Gay Marriage and AIDS

[Something Amyss]

That's actually a really biased thing to say. It's the kind of thing white power sites say to twist stats to promote their hate. If you issolate for risk factors, the black population is at the same risk as the white population. The figures are messed up in the US due to economic factors that see more risky behavior in that population.

Yes, it's completely biased to speak in real world terms as opposed to pretend fantasy rules apply.

Of course, rates among homosexuals are also somewhat biased. but hey, let's ignore that and my overarching point because PONIES!

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

"Note: I'm not against homosexuality (my gender is about as liquid as water, I'm bisexual and my primary attraction is to transgender females, lol) and think gay marriage should be allowed from sheer common sense.

But you are bringing gay marriage to discussion based on, in large part, the understanding that "gays are a high risk group."

I merely brought up the analogue, which seems to have made you hostile. I read your post. This is, as my girlfriend said, "striking at the heart" of what you're saying.

Also, being bisexual and gender queer doesn't change anything. For example, you may not have anything against homosexuals, but you are discussing gay marriage in relation to a falsehood about gays and AIDS.

Now, answer the question. Would this even come up as an issue if we were talking blacks?

Oh wow, you missed the point again. How to word it simpler... I'm wondering if the number of HIV or AIDS cases will increase should gay marriage be legal everywhere. I want marriage for everyone (that's an adult, obviously).

You're allowed to talk about a negative aspect of something without being against it, hun. Less knee-jerk, more dialog.

 

[ExtremePhobia]

I think there's a lot of reasons that doing so would reverse it. I don't think it would just "encourage monogamy" so much is allow it. If you weren't allowed to marry someone, wouldn't you feel a little more inclined to sleep around? I mean it's not like you're ever going to be able to get married or anything so you might as well make the most of it.

That aside, notice your own mention of heterosexual couples. They've been marrying for a very, very long time and HIV spreading through the heterosexual population hasn't dramatically increased over that of the GLBT community. I mean, according to you (and what I've heard too). I'm just not sure if that's true or just a popular myth based on how things were in the 80's.

 

[ExtremePhobia]

I think there's a lot of reasons that doing so would reverse it. I don't think it would just "encourage monogamy" so much is allow it. If you weren't allowed to marry someone, wouldn't you feel a little more inclined to sleep around? I mean it's not like you're ever going to be able to get married or anything so you might as well make the most of it.

That aside, notice your own mention of heterosexual couples. They've been marrying for a very, very long time and HIV spreading through the heterosexual population hasn't dramatically increased over that of the GLBT community. I mean, according to you (and what I've heard too). I'm just not sure if that's true or just a popular myth based on how things were in the 80's.

 

[NightHawk21]

I'd really like to see a source that says HIV is more common passed through homosexual relationships than normal ones. Far as I can figure it out the only reason that HIV is passed in gay males more often would be an unwillingness (or perhaps the thought that it is unnecessary) to wear a condom. That said, if this is the reason, then legalizing gay marriage would do shit all, and any increase that would likely result from a greater acceptance of a gay lifestyle, would likely be minimized by the probably increase in long term gay relationships (perhaps a slight increase in monogamy).

 

[doggy go 7]

no, no it would not. They're still having sex you know!

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Gay marriage isnt an issue. My issue is adoption or when two gay men or two lesbians have kids. One partner will be biological parent, the second wont be related biologically. Now the law states only biological parents are accountable for the raising and financial aid of that child. But this needs to be the case for gay couples also - regardless they are both the parents, they made that choice and thus need to pay.

 

[Syzygy23]

While it's a possibility, I would assume that common sense would rule the day. The common sense being partners entering a relationship should get regular screening for STDs and use of condoms when engaging in intercourse is advised.

Note: This holds true for heterosexual relationships as well as homosexual relationships. In the end, following common sense can reduce the chances that an STD is transmitted.

And, just because they're not married, it doesn't mean they're not having sex.

Sadly, AIDS and HIV is surprisingly common in the homosexual population. Some say it's due to promiscuity, but I have no idea why it's so much more prevalent there than heterosexual people. Anal sex is indeed more risky, but it seems to be much too high for that to explain it away--I mean, anal sex isn't some amazing rarity enough among straight pairings to account for it, is it?

I'm going to bite even though this is a close running second for silliest question of the year award.

See here is the thing....

They are still having sex even though they aren't married....

Yes, but wouldn't more general acceptance encourage more open behavior? For example, if playing D&D became "cool," wouldn't the people who pay D&D do it more and more openly? Wouldn't people who have thought about it, but never done it, also feel brave enough to give it a go? Many people fear "coming out" or even acting on their feelings at all. Gay people are still beaten, abused, disowned and murdered, sadly.

Really? You have NO idea why HIV/AIDS is so prevalent amongst homosexual men?

Really.

Hm.

I would have thought the fact that since one or both of any given homosexual couple(s) are taking a dick up the ass, the answer would be obvious. Do you know how many diseases live in the place FECES comes from?

 

[NightHawk21]

Yeah, that's right. You got me! I'm a liar, that's it. My agenda this whole time was to paint you as bisexual when in fact you aren't despite you labeling yourself as one. Yep, that's it. Yep, you got me.

Tsk, tsk. You are still trying to build a straw man? How silly. You're trying very hard to ignore the context of my comment so that you may "one up" me and prove a point against something that was never made. Rather than admit you originally tried to mock my assertion of bisexuality as a, in your mind, shield to make any comment I like against homosexuality, you continue on this little exercise. Are you really that scared of being proven wrong?

My exact words were "I didn't say I was bi. I said a lot more than that." The former revokes the limiting terms you tried to impose on my words and the latter refers to the section you chose to ignore to better paint me in a light you so chose.

Your argument: "'I'm bi so my opinion is valid', it smacks of 'I have a black friend so I'm not racist.'"

The actual point: I said I was much more involved in homosexuality than you cared to admit. Being bi was part of it, having an ever changing gender and a preference for individuals born physically male and later transitioning to female, makes up the greater portion.

If you ever want to actually act like an adult and drop this little act, I'm here. But for now I'm going to bed. Nighty, hun.

Grey, I originally thought you weren't just trolling (granted the question was dumb, and probably one of the worse topics I've seen this year, but that's beside the point), but then you dismiss a large part of what Mat said and tried to paint him as a liar, and on topic of that completely ignored the last on topic part he made.

In your opening post at the very start of the thread you say pretty explicitly that you are bisexual, but are specifically attracted to transgender woman. The important part of that sentence is the beginning. I personally am straight and attracted to blondes and redheads (just something bout them redheads). If someone asks me what my sexual orientation is I don't reply "I'm so much more than straight" or some other convoluted mess, because the latter part of that is preference. In much the same way, from the statement in your opening post, you're a bisexual person with a preference for women. Great now that that's settled, I'll requote my other post that has my opinions on the issue, since I don't feel like rewriting it.

I'd really like to see a source that says HIV is more common passed through homosexual relationships than normal ones. Far as I can figure it out the only reason that HIV is passed in gay males more often would be an unwillingness (or perhaps the thought that it is unnecessary) to wear a condom. That said, if this is the reason, then legalizing gay marriage would do shit all, and any increase that would likely result from a greater acceptance of a gay lifestyle, would likely be minimized by the probably increase in long term gay relationships (perhaps a slight increase in monogamy).

 

[NightHawk21]

Really? You have NO idea why HIV/AIDS is so prevalent amongst homosexual men?

Really.

Hm.

I would have thought the fact that since one or both of any given homosexual couple(s) are taking a dick up the ass, the answer would be obvious. Do you know how many diseases live in the place FECES comes from?

Here's the thing about that though. We aren't talking about all the diseases present in feces (and there are a lot), we are just talking about HIV, a viral infection passed on through bodily fluids, which far as I know the most prevalent substance of transmission are blood and ejaculatory fluids. Excluding the fact that the ass is pretty colonized as far as microbes are concerned (but then again while not to the same extent the vagina is by no means sterile - the joys of microbiology), the transmission of HIV is independent of all those other microbes, and can probably be largely avoided through sage sex practices. The question remains whether since there is no risk of impregnation in anal sex, there is less of a feel for the necessity of a condom, or other preventative measures.

 

[Woodsey]

I'm going to bite even though this is a close running second for silliest question of the year award.

See here is the thing....

They are still having sex even though they aren't married....

id think marriage would encourage monogamy so less spreading?

at least i would think so.

End of thread. I'm not even sure why this was a question that genuinely needed to be asked.

 

[TilMorrow]

Yea I can't really go into detail about what I think as I know I'll run the risk of sounding homophobic and possibily being quote bombed by a portion of the site. So I'll just say this guy hit the nail on the head.

See here is the thing....

They are still having sex even though they aren't married....

Also.

I was thinking, given that it is a sad reality...

No if it happens, it happens due to people not giving a fuck which is the sad reality. Not the fact that they are contracting it.

And.

...(my gender is about as liquid as water, I'm bisexual and my primary attraction is to transgender females, lol)

I don't even get this sentence. Unless you're an it, I'm pretty sure you're male or female unless I missed a new gender type being created? Also that was a weak defence with the "I'm bisexual..." comment. Hell how can you even say that if you state in the next part of the sentence that you have preference towards a specific gender? It just makes it look like you don't understand the phrase. [sub][sub][sub]Additionally, I feel the people that say they are Bisexual are complete bullshitters. Just because you have slept/thought of sleeping with members from both genders does not mean you've a balanced attraction to both.[/sub][/sub][/sub]

Captcha: Bird cage lololololol

 

[Avalanche91]

See here is the thing....

They are still having sex even though they aren't married....

....Well yeah, pretty much this.

The fact that they keep with one partner makes sure it wouldnt spread, and they are more likely to get themselves tested if the relation is going to be that intimate.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

I don't even get this sentence. Unless you're an it, I'm pretty sure you're male or female unless I missed a new gender type being created? Also that was a weak defence with the "I'm bisexual..." comment. Hell how can you even say that if you state in the next part of the sentence that you have preference towards a specific gender? It just makes it look like you don't understand the phrase. [sub][sub][sub]Additionally, I feel the people that say they are Bisexual are complete bullshitters. Just because you have slept/thought of sleeping with members from both genders does not mean you've a balanced attraction to both.[/sub][/sub][/sub]

Captcha: Bird cage lololololol

Well, I'm neither male nor female. Gender is not a binary state.

Bisexual means sexually attracted to men and women. You can find both men and women attractive but have a preference.

So, there you go.

 

[Gorilla Gunk]

Last I heard it was young, heterosexual men and women in Africa that spread around the most HIV/AIDS, not gay men.

 

[MPerce]

Uh....no?

Marriage encourages monogamy, so the odds of spreading it would actually drop. The reason the AIDS epidemic hit the gay community first was because promiscuous sex used to be a major part of that community. That is (mostly) no longer the case, so I don't think we'd see much of a change at all,

 

[templar1138a]

...what is this, the 1980s? Gay couples have been having sex for as long as sex has existed. STIs have been transmitted for just as long.

No legislation is going to change that. There will NOT be a spike of any sort except for a spike in the number of legally recognized same-sex marriages. Legalization of same-sex marriage will not automatically make all the gay couples horny (though I'm sure most of them will feel like celebrating in some way).

And even with the legalization of same-sex marriage, gays have to get to third base just like everyone else.