Need to disclose

[wood]

Because guys are being put in prison for not telling.

When I hooked up with a fuckbuddy of mine the other day he was saying that there's been a big change in the leadership of ACT/UP in the past year. The new ACT/UP has decriminalization of HIV as one of their main goals. In this day and age no one should be put in jail for not disclosing.

I can agree with that to an extent, where I have a big problem with it is when people actively lie about their status when doing high risk activity, and or they are not on treatment.

I dont think HIV should be criminalized, but I have a big problem with people who are highly infectious, and purposely trying to deceive and infect others.

[fillmyholeftl]

For myself and I am 100% BOTTOM & Undetectable, I still disclose UP FRONT with internet hookups and other "dates"... As Tiger pointed out I would rather be dumped from the get go !! Now in any bathhouse, sex club or "party", my prominent Bio-Hazard Tattoo does the job.

[bearbandit]

Somewhat different in the UK - they just imprisoned someone for passing on herpes FFS! If I'm dressed, I've got enough metal red (and long termer) ribbons on me, plus I need a walking stick to go more than a hundred yards. What does that tell you? And if it's a party situation, I've gotmy biohazard tattoo on my back (complications of diabetes mean I rarely fuck these days, but I'm open to encouragement - lots of it). As my Grindr profile says - just the free version as I wouldn't pay that sort of money for the service they offer - "if you can't cope with my HIV, we probably won't get on".

[hungry_hole]

...but I have a big problem with people who are highly infectious, and purposely trying to deceive and infect others.

I have a problem with people who know they are HIV+ and who don't properly inform their sexual partners but only when the sex is performed in a socially accepted manner. Most people think of the sex between men to be the copy of the sex between men and women. You first meet, you talk, exchange names, find out what you do, what you like. And then you have sex. When a relationship develops this way the chances of getting the truth about each other's HIV status is almost implicit. I have a big problem if deception takes place in this kind of relationship. It's simply despicable and Worthing using the law.

However, in anonymous and impersonal sexual situations, I see absolutely nothing wrong with someone lying or deceiving sexual partners about HIV status. I'm still testing HIV negative and I have no desire in seroconverting, but I know that sexual fetishes are powerful and sometimes uncontrollable. Saunas, darkrooms and gloryholes are there to fulfill these sexual fantasies, and it's simply naïve to expect any honesty in these places. Sometimes deception is the sexual fetish itself and an HIV+ guy gets off on breeding holes. You can't pretend to stop that from occurring because there's a market for it and some HIV- guys use it as a Rusian Roulette (me included) and that becomes party of the source of the excitement.

I don't know how I would feel if I were HIV+, what would my fetishes be. One thing I know for certain is that I would get tired of always having to disclose my HIV+ status and having to talk about. I would long for free sex and I would probably engage in exclusively anonymous sex.

Because I have no interest in pozing but I prefer my sex to be anonymous, I would welcome the possibility of having anonymous sex and also know that all the participants are STI free.

[GimmeMore]

I've been Poz for almost a year now. Since I got my news I have been upfront with it, and not many have wanted to fuck me due to it. They will let me suck their dick, but no fucking, but most are married and "straight" so maybe that's a factor. One said he wanted to fuck me, but I had no condom so it didn't happen. There's one guy that says he wants to fuck, so as soon as I get out of my family's house and back into my own place (soon I hope) we will see how that plays out. As for telling people now, I've decided not to. If they don't care enough to bring it up, I won't say anything. I'm living by the "don't ask, don't tell" policy now.

[Walkerth139]

In my opinion, it's my body and my health that's at stake. Therefore, it is my responsibility to ask what my potential partners status is and proceed accordingly. If I'm in a dark room taking anonymous loads then the risk is totally mine and what I might get is totally deserved. We know there are guys that play and don't get tested.

if your playing Russian roulette you can assume that you may not come out of the game unscathed.

[kinky_hot]

I don't know how I would feel if I were HIV+, what would my fetishes be. One thing I know for certain is that I would get tired of always having to disclose my HIV+ status and having to talk about. I would long for free sex and I would probably engage in exclusively anonymous sex.

You nailed it there. I've known many HIV+ who will eventually adapt their sexuality to those situations where you "don't have" to disclose your status. Clubs become enemy turf.

[slowfuck]

Just seen this from Canada via dailyxtra -Scientists urging restraint from Judges in non-disclosure where the risk is low including anti-retroviral treatment - “Among other things, the science supports the position that people who practice safer sex (eg, by using a condom) or who are under effective antiretroviral therapy should not be prosecuted or convicted for HIV non-disclosure.”

http://dailyxtra.com/canada/news/around-the-web/experts-claim-criminal-law-overused-canadians-with-hiv

[Poz1956]

Here is the full PDF of the Canadian Consensus Statement on HIV and its Transmission in the Context of Criminal Law.

Their opinion was based on HPTN 052, the study of mostly heterosexual couples which reported that a person on ARV had a 96% less chance of transmitting the virus, than a person not on treatment. (It's rarely noted that the 4% represents 1 person. The woman caught HIV within ten days either side of her Poz partner starting ARVs. He could not possibly have reached an undetectable viral load in ten days, and she may well have been received the bug before he started treatment. "Mostly straight" means there were 33 Gay couples in that study.)

I was sad that the consensus statement wasn't updated with data from the Partner study. But given that this was worked on for a significant period of time before the conference where it was released, and the Partner study interim data was only presented two months previous to the statement's release, their describing the risk as "Negligible" is a pretty strong statement.

Negligible possibility: The basic conditions of viral transmission are potentially present. Isolated reports of transmission have been linked to some of these activities, although they have been difficult to confirm. The efficiency of transmission appears to be negligible and transmission is highly unlikely, if not impossible in most circumstances.

...

Anal-penile intercourse: Where neither a condom nor effective antiretroviral therapy is present, anal-penile intercourse poses a low possibility of transmitting HIV.

Where a condom is used, anal-penile intercourse poses a negligible possibility of transmitting HIV regardless of the HIV-positive individual being on effective antiretroviral therapy.

Where the HIV-positive individual is on effective antiretroviral therapy, anal-penile intercourse likely poses a negligible possibility of transmitting HIV even in the absence of condom use.

. . .

The published data on the impact of effective antiretroviral therapy on HIV transmission, including the groundbreaking clinical trial referred to as HPTN 052 (Cohen MS et al, 2011), are principally from studies of heterosexual couples in which the predominant sexual activity was vaginal-penile intercourse. At this time, there are insufficient data to conclude that effective antiretroviral therapy provides similar levels of protection in relation to anal-penile intercourse.

However, it is our expert opinion that the magnitude of the reduction in the possibility of transmission via vaginal-penile sex observed with effective antiretroviral therapy in HTPN 052 can be extrapolated to anal-penile intercourse when the HIV-positive individual is the receptive partner.

Given the significant protective effects of effective antiretroviral therapy, this magnitude of the reduction in the possibility of transmission can also likely be extrapolated when the HIV-positive individual is the insertive partner in anal-penile intercourse. However, because of the higher biological possibility of transmission associated with anal-penile intercourse when the HIV-positive individual is the insertive partner, more data are needed before we can give a more definitive opinion about the anticipated negligible possibility of transmission in this case.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Poz1956

[orlandoneg]

The "disclosure laws" are ridiculous. Personally, I would rather know if a date has herpes than if he is POZ. But, the law shouldn't compel individuals to share information about themselves. In our sexual education, we need to emphasize that every sexual encounter carries risks (even sex with condoms and other protections.)

[bearbandit]

Be careful of what you wish for: there has already been a (failed) prosecution for transmission of herpes in the UK

[pisces bearcub]

I've always felt that it is up to each partner to ask the other their status, HIV or otherwise. To assume that the other is the same status is plain stupidity. "Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups!"

That being said, I think one who is poz should disclose their status if there is a significant risk of exposure to the partner. If you have a high viral load, the risk is significantly higher, and you should disclose it. If you are on meds and undetectable, then I wouldn't worry about it too much. In anonymous situations, where nothing is being said, then people need to learn that they should expect everyone to be high risk, and play accordingly. Of course, if asked, in any situation, you need to be honest. If you lie about it, you are not giving your partner the chance to make their own risk assessment. Let them decide if they want to take the risk or not. I know it may result in failed hook ups. It is unfortunate, but then, do you really want to play around with stupid people? The same would follow for any STI that one may have. Be honest, it is only fair to yourself and your partner.

Yes, if you fail to disclose when you are engaging in a higher risk activity, especially if you are asked outright, then you should be facing punishment. Undetectable or use of protection, even if it fails, should exclude you from prosecution. In an anonymous type of situation, then I would expect each to be responsible for themselves, and others to honour any requests made.

The bottom line is, many people now a days refuse to take any responsibility for their actions, and want to blame others for their own stupidity.

[Top-Secret]

i'am by "all means" no saint and i am not perfect , but i believe in honesty and being upfront about your HIV status is a part of being honest . with that said , i'am not implying that you should go around "telling your business" to any and everybody. but i believe that when you meet someone and you are about to "get-it-in" that it's best to tell your partner before you do it. wether your in bath house/date/ or internet hook-up. i have an opinion on dating-sites (that contradicts) what i just said tho. i don't feel that an HIV poz person needs to post his status on his profile. i know it's a contradiction , but sometimes it may be best to keep your status private until you hook-up later "AND THEN TELL YOUR POTENTIAL PARTNER."  i'am HIV neg and i think that if i ever became poz , i don't know but I'd probably feel a little embarrassed . So yea, there you have it, my personal opinion on the situation : TELL YOUR STATUS "PRIVATELY" TO THE MAN YOU ABOUT TO HAVE SEX WITH ,........BUT IF YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW SOMEONE "YET" OR IS INTERESTED IN SOMEONE AND YOU WANT TO BE "OPEN AND HONEST" WITH THAT PERSON , YOU MIGHT WANT TO WAIT TO TELL ,............(theres a TIME and a PLACE 4 EVERYTHING)

[sse4me]

I "think" I'm neg (I got what might have been the fuck flu in July 2015 but have been fine since then). I've been BB for a while (8 years) and not being a player, have only had about 4 dozen cocks in there (multiple loads though) and have fully expected any of them to be poz. I've made the choice to BB. I know the risks and the possibility that someone either has been recently converted (in which case they are probably very toxic) or is lying to me, and are stealthing me  Lying comes with having a hard cock. Whichever, shame on me! If ';m not already poz, I know I will be someday.

Edited January 30, 2016 by sse4me

[cman54]

I`ll say a few things here. Some may agree and some may not. But I do think a few simple things can apply here. For me If I am dating a guy and I am in a situation where it could turn into a long term relationship then I do think both party`s should be totally honest and disclose whatever they know about themselves. Then both can decide if they want to go for the commitment that a long term relationship requires.

 But for one time sex and going to sex party`s like a CumUnion event, a bathhouse, or even a quick hook-up in a sauna at a health club then I do not feel  we need to disclose status or anything. We are adults here and we know when we just want to fuck or get fucked. Me myself I am a neg. guy not on any protection. If I go to a bathhouse or to a CumUnion event, I know the risks and I am actually hoping there are going to be some top guys there who are poz and not on meds. When a bare unknown cock goes in my ass I want the excitement that goes with the thought that this could be a high viral poz load that is going to be shot in me. I need it sometimes.