was pure emotion. There was nothing rational in his posts. He'll learn soon enough or he won't learn and he'll continue blaming others for his problems.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 11:46:16 PM by AdonisSMU »

Offline AdonisSMU

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #92 on: March 11, 2012, 12:04:18 AM »
Why it matters how I was infected...I don't understand. I'd say I fall into the category of transmission by somebody that probably had no idea she was positive.

Going back to the previous knowledge, non-disclosure qualifier...why wouldn't anybody stand behind a mandate that says "If you're positive...you better fucking tell the person you're about to lay down with, so they can decide if they really want to or not". Why keep your status a secret, if your really ok with it? Actually...I'd be very interested to know what types of sexual situations dictate that it is not necessary to disclose ones status?
You can't be this daft...  You know the answer to your question is that people won't get tested and will unwittingly spread HIV....in the same way you say that you got it if forced to disclose by law. It's easier for everyone if people take responsibility for themselves. Think please.

Offline NiniMo

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #93 on: March 11, 2012, 01:20:51 AM »
I think this topic is a bit tricky. I agree it's someone's responsibility to protect themselves, but it almost seems like the posters are completely removing responsibility for their own actions just because they're positive.

I've read quite a few blogs and it makes me a bit miffed when I hear of someone who is positive who continues to have unprotected sex with people. Their rationale is that the person should protect themselves. I'm sorry but there needs to be some personal accountability for the person who is positive. Here's why:

1) They KNOW their status, therefore THEY can decrease the spread of HIV by not passing their strain onto someone who is negative.
2) By not insisting on condoms, they are putting themselves at risk for other STDS that the "negative" person might be carrying. These can cause many more unnecessary medical problems.
3) The positive person is giving their partner the ability to choose.

Here's why I think disclosure is important. There is a chance that the condom will break. So even if you practiced safe sex, you run the risk of being liable for the person you infected. Disclosure removes liability from you.

I can't believe some of the cold posts I've been reading. I might get a bit of flak for this, but it's almost like some poz people want to punish or teach those who are negative a lesson. That's not fair, I think everyone has the right to dignity and respect regardless of their status. 

I'm in part in favor of criminalizing HIV because if someone knowingly transmits the virus, then they should be punished. That person is taking away someone else's right to good health and freedom. I think we need to be careful about oversimplifying HIV. I am so glad there have been so many advances made in medicine. At the same time though, we can't dismiss the fact that it is a SERIOUS virus that no one should ever contract. The message is getting distorted and downplayed. HIV is not at this point in time diabetes and needs to stop being viewed as such.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 01:30:56 AM by NiniMo »

Offline spacebarsux

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,350
  • Survival of the Fittest
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #94 on: March 11, 2012, 01:33:55 AM »
I think this topic is a bit tricky. I'm an HIV negative person who works for an organization that specifically focuses on HIV positive youth. I agree it's someone's responsibility to protect themselves, but it almost seems like the posters are completely removing responsibility for their own actions just because they're positive.

I've read quite a few blogs and it makes me a bit miffed when I hear of someone who is positive who continues to have unprotected sex with people. Their rationale is that the person should protect themselves. I'm sorry but there needs to be some personal accountability for the person who is positive. Here's why:

1) They KNOW their status, therefore THEY can decrease the spread of HIV by not passing their strain onto someone who is negative.
2) By not insisting on condoms, they are putting yourself at risk for other STDS that the "negative" person might be carrying. These can cause many more unnecessary medical problems.
3) The positive person is giving their partner the ability to choose.

Here's why I think disclosure is important. There is a chance that the condom will break. So even if you practiced safe sex, you run the risk of being liable for the person you infected. Disclosure removes liability from you.

I can't believe some of the cold posts I've been reading. I might get a bit of flak for this, but it's almost like some poz people want to punish or teach those who are negative a lesson. That's not fair, I think everyone has the right to dignity and respect regardless of their status.

With due respect, since you're HIV negative you can't possibly fully understand the 'disclosure dilemma' and your post reflects that.

Moreover, this is more about criminalization due to non-disclosure (even when protection is used and neither is transmission intended, nor does it occur) and not about poz people going around having unprotected sex (who are exceedingly rare).

Also, you might want to check if you're permitted to post in 'Living with HIV'- since you do not live with HIV.

Best
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 03:12:52 AM by spacebarsux »
Infected-  2005 or early 2006; Diagnosed- Jan 28th, 2011; Feb '11- CD4 754 @34%, VL- 39K; July '11- CD4 907@26%,  VL-81K; Feb '12- CD4 713 @31%, VL- 41K, Nov '12- CD4- 827@31%

Offline spacebarsux

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,350
  • Survival of the Fittest
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #95 on: March 11, 2012, 01:49:20 AM »

I'm in part in favor of criminalizing HIV because if someone knowingly transmits the virus, then they should be punished. That person is taking away someone else's right to good health and freedom. I think we need to be careful about oversimplifying HIV. I am so glad there have been so many advances made in medicine. At the same time though, we can't dismiss the fact that it is a SERIOUS virus that no one should ever contract. The message is getting distorted and downplayed. HIV is not at this point in time diabetes and needs to stop being viewed as such.

Fascinating. What does 'knowingly transmit' mean ?

If there is no clear and unequivocal intent to harm and pass on the infection , criminalization makes no sense and in fact only serves to fuel to epidemic by increasing stigma and prejudice and instilling fear in people to test themselves. It is horrific from a public health standpoint. (You should scroll up and read the UNAIDS article on criminalization of HIV transmission, linked earlier.)

Moreover, why are you singling out people with HIV? What about HPV, HBV, Syphilis that could also make people very sick and cause death. Millions of people get infected (via sexual intercourse) with HPV which causes cervical cancer. Do you propagate criminalization of that as well?

In this context, I am quoting something Sean Strub posted on the forums a while back:

"Perhaps the biggest contributor to stigma are these HIV criminalization statutes.  There's no more extreme manifestation of stigma than when it is perpetrated by the government (think apartheid, Jim Crow laws, internment of Japanese, etc.)  HIV criminalization is highly discriminatory and, in fact, we are creating a viral subclass that could be the very beginning of an effort to divide and manipulate society based on the viruses, or other pathogens, some of us carry.

There are other sexually transmitted diseases, including some acquired more easily than HIV, which can make a person very ill and result in death.  4,000 women in the US were killed last year by cervical cancer.  More than 99% of them got the cancer from human papilloma virus:  genital warts  A huge percentage of the anal-genital cancers are caused by HPV, including almost all of the rectal cancers gay men get.

But people with HPV aren't prosecuted and there aren't HPV-specific statutes outlawing the failure to disclose.  That's because HPV isn't associated with outlaw sexualities, injection drug users or minority groups.  HIV is.  HPV is also carried at one point by more than 65% of the sexually active adult population."


Lastly, with your regressive views, I think (and this is my opinion) maybe you should do us and yourself a favour and stop working in the field of HIV since you've evidently got your head stuck in the sand.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 03:21:45 AM by spacebarsux »
Infected-  2005 or early 2006; Diagnosed- Jan 28th, 2011; Feb '11- CD4 754 @34%, VL- 39K; July '11- CD4 907@26%,  VL-81K; Feb '12- CD4 713 @31%, VL- 41K, Nov '12- CD4- 827@31%

Offline Dr.Strangelove

  • Member
  • Posts: 202
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #96 on: March 11, 2012, 04:29:09 AM »
So, first of all, let me say I think it is a good idea to let negative people post here as long as they don't offend or disrupt.
There were a few threads here in the past where I (as a recently converted guy) got the impression that some pozzies here are living in some kind of bubble.
It's always helpful to get an outside view... as a kind of 'reality check'.

Back to topic, I do believe that criminalization of HIV is counterproductive in general. I also believe that someone's health is the responsibility of him/her in the first place.
But I also believe that this does not relieve us pozzies from any kind of responsibility. It's just too easy for us to say: they are solely responsible for their own health.

But it's a very complex situation because when it comes to responsibilities there is a huge difference between a neg bottom guy dropping his pants in a darkroom to get fucked bareback by a random stranger and thinking it's the other's guy's responsibility to keep him safe
or
someone being in a monogamous relationship/marriage and trusting their partner after they both got tested negative at the beginning of their relationship.

Sometimes in these forums I don't see any disambiguation between those situations. I think those are totally different though.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 05:00:22 AM by Dr.Strangelove »

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 10,732
  • red pill? or blue pill?
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #97 on: March 11, 2012, 09:45:00 AM »
When I started having sex again after my diagnosis at first I disclosed to everybody before having sex. I felt it was a 'fair' thing to do. When I was still neg, I would have appreciated it (btw, nobody ever disclosed to me). But after having some poor reactions I see things differently now.
I'll never forget the reaction of one particular guy: "Congratulations, you are aware that you will be dead in 5 years from now."
Seriously, how does a person like this deserve my disclosure? The problem I see is that many people can't deal with that information properly, either because they are poorly educated or excessively scared beyond reason. Or they are just assholes.

That's happened to me.  But there's a silver lining, right?  The jerk doesn't deserve a disclosure, but also doesn't deserve sex with me.  Its a bit bitter as a pre-coitus cocktail cause you never get to the coitus.  But there are plenty more fish in sea.

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,259
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #98 on: March 11, 2012, 09:49:47 AM »
So, first of all, let me say I think it is a good idea to let negative people post here as long as they don't offend or disrupt.
There were a few threads here in the past where I (as a recently converted guy) got the impression that some pozzies here are living in some kind of bubble.
It's always helpful to get an outside view... as a kind of 'reality check'.

Back to topic, I do believe that criminalization of HIV is counterproductive in general. I also believe that someone's health is the responsibility of him/her in the first place.
But I also believe that this does not relieve us pozzies from any kind of responsibility. It's just too easy for us to say: they are solely responsible for their own health.

But it's a very complex situation because when it comes to responsibilities there is a huge difference between a neg bottom guy dropping his pants in a darkroom to get fucked bareback by a random stranger and thinking it's the other's guy's responsibility to keep him safe
or
someone being in a monogamous relationship/marriage and trusting their partner after they both got tested negative at the beginning of their relationship.

Sometimes in these forums I don't see any disambiguation between those situations. I think those are totally different though.

Neg people CAN post in some other areas but not in "Lining with HIV" because they are NOT living with it inside them.  They can not "give us a reality check" about our lives because they don't live with this virus.

Ont the rest of your post - this conversation is NOT ABOUT DISCLOSURE, it is about criminalizing nondisclosure, whether or not there was any real risk involved.  It is about why HIV should be treated so differently in this regard, compared to other diseases.

Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline AdonisSMU

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
Re: HIV criminalization escalates
« Reply #99 on: March 11, 2012, 10:27:29 AM »
I think this topic is a bit tricky. I agree it's someone's responsibility to protect themselves, but it almost seems like the posters are completely removing responsibility for their own actions just because they're positive.

I've read quite a few blogs and it makes me a bit miffed when I hear of someone who is positive who continues to have unprotected sex with people. Their rationale is that the person should protect themselves. I'm sorry but there needs to be some personal accountability for the person who is positive. Here's why:

1) They KNOW their status, therefore THEY can decrease the spread of HIV by not passing their strain onto someone who is negative.
2) By not insisting on condoms, they are putting themselves at risk for other STDS that the "negative" person might be carrying. These can cause many more unnecessary medical problems.
3) The positive person is giving their partner the ability to choose.

Here's why I think disclosure is important. There is a chance that the condom will break. So even if you practiced safe sex, you run the risk of being liable for the person you infected. Disclosure removes liability from you.

I can't believe some of the cold posts I've been reading. I might get a bit of flak for this, but it's almost like some poz people want to punish or teach those who are negative a lesson. That's not fair, I think everyone has the right to dignity and respect regardless of their status. 

I'm in part in favor of criminalizing HIV because if someone knowingly transmits the virus, then they should be punished. That person is taking away someone else's right to good health and freedom. I think we need to be careful about oversimplifying HIV. I am so glad there have been so many advances made in medicine. At the same time though, we can't dismiss the fact that it is a SERIOUS virus that no one should ever contract. The message is getting distorted and downplayed. HIV is not at this point in time diabetes and needs to stop being viewed as such.

When I was first diagnosed my doctor flat out said diabetes is worse and that he had diabetes. I'm not pricking my fingers every day or measuring blood sugar.

No one is punishing anyone by not disclosing to someone they don't know.

Everyone has to take responsibility for their own health.

What does that mean? It means asking the people you sleep with about STDs on both sides. No one is being hostile. It comes down to responsibility for your own health. It actually works both ways. However, it begs the questions... Are they being honest about the answer? Do they even know the answer?

What we do know is that the gross majority of new infections happen between people who don't even know their status.

Even if you do disclose, the other person could say you didn't disclose. Then it's a he said she said that the court system now has to figure out....when everything could've been avoided simply by using a condom. This is why one wouldn't disclose HIV information soo soon after meeting someone. HIV information could be used against you. What part of that don't you understand?

When you find yourself in that situation you'll have a better understanding about when you should and shouldn't disclose. Most of the time you aren't going to know the person you are sleeping with very well before you have relations.

Before passing these laws they should have some HIV treatment people testifying about the actual risks rather than the perceived risks. They may learn something about how limited the HIV virus really is in terms of catching it.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 10:41:49 AM by AdonisSMU »

 


Terms of Membership for these forums
 

© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved.   terms of use and your privacy
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.