HIV+ Celebrities

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

On a site like this, I'd say the discussion is more honest because people make it known what they want and how they want to get it (if that makes sense)...

You are right that a lot of HIV testing has gone underground and HIV isn't in the spotlight the way it deserves to be... as we discussed earlier in this thread, people don't understand the period an HIV test covers and what that means... Yes a celebrity public advocate could be the catalyst to change that but I'm not holding my breath for it to happen either.

true. that alone could be fatal!

[Scandbro]

HA! Actually, i'm not sure why that post still exists, I tried deleting it, I have reported it. I was thinking about 2 things at once and responding to the wrong post all at the same time.

... so you were expecting me to defend your POV???

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

HA! Actually, i'm not sure why that post still exists, I tried deleting it, I have reported it. I was thinking about 2 things at once and responding to the wrong post all at the same time.

No worries... I like threads by thinking guys as this has been. Provides fodder to expand my thinking and I always enjoy that.

[genericuser]

No worries... I like threads by thinking guys as this has been. Provides fodder to expand my thinking and I always enjoy that.

This continues to be a thought provoking discussion; I appreciate the knowledge and viewpoints that you and everyone who have posted in this thread.

As the conversation has evolved, I find myself focused on a few things:

(1) Something (not government mandated) is needed to significantly increase the number of people who (a) get tested ( make getting tested as regular and routine as one's 2-3 times/year dental checkups (sure it should be more often)

(2) Educate people as to what a HIV- result means: Understanding the period an HIV test covers and, more importantly, what time frame it does not cover is something that people should understand; most people think that HIV- results today include any sex you had for the 3-4 weeks prior to the test and that the HIV- result means you are absolutely HIV-.

(3) Repeal all criminal transmission of HIV laws and pass new legislation that makes HIV transmission criminal only in cases of rape, manipulation of condoms to render it ineffective and something to cover the malicious intent cases (criminally using a syringe of AIDS blood to assault someone and similar types), these cases are so rare they likely account for 0.001% of current charges. The law should recognize that if two adults are having consensual sex and both adults choose not to use protection, nothing criminal occurs because such a decision is made individually and both involved are equally responsible for his or her decision.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

This continues to be a thought provoking discussion; I appreciate the knowledge and viewpoints that you and everyone who have posted in this thread.

As the conversation has evolved, I find myself focused on a few things:

(1) Something (not government mandated) is needed to significantly increase the number of people who (a) get tested ( make getting tested as regular and routine as one's 2-3 times/year dental checkups (sure it should be more often)

(2) Educate people as to what a HIV- result means: Understanding the period an HIV test covers and, more importantly, what time frame it does not cover is something that people should understand; most people think that HIV- results today include any sex you had for the 3-4 weeks prior to the test and that the HIV- result means you are absolutely HIV-.

(3) Repeal all criminal transmission of HIV laws and pass new legislation that makes HIV transmission criminal only in cases of rape, manipulation of condoms to render it ineffective and something to cover the malicious intent cases (criminally using a syringe of AIDS blood to assault someone and similar types), these cases are so rare they likely account for 0.001% of current charges. The law should recognize that if two adults are having consensual sex and both adults choose not to use protection, nothing criminal occurs because such a decision is made individually and both involved are equally responsible for his or her decision.

Well stated summary of objectives. Hugely challenging to implement.

Given our rather twisted legislative agendas, I am least optimistic about 3. Oraquk starts dealing with (1) but behind closed doors.

One thing that I've been doing, especially on other sites, is putting facts in profiles. Like "not sure" or "ask me" for status. A few do; and that gives me the opportunity to write about the latency period from exposure to when a test will show up. Better tests, as all of us here know, are out there, but expensive, and requires a clinic visit rather than an oraquick. Locally, here in Milwaukee WI, we have a clinic STD Specialties. They charge $40 for the whole battery of tests for all STI's, which, oddly, is the same as the OraQuick from Walgreens costs.

There is tell an element of stigma and embarrassment about going to STD clinics though.

I mention this not because I think getting the message out is so difficult, but that we pretty much have to do our own public service announcements. If BZ hadn't become the chasers paradise, it would be wonderful to have banners appear occasionally reminding guys to get tested, be aware. And to NOT confuse awareness as a statement that one should not enjoy raw sex. They are not mutually exclusive (although from reactions I sometimes get, I might be lead to think that).

Hot raw stories that, as they unfold, bring in facts would sure help. One story line that always trips me up are the claims of testing poz two weeks later. (which, unless there is a blood slam involved, it not likely). But if we can combine themes of awareness; even in the chasing/gifting dialogues; it would go a long way to get more people coming closer to understanding the facts.

Can we get Advocate, Out, etc to regularly improve awareness campaigns? I'm thinking something along the line of "The National HIV test" with a quiz (maybe even an online quiz) where correct answers enter someone into a contest.

NOW, all this just begins to move the ball forward. I submit that understanding my result in more voluntary testing.

The legal battles; man I agree we should decriminalize HIV (except in extreme circumstances you brought up).

Sorry to ramble, late in day for me...

[bearbandit]

Jizz said: I mention this not because I think getting the message out is so difficult, but that we pretty much have to do our own public service announcements. If BZ hadn't become the chasers paradise, it would be wonderful to have banners appear occasionally reminding guys to get tested, be aware. And to NOT confuse awareness as a statement that one should not enjoy raw sex. They are not mutually exclusive (although from reactions I sometimes get, I might be lead to think that).

This is something we talked about at the recent PositivelyUK conference, getting sites like Recon and Gaydar to have the occasional pop-up or banner giving the facts, the same for phone apps. Some of the online services do contact tracing in conjunction with some clinics in major cities (A system message tells you that you really ought to get in touch with your nearest clinic, I'm told. Where I live isn't densely enough populated for it to be worthwhile). Talking to younger men on the phone apps I've found some disturbing trends like 30 year olds asking "what's HIV?" - they're basically the reason why I'll be sitting on myHIV tonight as an online peer support volunteer instead of writing.

The conference's basic decision was not to bother asking as the online services and phone apps feel they're going out of their altogether and to do more would detract from their revenue streams as more banners/pop-ups would put people off.

It's not something I'd advocate for here simply because we have a number of guys with a wide knowledge base, both theoretical and practical, who share that knowledge willingly.

[RenzzoRenne]

I saw this pic of Mario López, yesterday in :

http://pe.msn.com/?ocid=mailsignout&ar=3