Is it alright to ask for proof?

[Pozguyinchi]

On 11/12/2022 at 1:07 PM, BlindRawFucker1 said:

If you are truly concerned about HIV, you need to take care of yourself, instead of relying on others to take care of you.

 

What type of evidence would you want? These days, anything can be faked.

 

Even if he showed you his prescription of PREP, do you know if he is taking it?

 

Put on a condom, or get on PREP yourself.

I totally agree. Take care of yourself first. I used to ask but never really cared what the answer was anyway so I stopped. I am HIV positive but undetectable. I rarely get asked my status anymore. I feel it’s mostly because my top has taken care of himself and it does not matter to him. 

[hntnhole]

On 11/12/2022 at 2:07 PM, BlindRawFucker1 said:

If you are truly concerned about HIV, you need to take care of yourself, instead of relying on others to take care of you

In a nutshell, the above quote from BRF applies across the board.  

Why any guy would be so lazy as to ask tricks about their sero-status, actually trust that the guy standing in front of him with a hard Cock waiting to fuck, and actually believe what comes out of his mouth, is way beyond me.  Take care of your health first, and then hit the fleshpots with all the Lust you possess.  

[BootmanLA]

On 11/13/2022 at 8:06 AM, pussyboy82 said:

You are ultimately responsible for protecting yourself. That's it. You shouldn't really be asking in this day and age as it's discrimination. 

No one is forcing you to change your current situation of only going bareback with regular partners but even that is very fool Hardy.

It's very crazy to think everyone is honest and that you can trust anyone these days. 

I'd suggest you start living in the real world. 

You can protect yourself by taking prep or using condoms. Don't think there's any other solution available as there isn't. 

If what you mean is "asking [about someone's STI status] is insufficient for actual complete protection" then I would agree.

But the idea that it's "discrimination" to have an informed discussion about STI status and history is just bonkers. If nothing else, someone's responses to those questions may help you realize whether or not this person is a good fit for you as a sexual partner.

I'd much rather have someone who says "I've had X and Y in the past, but always get treatment and generally abstain from sex  until it's cleared up" than someone who says, in essence, "How dare you ask such a personal question when I'm about to do something very personal with you?"

And I'd much rather hear "I had gono three weeks ago but the doctor told me with the run of antibiotics I'd be clear to fuck again by now" than "I don't bother with STIs because they just happen, you can't ask about that because it's discriminatory."

[Guest]

On 11/13/2022 at 3:06 PM, pussyboy82 said:

You shouldn't really be asking in this day and age as it's discrimination. 

 

Not everything you don’t agree with is discrimination. 

While I will change my approach to things, especially getting on prep, I do believe that if someone is offended by me asking them a normal question, I still won’t be offering my body to that person.

Had a wonderful long term fwb who I asked the same, he was open about everything, just like I was. So yeah these chill guys do exist.
 

 

[PozBearWI]

Good point @frank86

If we can't engage in a civil dialogue then what do we really gain from sex with each other.  

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, JimInWisc said:

Good point @frank86

If we can't engage in a civil dialogue then what do we really gain from sex with each other.  

TBH, though, a lot of the people on here might as well be mute given that they don't want to have any conversation with their sexual partners whatsoever. 

[Hozzel]

I was asked. Once. Over 15 years ago. A one-off encounter. In fact, it was her friend who asked me via messenger. I hadn't been with anyone in a long time and I was 1000% positive I was clean at the time. So was the woman. But her friend went apesh*t at me and the woman's husband insisted on proof, so I went to a clinic, got tested, got a certificate, faxed it to the husband and then had nothing to do with any of them ever again. Once he got his proof, he was ok. It was an incredibly yucky feeling, as if I was full of vermin. I found out later the woman and her husband became swingers, went to parties, and were known as "full on". So, just my experience.

[hntnhole]

3 hours ago, frank86 said:

On 11/13/2022 at 9:06 AM, pussyboy82 said:

You shouldn't really be asking in this day and age as it's discrimination.

Was about to, but thought the better of it, and I just shouldn't ........ 

[PozBearWI]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

TBH, though, a lot of the people on here might as well be mute given that they don't want to have any conversation with their sexual partners whatsoever. 

And were I in Chicago at Steamworks at a Cum Union event; I likely wouldn't ask either.  If asked a simple "I test regularly" would probably suffice. 

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, JimInWisc said:

And were I in Chicago at Steamworks at a Cum Union event; I likely wouldn't ask either.  If asked a simple "I test regularly" would probably suffice. 

I have nothing against anonymous, fuck-whatever-hole-is-presented sex in such a setting, or even at most group play sessions. For that matter, I have nothing against those who do so in private sessions, either at home or in a hotel room or some other private setting. It may not always (or even often) be my style, but to each his own.

[pussyboy82]

I just want to clarify  why it's discrimination.... we're not talking about any sti, the sti we're talking about is HIV which is an incurable disease, not like syphilis or chlamydia or whatever. (I don't think it's appropriate to say its curable, as its not for the majority of people, some people have been cured but that's due to something not available to the general population, fingers crossed a cure will be made available in the near future). The issue here is that it's discrimination now that there is medication that prevents transmission.... medication that saves lives. This why its now discrimination as transmission is preventable.

I just wanted to clarify this without accusing people of being stupid as I don't think people are. 

I think it's very selfish for people to not think it's discrimination as Prep is available because people with hiv have been the guinea pigs for the medication. Rather than asking insensitive questions, think about the fact if someone has hiv they might be actually saving someone without hiv's life as the protection offered by Prep wouldn't be available otherwise. 

 

I'd much rather people carried on the discussion about suits and stockings and all that stuff rather than debating what is and what isn't discrimination and why. 

In the UK we have something called The Equality Act. Have a read and decide for yourself if it's discrimination or not if you still disagree that it isn't. 

Thanks for reading and peace to the world. 

[pussyboy82]

Can a moderator correct that typo that says with, and change it to without. I have learning disabilities protected under the Equality Act. 

[pussyboy82]

Also I don't care about people's reactions to my posts. This whole site is a fantasy trip for most people who use it. It's nice there are some mature people on here, the immature should really grow up or not take part at all. 

The most important lesson people can learn from this thread is to get regular testing and being responsible......if you're immature you will struggle with this......

I'll change the subject if you like......

How would you react if someone messaged you after they'd hooked up with you and said they'd tested positive for an sti and you should get tested? Narcissistic people behave a certain way....obviously..... 🙄 

[BootmanLA]

3 hours ago, pussyboy82 said:

I'd much rather people carried on the discussion about suits and stockings and all that stuff rather than debating what is and what isn't discrimination and why. 

You're the one who brought up discrimination, so it's rather cheeky for you to bring up the issue and then declare it off the table for debate. 

In any event, "discrimination", at its root (which is Latin), means to distinguish between - we say that someone has a discriminating eye, for instance, when he is able to detect the differences between an original painting and a good but forged copy. Any time we distinguish between two things, we are "discriminating" between them.

We've extended the use of the word such that today, it primarily means to choose one thing over the other thing - but it's important to know that discrimination, by itself, is value-neutral. It's only in certain contexts, and in certain situations, and in judging certain characteristics, that discrimination becomes (by societal agreement) wrong.

By which I mean: in the context of employment, in the situation of deciding to hire or fire someone, we (broadly, at least in the west) consider it wrong to make that decision based on the race, religion, sex, or national origin of the persons involved. We are fast coming to a broad consensus that making the decision based on sexual orientation is also wrong, and some (though not all) people believe the same is true when basing the decision on gender identity.

By contrast: nobody bats an eye if a straight man "discriminates" against other men in the context of sex or romance or dating; his attraction is to whatever sex he finds appealing. He's "discriminating" against men, by any definition; we just recognize that he has a right to do so. Likewise, if he is only attracted to blonde hair, or large breasts, or chubby women, or green eyes, we recognize that's within his rights. (Some people might find his choices limited and limiting, but it's his call to make.)

That's where one's HIV/STI status comes into play. Some HIV+ people simply do not want to risk infecting a negative person even if they are undetectable and the potential partner is on PrEP. That's their call to make. Some HIV- people simply do not want to take the risk of knowingly having sex with an HIV+ person, even if they themselves are on PrEP. And that is THEIR call to make. You or I might consider it silly or overly cautious, but we aren't the one making the decision and none of us are entitled to have sex with someone just because we want to. They're free to "discriminate" against us for any reason that they choose.

3 hours ago, pussyboy82 said:

How would you react if someone messaged you after they'd hooked up with you and said they'd tested positive for an sti and you should get tested? Narcissistic people behave a certain way....obviously..... 🙄 

I'd hope that anyone I'd hooked up with who found he had an STI within, say, three months or so (I'm not sure how far back they ask people to contact past partners) would contact me, on the off chance it had been in his system that long. I would be grateful as a spur to get checked. For HIV, if I were negative, I'd hope anyone who had bare sex with me and who was diagnosed as HIV+ later would contact me, just in case he'd had it for a long time. When I was diagnosed, I made a point of contacting every sex partner I'd had in the prior 8 years, just in case, even those where the sex was protected, just in case, because I didn't want anyone discovering he'd gotten it and not knowing it might have been me (even though I was almost invariably the/a  bottom).

[11bi11guy]

To OP: in your original post it was unclear whether you asked for evidence the other guy was on PrEP, or for evidence of recent test results. Either way, if I'm the guy you're asking, I would not be offended per se (truly, this hypersensitivity nonsense has really gone way too far...).

If you were asking for evidence I was on PrEP, I probably would not provide you with that information. Here are some facts that support that decision:

• Your reason for asking me about my PrEP would appear to be concern about contracting HIV. You can take your own precautions against protecting yourself from HIV, i.e., get on PrEP (which it sounds like you plan to do; good for you!). You have a responsibility to protect yourself as much as reasonably possible, and you cannot rely on others to protect you.
• After my first year of taking PrEP, my doctor no longer tests for the presence of the drug in my system when I do my regular STI panel every 3+ months. Thus, the only "evidence" of me taking PrEP would be a photo of my pill bottle, pills, or the prescription itself. That information seems somewhat intrusive, and could impact my safety and discretion. Considering the fact listed above, I would be worried about hooking up with someone who expected me to provide that level of detail about my life without taking responsibility for their own safety.
• There are some guys out there who might lie about their status, and might lie about taking PrEP, so I would be confused about why you didn't just ask for my test results. Test results provide direct evidence of HIV status, at least for a snapshot in time. Test results are more difficult to fake than a verbal response, and I would guess faking test results is a rare occurrence considering the effort and malice required.

If you were asking for evidence of test results, that's a different story for me. I think asking a potential partner about their STI status is normal and part of being a sexually responsible adult for many people. Asking STI status is different than asking for proof of STI test results, of course. But for me, that's along the same lines as asking STI status, and way less intrusive than asking for proof of my prescriptions. I would probably provide test results if asked. Many people would not provide test results if asked, and that's fine too.

Because I'm on PrEP, because I get tested regularly after every hookup, and because I understand that STIs come with the territory of being a cumdump slut, I don't ask for STI status or test results. I inspect cocks and ask about any open sores or rashes--there's nothing that takes me out of the moment more than starting to suck a guy off and seeing an open sore on his dick--but other than that I understand that I'm taking a calculated risk by having sex with relative strangers.

However, I do understand the impulse to want to be sure. I am concerned about catching STIs, mostly because I don't want to bring them home to my girlfriend. We have an open relationship. She allows me to hook up with guys once every few months. I get tested 2-3 weeks after every hookup. She had initiated sex with me after my hall passes within the 2-3 weeks before testing, but since I contracted chlamydia in March 2022 and passed it on to her (we both got treated), we now can't have sex during that pre-testing window. That sucks, but we all make trade-offs in life. For me, having a potential male partner ask me about my STI testing regimen or offer to provide his own puts my mind at ease and allows me to really get out of my head and into the fuck.

There are other situations where guys have rational reasons for wanting to be sure about a potential partner's STI status. There are gay and bisexual guys like me in open relationships who don't want to bring things home to their partner. A lot of guys aren't as lucky as me in that regard. Many are in relatively sexless marriages where there is a significant discrepancy in sexual desire, and they're cheating on their partners. I don't judge them. Many other guys are new to sex with men or simply new to sex period. Many haven't learned about taking responsibility for their sexual health, or that STIs aren't the big bad bogeyman the United States' puritan culture would have you believe.

Establishing and maintaining reasonable boundaries about your sexual health is important. Even if you may have gone too far in asking for proof of PrEP or test results, it doesn't make you an asshole. Unless you're leaving something out of your story--e.g., after you asked, the other guy said he wasn't interested and you pestered him about it--the other guy was kind of a douchebag for blocking you. He could have simply been an adult and told you he wasn't interested anymore. We need to normalize communicating like adults with others, including those with whom we disagree. And we need to stop being so offended by every possible slight that we either shut down conversation or claim the moral superiority of some false and unearned victimhood.