Protection and HIV

[Jack Scribe]

I was impressed at this UNAIDS public announcement tape concerning the necessity of using protection. It is suggestive enough to make the point.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ur7lAE3i7RE. The spokesman is Francesco D'Macho - a Spanish adult entertainment actor.

 

I share this because there is a younger generation that need to be reminded - like I was at that age - about the dangers of unsafe sex. HIV and STD are on the rise.

 

Jack

[Demetz]

Okay... so, I'm guilty. I have had unprotected sex. It was in a monogamous relationship. Before letting things go too far with my new partner I've gotten tested. I've talked with him about his sexual history (or rather, a lack of it). In all likelihood he and I are going to have unprotected sex at some point. This is usually frowned upon and hell... frown at me all you like. I stress though, I don't do the casual sex thing. I don't do one-night-stand sex. I get to know my partner before we do anything, and I make sure I'm clean and they're clean before anything happens. I may not be at the the top rung of the safe sex ladder but at least I'm not at the bottom.

[JSmith]

This sort of goes along with this article:

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2007/11/20/1

 

Most prisons deny inmates the use of condoms. They say "sex does not happen" because there are rules against it. Bullshit. Everyone knows gay sex happens in prison. Most of the time the prisoners themselves aren't gay, but it still happens because it's a release that they need. Now, the argument against giving them condoms is not only that it's against the rules, but that they're inmates so they don't deserve them. If you're a criminal, you deserve what happens to you while you're in jail. If you have sex against the rules, then you don't deserve the right to complain when you contract an STD.

 

But what about those that don't have a choice? The ones that go to prison for three months for a crime that didn't harm anyone. Or the ones that are falsely imprisoned and later released after they have been cleared of all charges? Those are the ones that don't have a choice and are raped by the more dominant inmates to prove a point and 'put them in their place' so to speak. Now, given that they're raping someone else, I don't think most of them would be too concerned about using a condom, but the risk of becomming HIV positive in jail is still there. I do think the country needs to follow the precident set by other countries and the few cities that do distribute them now. Prison doesn't strip a person of their rights. The government has a duty to protect the citizens, even if they are behind bars.

 

Beyond the prison thing, I don't think many people realize today how serious this issue really is. A lot of the younger generation doesn't know or doesn't care about the risks of unprotected sex. We rarely hear about it in the news and even when we do, we're becoming adjusted to it and desensitized. I'll admit that I have had unprotected sex, but it was a stupid mistake on my part and it won't happen again. I don't care how many times my partner tells me they're clean, I won't have sex without a condom. Not that it's that much of a problem for me because I don't do one night stands or hookups and I rarely have a boyfriend, but when the time comes, no matter how much I trust the guy, I will make sure we have protected sex. It's a stupid mistake that can ruin your life. Ten minutes of fun (which is pretty sad, but hey... some guys can't last that long) can lead to a lifetime of pain and regret that you don't want to have.

[Menzoberranzen]

Wear a condom all the time, every time. It's as simple as that. I don't care how long we've known each other and I don't care if you swear up and down I'm your only sexual partner. It's not worth the risk, ever.

 

As for prisons, rapists aren't going to be using condoms, and if the sex isn't involuntary, you shouldn't be having it. What kind of message do we send to inmates by saying "Don't have sex....but here are some condoms if you decide you don't like this rule."?

[JSmith]

As for prisons, rapists aren't going to be using condoms, and if the sex isn't involuntary, you shouldn't be having it. What kind of message do we send to inmates by saying "Don't have sex....but here are some condoms if you decide you don't like this rule."?

 

But that's not the point. They're going to have sex either way. If there is a rule against it or not, it's going to happen. They shouldn't be denied protection because of it. Everyone knows it happens in prison. That's where all of the "don't drop the soap" jokes come from. It's a rule that's going to be broken, and the wardens know that. But to deny that anything happens behind bars is biggotry. They don't want to admit that it happens. If you can stop it from happening by enforcing your rule, then by all means do it. But until they enforce those rules, they need to have some type of backup if those rules are broken.

[Demetz]

The status of prisons in this country is disgusting. Recently at an extradition hearing a European country refused to extradite a prisoner to the united states because of this, declaring US prisons to be inhumane and ultimately packed with human rights abuses.

 

A prison sentence should not be a rape sentence. We're better as a nation than that. Yes, the people who go to prison have been convicted of bad things... many of them are horrible people. The law separates them from the rest of the population for this reason, but can you imagine if the law were written such that a prison sentence were listed instead as a sentence to be raped as it is for many people? It would be outrageous. It is outrageous. Unfortunately, its not something most people are willing to rally behind reform for because of a general consensus that "they" deserve it.

[Menzoberranzen]

But that's not the point. They're going to have sex either way. If there is a rule against it or not, it's going to happen. They shouldn't be denied protection because of it. Everyone knows it happens in prison. That's where all of the "don't drop the soap" jokes come from. It's a rule that's going to be broken, and the wardens know that. But to deny that anything happens behind bars is biggotry. They don't want to admit that it happens. If you can stop it from happening by enforcing your rule, then by all means do it. But until they enforce those rules, they need to have some type of backup if those rules are broken.

 

I understand what you're saying, but giving out protection is tantamount to declaring the rule ineffective. What is the point of having a rule if you admit that nobody follows it. Maybe the rule should be changed, but as long as it is in effect, giving out condoms is the same thing as sanctioning rule-breaking.

[JSmith]

I understand what you're saying, but giving out protection is tantamount to declaring the rule ineffective. What is the point of having a rule if you admit that nobody follows it. Maybe the rule should be changed, but as long as it is in effect, giving out condoms is the same thing as sanctioning rule-breaking.

 

But the rule is ineffective. They don't enforce it. There isn't a point to having that rule because nobody does follow it. That's their issue to deal with. They need to start enforcing the rule if it's not working. But just because the rule says you shouldn't do it, doesn't mean it won't be done. This is a quote from the comments section of the article:

 

What a piece of sophistry! Lots of things in this world are wrong; but we still put safeguards in place to protect against their worst consequences.

 

For example, speeding along a curve is illegal; we sign forms stating that we agree to follow all driving laws. Yet we still install protective barriers on roads where lots of speeding accidents occur and bank the ramps on super highways.

 

Rules will be broken. That's a fact of life that everyone has to deal with. But we have to have some type of safeguard in place for when those rules really are broken.

 

I hate using that quote because I'm about to leave for court because I was speeding but oh well. It works.

[Graeme]

I've just watched the video and I was struck by the expression on the guy being f*cked. Uncertainty, with just a touch of horror....

 

A straight version wouldn't be hard to produce with exactly the same message. The more people who get the message, the better.

 

As for prisons, I understand what Menzo is saying, but I have to disagree. It is the same logic that has stopped education on contraception for teenagers in some places -- "You shouldn't be doing it so we're not going to tell you how to do it safely if you disobey because you might think that means we approve."

 

When a policy is failing, ignoring the consequences of that failure is wrong. The policy/rule of "no sex in prisons" is failing -- that is widely recognised -- so doing nothing about preventing the negative consequences is tantamount to criminal behaviour. Ethically, they are accessories to the spread of HIV by not trying to do something effective to try to prevent further infections.

[Hylas]

As a virgin. I do not know if it really is more pleasurable going 'barebacking' as people seem to claim. But no, I wouldn't take the chance and if you love someone you would take the initiative of always using protection.

 

i applaud that infomercial! but i wonder where it would be shown? just before opening credits on porn films? it certainly evokes the right reactions - better safe than sorry.

[JSmith]

As a virgin. I do not know if it really is more pleasurable going 'barebacking' as people seem to claim. But no, I wouldn't take the chance and if you love someone you would take the initiative of always using protection.

 

i applaud that infomercial! but i wonder where it would be shown? just before opening credits on porn films? it certainly evokes the right reactions - better safe than sorry.

Well if it's shown at the beginning of porn films, I'm pretty sure the guy watching it is only using his right (or left) hand so no need for a condom

[Jack Scribe]

i applaud that infomercial! but i wonder where it would be shown? just before opening credits on porn films? it certainly evokes the right reactions - better safe than sorry.

The PA was made for UNAIDS World Organization for television...but obviously not for North America TV programming. "Heavens to Betsy" that a realistic portrayal of this problem would be shared on our morally-cleansed electronic portals. And media "suits" wonder why You Tube is so popular. The Internet and cable are rapidly making network TV in North America irrelevant.

[Former Member]

Here in Germany Protection-adverts can be seen on nearly every bus-stop. They use funny adverts like you can see on those e-cards: http://www.machsmit.de/interaktiv/ecards/index.php Unfortunately there's still a high number of people who think "It won't happen to me" But I think those campaigns will not convince those people to use protection. Simply because the know it better and don't need someone to tell them what to do. Even if it's for their own good. *sigh*

 

Tob

[rich_e]

Wear a condom all the time, every time. It's as simple as that. I don't care how long we've known each other and I don't care if you swear up and down I'm your only sexual partner. It's not worth the risk, ever.

 

[Razor]

I understand what you're saying, but giving out protection is tantamount to declaring the rule ineffective. What is the point of having a rule if you admit that nobody follows it. Maybe the rule should be changed, but as long as it is in effect, giving out condoms is the same thing as sanctioning rule-breaking.

 

 

~frown~

 

You don't talk about whether or not to break or change a rule when a life is involved. End of story.

[Menzoberranzen]

~frown~

 

You don't talk about whether or not to break or change a rule when a life is involved. End of story.

 

If the sex is involuntary, the issue is moot. If the sex is voluntary, then you accept the possible consequences of your actions. Inmates dieing of AIDS is not the fault of the government, its the fault of the people having sex. I don't think that sex should be forbidden in prisons, in which case the distribution of condoms is natural, but as long as the law stands in its present form, then you accept the chance that breaking said rule might have possibly fatal consequences. Just like when you murder someone you accept the possibility that there are possibly fatal consequences.

 

Don't want to get an STD in prison? Don't have sex. End of story.

 

Menzo

[Razor]

Menzo!!!!!!!!! You're so mean sometimes but I know you're actually a sweetiepie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ~grabs Menzo and takes him to play in the rainbow and fairy filled field of sugary wonderfulnesses~ <---- Yes, over the top, but you know you wanna!

 

Anyway, the crux of the matter is that it is cruel to put people in a place where sex is likely to take place and deny them protection from a disease which will ultimately kill them. No matter how terrible a crime is, it is no person's place to inflict that sort of end on another; for those in control of the prisons to deny the criminals protection is equivalent to murder.

[woody]

If the sex is involuntary, the issue is moot. If the sex is voluntary, then you accept the possible consequences of your actions. Inmates dieing of AIDS is not the fault of the government, its the fault of the people having sex. I don't think that sex should be forbidden in prisons, in which case the distribution of condoms is natural, but as long as the law stands in its present form, then you accept the chance that breaking said rule might have possibly fatal consequences. Just like when you murder someone you accept the possibility that there are possibly fatal consequences.

 

Don't want to get an STD in prison? Don't have sex. End of story.

 

Menzo

 

I actually saw a really interesting documentary the other day which is extremely relevant to this argument, it talked about the response to AIDS in Australia when the disease was first discovered and dealt with the arguments whether by supplying preventative measures in terms of the spread of the disease for illegal activities (in the doco they discussed drug use as well as prostitution) you are in effect condoning it and aiding these activities. The big one in terms of controversy was supplying clean needles for drug users, and basically the conclusion the people in Australia who were charged for preventing the spread came to is it is a far lesser evil to provide and in this abstract way 'condone' this illegal activity and help greatly prevent the spread of the disease not just to the users and the offenders themselves but also their Wives and sexual partners then it is to ignore it. The evidence lies in looking at the results as well, Australia was far more successful than a majority of countries at fighting AIDS at that early period.

 

The exact same principles apply to this case, sure an inmate breaks the rules has sex doesn

[Drewbie]

This sort of goes along with this article:

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2007/11/20/1

 

 

 

Beyond the prison thing, I don't think many people realize today how serious this issue really is. A lot of the younger generation doesn't know or doesn't care about the risks of unprotected sex. We rarely hear about it in the news and even when we do, we're becoming adjusted to it and desensitized. I'll admit that I have had unprotected sex, but it was a stupid mistake on my part and it won't happen again. I don't care how many times my partner tells me they're clean, I won't have sex without a condom. Not that it's that much of a problem for me because I don't do one night stands or hookups and I rarely have a boyfriend, but when the time comes, no matter how much I trust the guy, I will make sure we have protected sex. It's a stupid mistake that can ruin your life. Ten minutes of fun (which is pretty sad, but hey... some guys can't last that long) can lead to a lifetime of pain and regret that you don't want to have.

 

I definitely agree with younger generations doesn't know the know or care about the risk, I will only use protection most of the time, if I was in a long term relationship and got tested, I might not use a condom.

[FrenchCanadian]

I definitely agree with younger generations doesn't know the know or care about the risk, I will only use protection most of the time, if I was in a long term relationship and got tested, I might not use a condom.

It's right, often I'll talk with other guys of my age, and they,ll be like, oh ya bareback. Or they'll be, it's your choice, but deep down they'd really want it bareback.

 

as for me, with any guy it's with condom for sure. Bareback is only for with your boyfriend when you reach the point where you know that you're both faithful, and that you're both tested. No barebacking for me otherwise not even in a drunken mistake

[Drewbie]

It's right, often I'll talk with other guys of my age, and they,ll be like, oh ya bareback. Or they'll be, it's your choice, but deep down they'd really want it bareback.

 

as for me, with any guy it's with condom for sure. Bareback is only for with your boyfriend when you reach the point where you know that you're both faithful, and that you're both tested. No barebacking for me otherwise not even in a drunken mistake

 

I agree with you. like you said only when it reaches a certain point.