Jump to content

rawTOP

Administrators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,082

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Everything posted by rawTOP

  1. rawTOP
    For a while now Google has judged sites on the question "Would you trust this site with your life or your money?" And based on recent changes to the guidelines they've given their site reviewers, questions like that are becoming an even bigger factor in how they rank websites. (Yes, Google manually reviews sites). So I figured I'd create a thread that will be stickied in the root of the Sexual Health section where people can state ways in which they'd be considered an expert on sexual health. While this is inspired by Google's guidelines it will also be useful to average visitors who come to the site. A lot of you have backgrounds in public health, counseling, and medical care. So I'd like to show off your credentials by formally listing them. This thread is only for listing credentials, not discussing them. So don't post replies. But if you have credentials that would make you something of an expert in some aspect of sexual health, and you contribute to the sexual health discussions on this site - please take the time to list them. Examples would be: Licensed doctors, nurses and counselors/therapists who have experience with sexual health issues. People with degrees in public health. People who've been formally trained to work hotlines that dealt with sexual health issues. People who have leadership roles in community organizations that deal with sexual health. Researchers who work on projects related to HIV/AIDS or other sexual health issues. You don't have to be too detailed - feel free to keep your identity private. Things like "Licensed physician in a mid-western state", or "Sexual Health Policy Coordinator for a community organization with 2,000 active clients" are completely sufficient.
  2. rawTOP
    The guy in question isn't wanting to see more HIV infections. It's more a case that's he's generally a bit bitter and always sees the glass half empty. I'm completely just speculating, but I'm guessing there's a little bitterness that he got pozzed before PrEP was available - so he's trying to find something wrong with PrEP - maybe that makes him feel better somehow. But if a lot of poz guys expressed the same opinion it would make neg guys less likely to see PrEP in the positive light it deserves. So him expressing his opinion (multiplied by the number of guys who feel like he does) ultimately leads to more infections, which is why I don't really think the nay sayers should be given platforms to express their FUD.
  3. rawTOP
    See, I would disagree. Maybe it's because in undergrad and grad school I had some pretty strident feminists teach me that men really should have no voice in the discussion of abortion - it's not their bodies, hence it's none of their business. So right to you're opinion? Sure. But right to express it - not so much. I think they should stay out of the discussion. I should probably explain that the guy I was arguing with was doing a "Well, PrEP may not actually be 99% effective like they say". It was a clear case of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt) designed to make people think PrEP may not actually be all that effective. He was citing this article in the NY Times… http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/upshot/is-truvada-the-pill-to-prevent-hiv-99-percent-effective-dont-be-so-sure.html Towards the end of the article they do state that whether it's 99% effective or 92% effective really doesn't make a difference from a public policy perspective. Which begs the question - why exactly did they title the article "Is Truvada 99% Effective? Don't Be So Sure…" I mean that's a total FUD way of wording it. So it's not like he was making up untrue statements as much as ignorantly questioning the scientific and statistical conclusions in a way that made the general conclusions about PrEP sound questionable.
  4. rawTOP
    Today, on a gay webmaster board a poz guy started bashing PrEP. As I was responding to him it struck me that a poz guy talking trash about PrEP is pretty much the same as a guy talking trash about abortion - it's really none of their business. At one point he tried to say he knew what he was talking about because he took Truvada - to which I said, "So, if you take Viagra, does that mean you understand what it's like for a women to take Viagra?" So do you guys agree with me? What do you think is an appropriate role for poz guys in the discussion of PrEP? Personally I think it's appropriate for them to make sure neg guys are aware of PrEP, and encourage neg guys to look into it, but I think that's where they should stop. And if they want to play a supportive role in marketing PrEP - I'm fine with that too. But, IMHO, neg guys should be out in front shaping the policy and opinions on PrEP. Agree? Disagree?
  5. rawTOP
    This is just sad… The EU apparently isn't convinced about PrEP… http://www.aidsmap.com/European-CDC-cautious-about-PrEP/page/2891977/ I wonder if it's because if they back it the governments have to pay for it. Someone needs to show them that PrEP is cheaper than having guys become poz. But cost-effectiveness may only be achieved if the price of PrEP goes down.
  6. rawTOP
    Here's more info as various sites report on the findings… http://betablog.org/prep-works-despite-missed-doses/ And another page discussing the results - http://www.aidsmap.com/Overall-PrEP-effectiveness-in-iPrEx-OLE-study-50-but-100-in-those-taking-four-or-more-doses-a-week/page/2892435/ That last bit is quite important - In other words if you want guys to take PrEP you need to get the word out that it works. Messages that make it seem less effective will reduce the number of people who take their meds consistently and put guys at risk.
  7. rawTOP
    No, it's not necessary to stop sex before taking PrEP. If recent infection is a real concern then they can do a different type of test that can detect infection more quickly. The worst case scenario is that you're poz and develop a resistance to Truvada. That's not the end of the world. Since recent infection is not likely in most cases, and the worst case scenario isn't all that horrible - doctors don't worry too much about it. (And neither should you).
  8. rawTOP
    With kids the issue is when they're coerced into things. Coercion is the reason why we have age of consent laws. Doesn't sound like you were coerced, so I see no problem with your starting young.
  9. rawTOP
    So it seems 4+ per week is the goal, and at 2-3 per week you get about the same protection as sloppy condom usage. Personally, I take PrEP Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays plus any off day when I'm planning to be a slut or was a slut the day before. I'm pretty religious about taking my pills since I've been taking daily meds for blood pressure for years now - it's no big deal.
  10. rawTOP
    People just have their preferences. They always will. There's a point to which what you're describing will always exist. BUT I think what you're asking for is a place where skin color isn't such a big deal. I'm white and I live in the middle of Harlem. I constantly see black guys saying they only want to hookup with black or latino guys. The black community here has faced so much racism over the years that it has become racist in that they completely jump to conclusions about white folks. Just the other day a woman from our block tried to explain to my boyfriend how some of her best friends were gay, but yes, she thought nothing of using the word faggot. People are weird. People are often xenophobic. The key to finding people who aren't xenophobic is to find a place where races mix. The problem with middle America or Harlem is that the communities are only of one race - that leads to xenophobia. Despite communities like Harlem or East New York which historically have been black ghettos, in general there's a lot of mixing in New York - and that's true sexually too. The average white gay guy here in NYC is a lot more likely to have sex with a black guy than they would in Omaha. There's still plenty of racism, but IMHO, there's less than you'd find elsewhere.
  11. rawTOP
    For me it's more of an ick factor and a turn off. "Disgusted" is too strong of a term. I don't have anything against it other than I don't personally like it. The funny part is I sorta enjoy reading threads like the "Last hetero load" - my imagination is able to concentrate on the parts I think are hot without the distractions of things I think are icky.
  12. rawTOP
    Yes, please don't stop posting. I don't think that many of the gay guys have a problem with it.
  13. rawTOP
    Poz guys take Truvada too… But I agree that wasn't the intention of #TruvadaWhore, and shouldn't it be #TruvadaSlut? Whores get paid for their services, sluts give it away for free…
  14. rawTOP
    That's just fucked up. But you should know that your parents cannot claim you as a dependent unless they give you more financial support than you earn on your own. Doesn't sound like that's the case. Though I'm sure the taxes are done for last year and hopefully you'll be out of their place by next April. IMHO though, you need to concentrate on becoming independent (school can wait a couple years until you're on your feet). Becoming poz in the middle of all that drama just sounds like you're inflicting self-harm because somehow you've bought into your parents' view of you. Get away from them and never go back unless they apologize and change. Never see yourself through their eyes. Once you're independent and taking pride in who you are, then revisit the idea of becoming poz. But don't go down that path just because you have low self-esteem.
  15. rawTOP
    Not sure how that will work. Even if Gilead will cover the cost of your meds (not sure if they do this for neg guys), you still have to pay for doctors visits and labs every 3 months which will be costly. Maybe try to find a study near you? But if you're not in a major city, that's gonna be difficult as well.
  16. rawTOP
    BTW, I actually asked two doctors - my colo-rectal surgeon - who didn't think twice with her answer of "it's not a problem" - and my GP who thought aloud as he ran down the list of meds I took and then said "no problem". I trust my GP's answer more than the colo-rectal surgeon's answer.
  17. rawTOP
    I asked my doctor about that 'cause I saw the warning on the bottle - and he said it was fine - at least for the meds I'm taking (including Truvada). There are meds that aren't compatible with psyllium, but none of mine fall in that category.
  18. rawTOP
    Is there a decent bathhouse in Las Vegas? If so, just go and put your ass up and take loads from whoever fucks you. Or get a cheap no-tell motel room and put an ad on Craigslist and the hookup sites with your room number and just take loads from whoever shows up. Bottom line - you don't really need a top to organize things, though it is a bit safer to have someone watching over you in a motel setting.
  19. rawTOP
    That's not my point - I can deal with details. My point is why are public health officials obsessed with such low viral loads? Why aren't they happy with relatively low viral loads? It would seem to me that if the person is on treatment and the treatment is working pretty well, that they should be happy with that result and see it as success.
  20. rawTOP
    My point is that if you get into a relationship your boyfriend is going to want to have sex with other guys at some point. You may be monogamous, but your boyfriend and your relationship won't be. That is the price of a long term gay relationship. Unless you accept that fact, you'll never have a long term relationship (or your boyfriend will be forced to lie to you).
  21. rawTOP
    To that point isn't the graphic above a bit misleading? Wouldn't "well-controlled" be more of an objective and set it in the 200 to 500 range? That achieves the public health goals they're looking for, etc.
  22. rawTOP
    That means when you top, when you bottom - so vers guys could answer both questions. Bottoms often look for 100% tops because they're considered "cleaner" (less likely to have STDs, less likely to be poz). Also - as Max Sohl once told me - bottoms are bottoms, vers bottoms are bottoms, vers guys are bottoms, vers tops are often bottoms, only tops are really tops. In other words, if a bottom just wants to get fucked and doesn't want the guy to ask the bottom to fuck him- then the only safe bet is a strict top.
  23. rawTOP
    Long story - but the one you're thinking of will continue to be a primary pic. These were for something else. I take it out when I'm jacking my cock.
  24. rawTOP
    I thought it was more like 1/4 didn't know. Yeah, I get all that, the only thing I may have misstated is saying "guys" in the title. I still find 37% a bit shocking. I'd love to know the percentage for MSMs / gay guys.
  25. rawTOP
    Not to be Debbie Downer, but… 90+% of long term gay relationships are NOT monogamous. My bf and I have been together for over 16 years now. I've seen a lot of long term gay couples. There are maybe 2 or 3 couples who I think are more or less monogamous. The rest would probably say that if they stuck with monogamy they'd have broken up. In other words long term monogamous gay relationships are only slightly more common than unicorns. The sooner you embrace that fact the sooner you'll find yourself a long-term relationship. Personally I'm much more interested in getting sluts to form long term relationships with other sluts. Somehow our society has taught sluts that they're not deserving of real love or even companionship. That's wrong.

Other #BBBH Sites…

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Top Bareback Porn Sites…

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.