A Death Sentence.

[Darkside2009]

A while back I mentioned in one of the threads about two guys who indulged in random bare-back sex. Both were on this side of the Pond, one in Belfast the other in the North of England.

Out of curiosity I clicked on the web site of the English guy to read that he has now contracted HIV, and is now HIV+, but is still continuing with his bareback lifestyle.

If you read through his blogs, he has pursued this lifestyle for a number of years now, attending parties where he regularly had bare-back sex with all who wished to avail of him, in an orgy setting.

To me, he seemed to be positively courting the infection with abandon. It seemed only a matter of time before he caught it and now he has. He mentioned it on his blog and seemed rather disturbed that someone adversely commented that he was stupid and selfish. That his treatment, for this self inflicted injury would add a further burden to our National Health Service, at a time when funding to treat cancer is more difficult to find.

To my mind, he has always seemed rather delusional, apparently thinking that he was in the Vanguard of some movement to spread the joy of natural sex, that somehow infection would pass him by on the other side of the street.

I wonder how many of his erstwhile companions will be willing to have sex with him now, apart from the number that are already HIV+ themselves.

He is by his own account a relatively young man in his twenties, although modern medicines have delayed the onset of full-blown Aids, they have not eradicated it. I can't help but think of the wasted life when this disease takes it's toll, the pain and misery it will inflict on his family and friends from the loss of their loved one.

It is not as though he could not afford condoms, he made a deliberate choice not to use them and to attend parties where he knew the other guests were HIV+ and to let them use him as a receptacle.

In this wish, this seeming need to be the centre of attention, he has effectively consigned himself to Death Row, just waiting the day of his execution. Quite a price to pay for his 'fifteen minutes' of fame.

This is his site, for those of you who might wish to read his blogs:-

http://confessionsofabarebacksaunaslut.bestmalediaries.co m/?p=1069

[elian]

Yes, I've heard that there is apparently a whole subculture of people who do this..both tops and bottoms - My there are a lot of interesting people in the world, wouldn't you say?

..I'm not too keen on growing old alone but I'm not really into the club scene either..you would think I could make up my mind by now whether or not I could be happy living as a married man.

[darkeyes]

In the days when I was foot loose and fancy free and did my bit to please myself and the men I had sex with, my preference was always sex without condoms .. I admit it, but regularly had tests of my sexual health from the very earliest days and luckily the worst I ever had was a couple of cases of thrush.. being a bit older now I think back to how stupid I was in risking both myself and others in such a way...

Being responsible for two young children has certainly played its part in changing my attitude and would never wish that when the time comes for them to embark on their sexual adventures that they risk themselves or anyone else by such irresponsibility and so they receive the soundest advice regarding sex that we can provide.. and that means employing safer sex methods to prevent them contracting or spreading STD's as far as possible, particularly should they embark on a promiscuous lifestyle similar to my own of my teenage years and early 20s...

[Maggot]

A rather sad tale indeed.

I have always, without fail, insisted on using condoms - if my partner doesn't want to, we don't have sex. I'd rather miss out on the potential pleasures than have to deal with STIs.

[slipnslide]

It's complete insanity.

Is Deliberate HIV Exposure a Rite of Passage (http://aids.about.com/od/safersexresources/a/barebacking.htm)

[FunE1]

Wow... had not heard of this whole "bug-chasing" phenonmenon til reading this. Scary.

It's dangerous enough playing out there without having to worry about people like this -- who may not be as upfront about their status as the blogger mentioned.

[slipnslide]

As the bug chasing article suggests, addressing insecurities may be a major factor for these people.

I read Why People Say Yes to Sex! (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-attraction-doctor/201109/why-people-say-yes-sex) and learned that people who are comfortable having sex outside a monogamous relationship are also more likely to report having sex for reasons of insecurity.

Take these insecure men-who-have-sex-with-men and they're more likely to encounter HIV to start with simply by the number of potential exposures - and couple that with guys who want to feel they belong so they chase HIV. I'm guessing that the actual bug chasers as a small group, but they're likely having sex with the insecure guys. A public health nightmare.

[Gearbox]

I read Why People Say Yes to Sex! and learned that people who are comfortable having sex outside a monogamous relationship are also more likely to report having sex for reasons of insecurity.
While the ones who'd only have sex if you swear to God that you love them and will only touch THEIR genitals out of 7billion+ ever again, are quite secure?:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Sex is lovely. Use a rubber, like you would use a seatbelt!;)

[tenni]

reasons of insecurity????

Selective reading Slippy?..:bigrin:

"Both men and women with a high (unrestricted) orientation were motivated by the range of reasons for engaging in sex - and were more likely than low (restricted) orientation to have sex for physical, goal attainment, and insecurity reasons. In contrast, low (restricted) orientation men and women primarily had sex for love and commitment only."

I'll lay my bet on sex for physical reasons over insecurity for men sixty to eighty percent of the time.


What I wonder is why this thread is posted?

Is this thread posted because some don't understand the risk taking of the blogger?

Is it to feel superior in judgements compared to those who bare back and are risk takers?

I think from reading his blog article that he risk took because he felt that he would not get HIV? He may be seen as delusional in his belief and even discussing now being HIV he seems to be rationalizing the consequences and justifying his behaviour in terms of how people are reacting to his finally becoming HIV.

[slipnslide]

While the ones who'd only have sex if you swear to God that you love them and will only touch THEIR genitals out of 7billion+ ever again, are quite secure?

Your exaggeration, "if you swear to God that you love them" seems to imply that you see yourself in the insecure lot. Often mockery appears when people don't want to face harsh realities about themselves.

My personal experience reflects this too. I've turned down so many guys because their insecurity and desperation to be liked was just sad to me. There's nothing sexy about that. Yet if they're confident and happy, they're not after the "hook up". Those guys I end up on dates with and nothing physical happens for quite a while -if at all before we decide we're not a good match.

[slipnslide]

reasons of insecurity????

Selective reading Slippy?..:bigrin:

"Both men and women with a high (unrestricted) orientation were motivated by the range of reasons for engaging in sex - and were more likely than low (restricted) orientation to have sex for physical, goal attainment, and insecurity reasons. In contrast, low (restricted) orientation men and women primarily had sex for love and commitment only."

I'll lay my bet on sex for physical reasons over insecurity for men sixty to eighty percent of the time.

Careful, your defense mechanisms are showing.



What I wonder is why this thread is posted?

Is this thread posted because some don't understand the risk taking of the blogger?

Is it to feel superior in judgements compared to those who bare back and are risk takers?

There's no if and or but about, those who are responsible are definitely better people and are superior. How can you even question that?

My apologies to everyone for Tenni. Canadians have been programmed for a while now to think that judging is bad. It's kind of backfired on us.

[slipnslide]

Hi
I'm looking for another guy to have fun in the bed and out of the bed. Sensual and playful. Laughing and stimulating each other intellectually as well as physically. I'm not looking for a fuck buddy for a married guy but single or married who wants more than just a roll in the hay...a friendship plus. If you have a lady in your life, I might be interested in exploring getting to know both of you once I have gotten to know you. My interests range from the usual socializing to the very artsie stuff. I'm a visual artist who exhibits my art professionally. I'm 5'5", 145 lb, blue eyes, hairy chested guy.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[FunE1]

Sex is lovely. Use a rubber, like you would use a seatbelt!;)

Great! I have troublle enough staying hard while I put it on my penis. Now I have to pull it over my shoulder AND wrap it around my waist, too?

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuu....

:tong:

(Sorry, couldn't resist.... seemed like the type of reply Gearbox would appreciate.)

[bigbadmax]

Slippy you are so noxious im surprised that anyone dares get close to you...your default setting is to attack people personally.

If you are going to cast an opinion...expect it to be commented on. or are you going to cut and paste aspects of my profile as well.

Grow up man, this is a serious topic and idjets like you just go to show why theres STI's in the first place.

AND just for note....I used to work in a G.U clinic except most of the people there were genuinely trying to improve their sexual health, and those who wre not were pursuaded into a healthier lifestyle

[Gearbox]

Your exaggeration, "if you swear to God that you love them" seems to imply that you see yourself in the insecure lot. Often mockery appears when people don't want to face harsh realities about themselves.

My personal experience reflects this too. I've turned down so many guys because their insecurity and desperation to be liked was just sad to me. There's nothing sexy about that. Yet if they're confident and happy, they're not after the "hook up". Those guys I end up on dates with and nothing physical happens for quite a while -if at all before we decide we're not a good match.
My point was that monogamy is in no way shape or form any indication of a self secure person, as you implied it was.
No shock that you completely avoided that and took to your 'Attack is the best defence' habit.:rolleyes:

If you think hookups are sad and desperate for sex, don't hookup! Send them to my place, I'm sadly desperate for sex!:tong:

@FunE1- Are you trying to say I'm at all sarcastic? What on Earth gave you that impression?:rolleyes:

[elian]

In an ideal world both men and women should feel secure and worthy..it's a shame that it has to be any other way and it causes a lot of hardship in the world. So is life I suppose. Of course not all sex is due to insecurity! - but it's not too hard for me to imagine that craving attention and acceptance is a common reason some people have sex..

Why was this thread posted? Maybe because the OP really didn't know about the details of this behavior until he read the article. Education is not judgement.

[Darkside2009]

[QUOTE=elian;219169]In an ideal world both men and women should feel secure and worthy..it's a shame that it has to be any other way and it causes a lot of hardship in the world. So is life I suppose. Of course not all sex is due to insecurity! - but it's not too hard for me to imagine that craving attention and acceptance is a common reason some people have sex..

Why was this thread posted? Maybe because the OP really didn't know about the details of this behavior until he read the article. Education is not judgement.[/QUOTE

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As the OP I am fully aware of the details of this behaviour, I have read his blog a few times over the years. He has detailed his exploits with numerous participants, many of whom he knew to be HIV+ at these parties, which were held at various venues around the country.

He has posted various photographs and videos on these blogs showing him having sex with the other participants. He has given details about having six monthly check-ups to see if he has become infected. He states his previous test in March was clear, but this latest one in November proved positive.

He declares his avowed intention to continue this behaviour, knowing he is now positive and will almost certainly infect others. The participants come from all over the country to attend these 'parties' and will carry the infection back into their communities where they will doubtless have sex with others.

Those others may not be made aware of the health status of the person they are having sex with, and may have no reason to ask, perhaps believing themselves to be in a monogamous relationship, (just as an example).

If you read through his blog, and through past entries and the comments made, you will see that there appears to be others queuing up to become infected.

If you read the links on his blog to the blogs of others following similar behaviour, you will see and hear other short videos of bareback sex with the top actually telling the bottom he is pumping him full of his infected seed, in order to breed him, whilst he is engaged in doing it.

There is also a risk from crossing different strains of HIV and making one more resistant to current medication.

Consider this, if this were a dog with rabies, (another disease for which there is no cure), the dog would be taken into custody and destroyed to prevent the spread of infection. Yet this person and his friends are left free to roam and create a public health problem.

The subject of this thread has moved his blog several times over the years, as it has grown in size and outgrown the bandwidth constrictions of his previous ISP's.

At a certain point he had been hoping for a career as a porn star and had offered his services to a certain purveyor of homosexual porn. As far as I'm aware they didn't take up his offer. As porn stars make their living from sex I would suspect they would need a clean bill of health before other performers would agree to perform with them. This fact appears to have escaped him.

I for one, find this behaviour bizarre. It is utterly stupid to risk years of ill health or even death by engaging in unprotected sex with complete strangers for what amounts to a few minutes of pleasure.

I have not got any knowledge of his family background, but I have never read in his blog over the years any reference to family or how he thinks it might affect them, or how they will no doubt be the ones left to cope with his illness. Not one shred of guilt, remorse, consideration even. Just a selfish disregard for anything or anyone but his own selfish pleasure.

No thoughts for the burden he will place on an already stretched Health Service, as long as he gets his little pocket of fame on the Internet.

[Long Duck Dong]

I have read the blog, I see a person that has made a chance in their life, knowing the risks, knowing the options, knowing the choices.... and choosing as part of a informed and consensual action.....

yet he is selfish and wrong and only thinking of himself ?..... is that not the same way that a good number of bisexual people can act, when it comes to sex ? its about them and their reasoning for having sex, at the expense of other people ?

the guy is using the understanding that you only live once and you can live your whole life sheltering yourself and protecting yourself.... or you can say, I am not going to hide behind a condom, I am going to live as I want to.....

the * why should I deny myself the pleasures of life * type thinking come into this, something that bisexuals have used in the site as a defense for acting on their sexuality.......

if the guy never caught aids, then there would only be the people saying he was stupid cos of the risks according to all the stat sites and not the people saying that he is wrong and selfish for indulging himself......

its his body, his choice, his life and as long and hes doing everything in a consensual manner ( giving and receiving sex ) then its his right to live his life his way.... as many would argue, when it comes to their own sexuality and sexual expression...... or does that only apply to people when they want to have sex with others, and not to other people that are making choices in their lives that we may not agree with.......

[elian]

Yes, I agree with both of you, it is sad, and I have seen people be very selfish with sex - it's almost enough to make me swear off the stuff.

[tenni]

"is that not the same way that a good number of bisexual people can act, when it comes to sex ? its about them and their reasoning for having sex, at the expense of other people ?"

I find this wording to be a rather anti bisexual slur.

A good number of bisexual people weigh their sexual decisions and make their sexual decisions wisely. Every sexual interaction that you involve yourself in as a bisexual is about you regardless how many others that you involve yourself with sexually. To think that a good number of bisexuals do not practice safe sex and make wise decisions who they have sex with is an attitude reflecting a hostile approach to bisexuals.

[Long Duck Dong]

"is that not the same way that a good number of bisexual people can act, when it comes to sex ? its about them and their reasoning for having sex, at the expense of other people ?"

This is rather an anti bisexual slur.

A good number of bisexual people weigh their sexual decisions and make their sexual decisions wisely. Every sexual interaction that you involve yourself in as a bisexual is about you regardless how many others that you involve yourself with sexually. To think that a good number of bisexuals do not practice safe sex and make wise decisions who they have sex with is an attitude reflecting a hostile approach to bisexuals. It might be seen as the thoughts of a bigot.

when you finish taking what I say out of context and twisting it around as you have......

the first two lines I posted, were a observation about a person, the second two that you missed part of, were open questions about the nature of some bisexuals, NOT statements......

care to show me where a couple of open questions, are a anti bisexual slur regarding safe sex, when I never mentioned it ????

[Darkside2009]

I have read the blog, I see a person that has made a chance in their life, knowing the risks, knowing the options, knowing the choices.... and choosing as part of a informed and consensual action.....

yet he is selfish and wrong and only thinking of himself ?..... is that not the same way that a good number of bisexual people can act, when it comes to sex ? its about them and their reasoning for having sex, at the expense of other people ?

the guy is using the understanding that you only live once and you can live your whole life sheltering yourself and protecting yourself.... or you can say, I am not going to hide behind a condom, I am going to live as I want to.....

the * why should I deny myself the pleasures of life * type thinking come into this, something that bisexuals have used in the site as a defense for acting on their sexuality.......

if the guy never caught aids, then there would only be the people saying he was stupid cos of the risks according to all the stat sites and not the people saying that he is wrong and selfish for indulging himself......

its his body, his choice, his life and as long and hes doing everything in a consensual manner ( giving and receiving sex ) then its his right to live his life his way.... as many would argue, when it comes to their own sexuality and sexual expression...... or does that only apply to people when they want to have sex with others, and not to other people that are making choices in their lives that we may not agree with.......

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't have a problem with responsible people having consensual sex in private, provided they are not cheating on their partner, or harming anyone else.

I do not like stupid, selfish people in general, especially if they are creating a pool of infection that they then proceed to spread around the country, without qualm.

I find it more than a little bizarre that this person details his exploits on a web site as though he is some kind of rock-star, inviting comments, then gets upset if people voice their opinion of him and his activities, in a manner not to his liking. He obviously expects adulation, and didn't get it.

Modern drugs only slow the onset of Aids, they don't cure it. When he eventually falls ill, it will be his family that bear the burden of his stupidity, not his party friends.

An already over-stretched hospital that will have to attend to his self-inflicted medical needs.

Since the 70's I have argued for a change in the law, that anyone who knowingly infects another with an infection that leads to their death should be tried for murder.

In the UK to fulfil the requirement for that charge, the death of the victim had to occur within a year and a day of the incident. Outside of that time, and a charge was not brought due to the idea of remoteness.

In the intervening period the law in the UK has changed somewhat, anyone knowingly infecting a person with HIV can now be charged with Grievous Bodily Harm.

I gave the example of the dog with rabies, it is considered a public health risk, taken into custody and destroyed. Even a dog that merely bites people, will be taken into custody and destroyed.

As a society, we keep a close watch on paedophiles and restrict their activities, as to where they can live, where they can visit, who they can associate with.

Yet the person under discussion and his friends can go where they like, engage with whom they like and engage in activity that poses a public health risk. This in a Society that has imprisoned people for shop lifting or not paying their television licence.

Is it good enough to say he is leading his life the way he wishes? If he were not spreading infection I would say yes. Does his right to lead his life as he wishes and engage in this behaviour, outweigh the danger to public health? I would say no.

The Yorkshire Ripper liked to exercise his prerogative of killing women by hitting them over the head with a hammer. He was eventually caught and removed from society, to a secure mental institution, where he could not harm anyone else.

I find the similarities striking.

[darkeyes]

As one who took such awful risks when she was in her teens and at the beginning of her 20s, and who would think twice about having revisting those years as stupidly as I did, I ask myself this.. if I were HIV, or indeed was infected by a STD of any kind, but HIV in particular, even if a sex partner knowingly took the gamble that he or she would not contract the disease, or even if he was a kook and wanted to, could I live with myself if that or any other partner was less circumspect than I and went about sewing the seeds of infection that I had passed to him, or her, willy nilly all over the place with nary a word to anyone?

However honest we may be, or how careful, we are unable to guarantee that those we may infect will be as scrupulously honest as we like to think ourselves to be.

I do not wish to prevent anyone from pursuing a life of sexual adventure, but a little sanity is needed and a little forethought, and consideration not just for those to whom we may directly pass infection to, but for the many we may never meet who we may be ultimately responsible for infecting and in time, costing them their lives..

[tenni]

"Since the 70's I have argued for a change in the law, that anyone who knowingly infects another with an infection that leads to their death should be tried for murder. "

Darkside
In Canada, I believe that two people have been found guilty of murder by knowingly transmitting HIV and non disclosure of their HIV status causing death. One man who caused at least two deaths and infecting eleven other victims by knowingly transmitting HIV has been declared permanent dangerous offender (not actual term) that he will never be released from prison. Non disclosure of HIV status is a form of deception. The courts have determined that people who are not informed that a sexual partner is HIV-positive cannot truly give consent to sex.

Anyone knowingly transmitting HIV without expressed consent that the victim knows the HIV status of the perp may be charge with an aggravated sexual assault. I think that there is no time period that the victim must die. That does seem unusual. How does the UK come to that a year and a day factor?

[Jobelorocks]

I don't have a problem with people choosing to have unsafe sex if they are consenting adults, but if someone knows they are HIV+ or have any other STI for that matter and don't disclose this before engaging in this sexual activity are selfish and in my opinion disgusting.

To knowingly risk someone else's health or even life so you can get off is just plain criminal.

I especially hate when people cheat on their spouse (Which is selfish since they are taking away their partner's informed consent. This is because many of these people would not consent to sex with their spouse if they knew they were sleeping with multiple people.) and to add insult to injury they also do it without protection bringing home who knows what to their partner. If you are going to be a jack ass and cheat on your partner, at least show some prudence and use protection.

[Gearbox]

I find the similarities striking.
I find you disturbing!:eek:

These PEOPLE are nothing like rabid dogs, paedophiles or The Yorkshire Ripper! Not that would stop you demonising them as much as you can.

If you don't BB they won't fuck you! So you'd be quite safe there, I'm assuming, as your in no way interested in that, as you just happened on a BB blog.:rolleyes:

I think the blog is a great thing, as it is honest about the BB'ing that goes on. It is a blunt confirmation of the dangers of BB'ing, and doesn't try to do otherwise!
I can't stand condoms. Not many like them. BUT that blog makes you appreciate them very much.:)
I'd LOVE to BB, and so would everybody else! But the risks are not ignorable. We KNOW people like the blogger are out there.

So don't you think he's doing you a favour by warning you?

[Darkside2009]

I find you disturbing!:eek:

These PEOPLE are nothing like rabid dogs, paedophiles or The Yorkshire Ripper! Not that would stop you demonising them as much as you can.

If you don't BB they won't fuck you! So you'd be quite safe there, I'm assuming, as your in no way interested in that, as you just happened on a BB blog.:rolleyes:

I think the blog is a great thing, as it is honest about the BB'ing that goes on. It is a blunt confirmation of the dangers of BB'ing, and doesn't try to do otherwise!
I can't stand condoms. Not many like them. BUT that blog makes you appreciate them very much.:)
I'd LOVE to BB, and so would everybody else! But the risks are not ignorable. We KNOW people like the blogger are out there.

So don't you think he's doing you a favour by warning you?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This same person under discussion, detailed in a previous blog how he took a toothbrush and used it on his anus and rectum until he bled, to facilitate the chances of him becoming infected at one of these parties.

The other one I spoke of in Belfast, who went by the name of Spunk Bucket, detailed in his blogs how he would visit his local Gay Sauna and not only engage in bareback sex there, but actually rummage through the rubbish bins to find used condoms. Once he found them he would swallow the used, contents.

Still think these two people are sane and normal?

I have retained an interest through the years on people like them as I wrote a term paper as part of my degree on Offences Against the Person,(Murder, GBH, ABH, Common Assault).

As part of the section on Murder and GBH, I used such people as examples, as the problem with Aids was just emerging, it seemed to me that it would change the definition we had of murder.

I used a number on both sides of the Atlantic as comparison, as I wanted to show this was not a sub-culture existing in only one country. Over the years most of them have stopped writing blogs, I presume because they are either dead or developed some notion of social responsibility.

The one I have detailed in this thread has continued writing his blog, through various ISP's, even through times when his photos were all deleted by the ISP.

As you can see from the comments on his blog, there are numerous stupid people willing to take his place. He would be doing Society a favour, if he stopped engaging in such insane behaviour or if he was sectioned and moved to a secure mental hospital, where he could not inflict his infection on others. Or if his ISP were to deny him the facility to glamourise his insane lifestyle by persuading other gullible people that he is a person to be emulated.

It is his actions in courting and spreading the infection that I find repulsive, not that he is interested in sex without condoms.

[Long Duck Dong]

is anybody that engages in sex with multiple partners, sane and normal ?

we place ourselves at risk, every time we do that..... and we have trust and faith in the other people NOT to place us at risk, while justifying our placing ourselves at risk......and we call it normal and sane.....

I am not just refering to hiv, I am refering to things like shaving our pubic regions with razors which has been shown to increase the risk of herpes transmission to a very high level, and for many carriers, they have no idea that they have herpes, they are carriers with no visible symptoms..... and safe sex doesn't stop the transmission of the herpes virus as a condom doesn't cover the whole area......

we play with fire every time we hook up with people, and we place ourselves at risk, but deem it to be acceptable behievour, normal and sane cos its OUR lifestyle......

when we talk about putting people in mental hospitals cos we do not agree with or accept their behievour, we become no different to the people that once wanted to do that to us cos of our behievour.......but somehow, we are suddenly not the victims, we become the judge and jury......

its what happens when we change the boundaries.. as many people have said, they used to bareback before they knew of the risks involved....

and before anybody comes in to object to the usage of WE, instead of I, the WE is inclusive of any person that sharing a matching viewpoint in regards to part or all of what I have said, and i am not putting myself out there as a voice for any group or aspect of society and nor am I speaking on behalf of anybody .....

[Darkside2009]

is anybody that engages in sex with multiple partners, sane and normal ?

we place ourselves at risk, every time we do that..... and we have trust and faith in the other people NOT to place us at risk, while justifying our placing ourselves at risk......and we call it normal and sane.....

I am not just refering to hiv, I am refering to things like shaving our pubic regions with razors which has been shown to increase the risk of herpes transmission to a very high level, and for many carriers, they have no idea that they have herpes, they are carriers with no visible symptoms..... and safe sex doesn't stop the transmission of the herpes virus as a condom doesn't cover the whole area......

we play with fire every time we hook up with people, and we place ourselves at risk, but deem it to be acceptable behievour, normal and sane cos its OUR lifestyle......

when we talk about putting people in mental hospitals cos we do not agree with or accept their behievour, we become no different to the people that once wanted to do that to us cos of our behievour.......but somehow, we are suddenly not the victims, we become the judge and jury......

its what happens when we change the boundaries.. as many people have said, they used to bareback before they knew of the risks involved....

and before anybody comes in to object to the usage of WE, instead of I, the WE is inclusive of any person that sharing a matching viewpoint in regards to part or all of what I have said, and i am not putting myself out there as a voice for any group or aspect of society and nor am I speaking on behalf of anybody .....

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If someone persistently drives their car down the wrong side of the road, in the face of oncoming traffic, we as a Society, decide he is a danger to other road users. His licence and car is taken away, he will be lucky not to escape a sentence for dangerous driving.

His freedom of choice is removed, as we consider the safety of the public to be of the greater importance.

Similarly if a person walks through his local mall with a handgun, taking pot shots at the other shoppers, we as a Society do not think twice about having him arrested and removed to prison where he cannot shoot at people again. Irrespective of his own wishes in the matter.

Life is full of examples where the Public Good outweighs individual freedoms, it is justly so. All societies have parameters of acceptable behaviour laid out in laws and rules, transgression of which results in penalties.

Even a site such as this, has rules of acceptable behaviour for posting in the forum, transgression of which, will result in the culprit being banned.

There has always been a potential conflict of interest between the rights of an individual and the rights of society as a whole. In my view, the individual under discussion in this thread, does not have a right to go around inflicting his infection on others, when this behaviour will endanger the lives of others and impinge on the public safety of Society.

His irresponsible behaviour should not be tolerated as it affects others as well as himself. That is my opinion, you may well have a different one.

[Gearbox]

Still think these two people are sane and normal?
We could debate/guess their motives and rationale till our fingers drop off. But IMO it does more harm than good to demonise them.
I'd GUESS that for every 1 BB blogger who has no regard for infection, there are a 100 BB's who think they are at low risk. (Underestimate of the century!).

They don't inflict anything on to anyone that doesn't invite it (BB). We KNOW that to BB is to accept the risks, no matter if it's with those bloggers or with a 'nice man/woman' who wouldn't harm a fly.:rolleyes:
They don't start their own blogs about how they got the infection.

It's incredibly sad that in 2012 we still have HIV in circulation, and astonishing that those like the Bloggers would aim to catch it.
Obviously they are not responsible for ALL infections.
You could lock them away from society, but you can't protect it from the majority of it's unknown 'spreaders'. You can't make it 'safe'!
All we can do is make it as 'safe' as we can for ourselves.

I have no comprehension of how the blog glamorises infection. But I wouldn't be too surprised if that's what it's about.
IMO it's best to take it as a stark warning!:eek:

[Darkside2009]

We could debate/guess their motives and rationale till our fingers drop off. But IMO it does more harm than good to demonise them.
I'd GUESS that for every 1 BB blogger who has no regard for infection, there are a 100 BB's who think they are at low risk. (Underestimate of the century!).

They don't inflict anything on to anyone that doesn't invite it (BB). We KNOW that to BB is to accept the risks, no matter if it's with those bloggers or with a 'nice man/woman' who wouldn't harm a fly.:rolleyes:
They don't start their own blogs about how they got the infection.

It's incredibly sad that in 2012 we still have HIV in circulation, and astonishing that those like the Bloggers would aim to catch it.
Obviously they are not responsible for ALL infections.
You could lock them away from society, but you can't protect it from the majority of it's unknown 'spreaders'. You can't make it 'safe'!
All we can do is make it as 'safe' as we can for ourselves.

I have no comprehension of how the blog glamorises infection. But I wouldn't be too surprised if that's what it's about.
IMO it's best to take it as a stark warning!:eek:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We can place bars on our windows and locks on our doors to protect us from burglars, that doesn't mean we should not imprison those burglars we do catch. There may well be other burglars out there, but the ones we as a Society have imprisoned will not be stealing, or making people feel vulnerable in their own homes, for as long as they are incarcerated.

[elian]

I don't disagree that such people could potentially pose a risk to society at large but I do find it curious that in fact, society DID practice forced sterilization for a time whenever that public policy was the fashion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

.. "though some states (Oregon and North Dakota in particular) had laws which called for the use of castration" ..

My, how exciting..what a curious world we live in..

.. "After World War II, public opinion towards eugenics and sterilization programs became more negative" ..

Well, you don't say..

[Long Duck Dong]

lol its that I am curious about the way that people justify their own behievour and choices, but vilify others.... a bit like the anti LGBT people that will engage in anal sex with their partners, but rubbish gay males for doing the same thing.....

its in the same context that being ex military, I was permitted to take a human life but in my own country, defense of my own home and sister, resulted in me being locked up.....yet my desire to return to the battle field and a aspect of life that I merge with so well, is seen as wrong......

your last remark is " His irresponsible behaviour should not be tolerated as it affects others as well as himself. That is my opinion, you may well have a different one "

thats the same stance I have with people that cheat on their partners, yet I am told I am wrong, its about the rights of the bisexual male and his rights v's the rights of both partners.... however its still acting in a selfish and irresponsible manner as it can affect other people....

in regards to the person repeatedly driving the wrong way down the road, sure, hes doing something illegally wrong.... but how does that make his crime any more different than a person that fails to stop at a stop sign, or a person that fails to indicate....... its still irresponsible behievour, but its something that many of us have done and we brush it off and rarely do we refer to ourselves as stupid, irresponsible drivers when we can not obey the same road rules we expect others to abide by.... and I am speaking there as a drunken driver that crashed and killed 7 people.....

my sister contracted hiv.....
maybe I should refer to my sister as a selfish, stupid, irresponsible slut for having unsafe sex and contracting HIV.... the fact that she was a responsible adult, that made a informed choice and decision ( abeit she was drinking ) and had unprotected sex with a male that was NOT aware he had hiv ( he commited suicide when he found out as he also became aware he have infected another person, my sister, and he could handle the guilt ) .....

the reason why I do not judge the guy in the blog or my sister harshly, is cos of my own mistakes in life and some of the things I have done, myself..... and I dare say a number of others, IE barebacking when we were younger, as it placed us and others at risk from STI's..... and that would make me a person that was also selfish, stupid and irresponsible....

I can use the defence that I changed my ways... but it doesn't change my actions in the past or make them acceptable and ok.....

I am not defending the guys actions or choices.... I am merely pointing out the way that people can vilify the actions of people that they do not agree with, while justifying their own actions...... and I am no angel myself, I use my halo as a cock ring :tong:

are any of us, truly law abiding, intelligent people that have never acted in a irresponsible, selfish manner that could have affected many others..... I doubt it.....

[Darkside2009]

I don't disagree that such people could potentially pose a risk to society at large but I do find it curious that in fact, society DID practice forced sterilization for a time whenever that public policy was the fashion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

.. "though some states (Oregon and North Dakota in particular) had laws which called for the use of castration" ..

My, how exciting..what a curious world we live in..

.. "After World War II, public opinion towards eugenics and sterilization programs became more negative" ..

Well, you don't say..

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't recall anyone mentioning sterilisation in this thread, apart from yourself, perhaps you are thinking of another thread?

[elian]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't recall anyone mentioning sterilisation in this thread, apart from yourself, perhaps you are thinking of another thread?

Prison is good then, or maybe just a stiff fine per offense?

Judges here in the US were making similar moral judgements about women who were on public welfare in the 1970's. ".since they can't keep their legs closed we better make that decision for them."

I'm not trying to justify the behavior of someone who is willfully infecting others with HIV, just looking at some of the alternatives we could employ to help reduce the public health menace.

Like gear said, hopefully it is self policing..

Personally I like Planned Parenthood's random guerrilla drive-by approach a lot better - pull up in an obnoxiously decorated small VW beetle and just start throwing condoms out the windows like crazy..

[Darkside2009]

Prison is good then, or maybe just a stiff fine per offense?

Judges here in the US were making similar moral judgements about women who were on public welfare in the 1970's. ".since they can't keep their legs closed we better make that decision for them."

I'm not trying to justify the behavior of someone who is willfully infecting others with HIV, just looking at some of the alternatives we could employ to help reduce the public health menace.

Like gear said, hopefully it is self policing..

Personally I like Planned Parenthood's random guerrilla drive-by approach a lot better - pull up in an obnoxiously decorated small VW beetle and just start throwing condoms out the windows like crazy..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was me thinking you were aiming for flippancy, and failing desperately. No one, apart from yourself had mentioned women on public welfare either.

If you don't wish to have a serious conversation on the topic of the thread why bother contributing to the thread, there are others to choose from?

[mikey3000]

...I'd LOVE to BB, and so would everybody else! But the risks are not ignorable. We KNOW people like the blogger are out there...

I dodged a bullet last year. After a particularly long absense of "male love" I was ready to get hammered real good. There was even a friend friend that I've known for a few years who I knew was more that willing to take my virginity. I decided he would be the one when the time was right.

One evening he and I went out to dinner and thought that if he invited me back to his place, I would go and follow through on my decision. After all, I ain't getting any younger :bigrin:. But it was at that dinner that he revealed to me that he was poz. and that he regularly frequents bath houses and has regular anonymous BB hook ups. Both him and his recent ex-partner are now infected.

It scares me how close I came. I don't even consider it anymore.

[Pasadenacpl2]

I've said it before: if you get HIV in this day and age, you're either negligent, or raped. I didn't think to include suicide by disease.

Honestly, I don't think he should be covered under the health plan in his nation. Why should the tax payers spend the money for this jackass? He should be left to have the disease that he courted ravage his body and the money to care for him should be used for AIDs research, or caring for a sick child, or funding some obnoxious government program.

As for the other BBs, while I can NEVER condone exposing people to disease without their consent, they don't really deserve services either. They knew the risks. Or, rather, they thought they knew. The only person who really knew was this douchebag. But they should have known it was a game of Russian Roulette. They chose to play, they should be excluded from taxpayer funded healthcare.

Pasa

[elian]

Don't mistake my flippant attitude for not taking the issue seriously, I may make a devil's advocate argument but it's a serious problem when I suffer from depression and self loathing because of the "gay lifestyle". I read about people like this blogger and is it any wonder that I can still feel ashamed of my sexuality?

I'm too paranoid to have sex - on one hand you've got hormones and longing for companionship and on the other you've got indiscriminate guys who will rub up against anything that has a pulse. In a lot of cases gay men cannot meet openly in public, we're forced to do so in secret and that in itself causes a whole host of potential health, morale and safety problems. Even if I decide to use a condom I can STILL get infected.. I don't WANT to be 70 years old and STILL looking to hook up with guys on the weekend, I'd much rather settle down with a real companion but oh wait - I can't get married either, can't enjoy the benefits of a civil partnership - well so much for that.

Hey at least it's not still the 1950's..

One thing at a time I can handle, but people like this blogger, hate groups, conservative news stories, personal feelings, little by little it all adds up and it bothers me quite a lot. I know this isn't MY world, I don't OWN it, I have to share it but I've very flippantly considered joining a monastery and going away from this place. These days people's foremost concern seems to be stroking their own ego (among other things) .. maybe I need to stop listening to the media or something.

I don't have anything more constructive to add to the argument than that, I think most of the other angles have been covered by other posters so I'll stop irritating you now.

[tenni]

My dear Elian
I do empathize with you. There is so much more to sex and sensual love making than anal penetration. I'm sure that you know that. Don't let you life pass you by. A kiss can become almost even orgasmic with the right lover. Your hands and mouth can out do your penis as a love tool. Everyone needs and deserves human interaction of a sensual and caring way whether you are in a monogamous relationship or some other form of friendship. I've met some guys who are are so fearful of contracting a disease that they either are all rubbered up even for oral or no sex at all.

Reach 70 and have great memories of lovers that you have been with. Hell, the numbers in their 70's are going to be increasing every decade. There will be someone there for you at 70.:bigrin: It may not be all that you dream of but don't deny yourself of love making and sensual play with a caring person. It doesn't have to be the same lover for every decade or even every year. Monogamy is no cure all or guarantee of happiness nor even making love a lot. It can be hell and destructive for some people. It can also be great! Monogamy is not for everyone and you don't have to get a disease if you make love to more than ten lovers a year either. Caution and lower risk activity are good things.

Stay the hell out of the monastry! :eek:;):tong::bigrin:

[Darkside2009]

I've said it before: if you get HIV in this day and age, you're either negligent, or raped. I didn't think to include suicide by disease.

Honestly, I don't think he should be covered under the health plan in his nation. Why should the tax payers spend the money for this jackass? He should be left to have the disease that he courted ravage his body and the money to care for him should be used for AIDs research, or caring for a sick child, or funding some obnoxious government program.

As for the other BBs, while I can NEVER condone exposing people to disease without their consent, they don't really deserve services either. They knew the risks. Or, rather, they thought they knew. The only person who really knew was this douchebag. But they should have known it was a game of Russian Roulette. They chose to play, they should be excluded from taxpayer funded healthcare.

Pasa

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It may not be just the people attending the party who have sex with the blogger that suffer the consequences.

If for example, a bisexual male attends one of these parties, becomes infected and takes that infection home to his unsuspecting, wife, girlfriend or partner. She would have no reason to suspect she needs to wear condoms with her spouse, whom she trusts not to have cheated on her whilst he was on his business trip to London.

The first she will know of it will be when the symptoms start to appear. If they both have young children the ensuing mess and recriminations will be horrendous.

If one or both of the adults die, it could lead to enormous financial hardship, or even the children having to be taken into care of the Local Authority with all that might entail. Multiply this by x-number of parties per year for however long this blogger takes to develop full blown Aids, when his sex appeal may suddenly wane.

All because one blogger didn't give a damn about anyone, or anything else but his own selfish pleasure. You can see from his web site there are others out there, just like him, infecting others, just as he does. Others queuing up to emulate him and be infected by him.

As a Society, we can continue to allow those infections to ripple out from their source, or we can do our best to stop them by removing the source of infection to a place where they cannot harm others, such as a prison or secure mental hospital.

If it were our water supply that was at risk from contamination, we wouldn't think twice about it.

Just my opinion of course, you are welcome to your own.

[mikey3000]

My dear Elian
I do empathize with you. There is so much more to sex and sensual love making than anal penetration. I'm sure that you know that. Don't let you life pass you by. A kiss can become almost even orgasmic with the right lover. Your hands and mouth can out do your penis as a love tool. Everyone needs and deserves human interaction of a sensual and caring way whether you are in a monogamous relationship or some other form of friendship. I've met some guys who are are so fearful of contracting a disease that they either are all rubbered up even for oral or no sex at all.

Reach 70 and have great memories of lovers that you have been with. Hell, the numbers in their 70's are going to be increasing every decade. There will be someone there for you at 70.:bigrin: It may not be all that you dream of but don't deny yourself of love making and sensual play with a caring person. It doesn't have to be the same lover for every decade or even every year. Monogamy is no cure all or guarantee of happiness nor even making love a lot. It can be hell and destructive for some people. It can also be great! Monogamy is not for everyone and you don't have to get a disease if you make love to more than ten lovers a year either. Caution and lower risk activity are good things.

Stay the hell out of the monastry! :eek:;):tong::bigrin:

Last month I went to a strip joint where I made out with the stripper and gave him a hand job. That's ok, isn't ? Isn't it? Hellooooo? :( Ahhh the memories.

[tenni]

Probably not your wisest move Mikey. :(:bigrin:

Did he shoot?

Did you check for cuts on your hand first?

Did you wrap(glove) your hand? (I know who would..:tong:)

Come over to my place and we'll set up a strip club atmosphere...:bigrin:
Beers and lap dances are cheaper...:tongue:.

[mikey3000]

But..but...but..Tenni, you said. "No monasteries" you said. "Build memories" you said. So I did. Ahh, sweet whatshisname. I'll never forget him.

As for you, Tenni. The day you put that pole back up in your livingroom, I'll be right over. :cool:

And by the by, I didn't see a rubber in your "art installation". :bigrin:

If I had to glove my hand when ever I gave a hand job, I'd never give one again. Some risks are worth taking.

[tenni]

Mikey
Well, you have a point there....memories ..no monastaries..

I bet daffyd would be "up" to pole dancing..his moniker refers to liking pole and hole.:tongue:

Gear would probably be up to a pole dance shaking his lily white arse probably something about a Welsh Wank.;)

Give Elian another beer and we can get him dancing with the pole.:tong:

Maybe, LDD & Pasa could be duo dancers?:bigrin:

Of course, we would all have to show darkside our latest STI report cards.:)

I can just see Cat there with dollar bills to stuff down your g string Mikey.:tong:

I wonder if darkeyes would spare a pound for a round :tongue:

What would Slippy do? Hand out condoms?

I could videotape the dancers and create an installation where each dancer is projected on to very large condoms (two metres wide) Maybe bouncing images off mirrors and the disco ball....to Tina Turner's "Private Dancer"

OPPS Now back to your regular serious programme ;)

[Lay-Lay]

This just makes me wonder how their minds work and what happened to make them think that way....


“You must be the change you wish to see in the world.”

- Gandhi

[elian]

guess I probably owe you all an apology, sorry.

[Hephaestion]

".....In this wish, this seeming need to be the centre of attention, he has effectively consigned himself to Death Row, just waiting the day of his execution. Quite a price to pay for his 'fifteen minutes' of fame......."


If what has been seen in the past was AIDS in its last stages then that's more a very slow death. Were it an execution it would be more humane.

No wonder that accusations of "gay plague" are made. With this behaviour, this maroon and his like set back society's 'understanding' and 'adoption' by decades. Is he real or an 'agent provocateur' set out to do just that? After all Mrs Rupert Murdoch turned out to be a hoax although ticked as acredited.

.