Marriage Equality: Unprotected Gay Sex Increases 20%


aids

If every other magazine, TV show and movie were promoting smoking… there would be a lot more lung cancer cases.

Some would say that the media repeatedly promoting a notoriously unhealthy lifestyle, which despite the claims of gay rights advocates, is as monogamous as Hugh Hefner,  might lead to a second AIDS outbreak wave.

But those people are clearly ignorant homophobes. And by those people I mean the Centers for Disease Control.

In 2011, MSM (male homosexuality) accounted for at least half of persons diagnosed with HIV in all but two states. Unprotected anal sex at least once in the past 12 months increased from 48% in 2005 to 57% in 2011.

Although MSM (male homosexuals) are a small proportion of the population, they represent the majority of persons diagnosed with HIV in nearly every U.S. state. Unprotected anal sex in the last 12 months increased nearly 20% among MSM from 2005 to 2011.

It’s almost like AIDS was a gay disease all along.

One third of HIV-positive MSM in NHBS did not know that they were infected with HIV, and a high percentage of them reported recent unprotected discordant anal sex with a partner of HIV-negative or unknown status.

Clearly this gay marriage thing is working great. When those last final intolerant states legalize it, enabling gleeful couples to sue Christian bakeries and photographers, then surely these numbers will turn around.

Gay marriage has been fully legal in the Netherlands.

“Just  20 percent  of  Dutch  homosexual  couples  are married,  compared  with  80  percent  of heterosexual  couples  ‐ this  is  according to new  figures  published  by  Statistics Netherlands as the country marks ten years of officially  sanctioned same‐sex marriage.”

The actual number of gays marrying there appears to be about 8 percent.And the news for “gay marriage” is no better anywhere else.

“In Norway, male same-sex marriages are 50 percent more likely to end in divorce than heterosexual marriages, and female same-sex marriages are an astonishing 167 percent more likely to be dissolved. In Sweden, the divorce risk for male-male partnerships is 50 percent higher than for heterosexual marriages, and the divorce risk for female partnerships is nearly double that for men.”

Gay marriage has never been anything other than a false front for gay rights. And gay rights leads to numbers like these from the CDC.

  • BagLady

    Hm Daniel, this will take some thinking about. I really don’t believe couples, whether they be heterosexual or gay, spend their existence chasing extramarital ‘tail’. The breakdown of marriage has many causes. Let us discuss your argument that gay marriages are more flippant.

    • A Z

      I’ll go with the theory that most marriages fail over zex or money. Nothing I see on the Investigation Discovery (People Slaughtering People) channel dissuades me from this hypothesis

  • http://www.facebook.com/psiphiorg David Henderson-Rinehart

    Do these numbers differentiate between married gay couples and unmarried gay couples? If not, then you’ll need to try a little harder to show that just because two variables happen to change over time, that one of them changing is the cause of the other one changing. In other words, correlation does not imply causation.

    Also, how do married lesbians factor into your analysis? Does giving lesbians the right to marry increase their risk factors at all?

    • Bob Jones

      And don’t forget about race. African Americans are more likely to contract HIV than Caucasians (in the United States of America at least) yet there is no reason to think that the African-American portion of America has a proportionately higher number of homosexuals than the Caucasian portion.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        Black gay men are less likely to openly identify as such. But they’re still part of the lifestyle.

        • Bob Jones

          Right, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that there are more or less (proportionately speaking) homosexual men in the African-American subset of the American population than the Caucasian subset of the American population. I agree that the data seems to indicate that African Americans are less likely to come out than Caucasians, at least in America, but being homosexual and being publicly gay are two different things.

      • Biff Henderson

        Would it be a stretch to suggest that portions of black prison population whose preference in $*xual partners are hetero$*xuals practiced unprotected $*x with male disease carriers and once they had contracted HIV where loosed on women of loose morals and that is the way this blight entered and spread throughout the African-American population? Condoms aren’t handed out with the baloney sandwiches at meal time yet the celebrated ratchet wh*re can be found in every nook and cranny.

        • Bob Jones

          Of course not. I’ve been arguing that correlation is not the same thing as causation this whole time.

          • Biff Henderson

            It’s easy enough. Concentrations of depravity lead to death.

          • Bob Jones

            Yes, risky behavior does increase one’s chance of disease which increases one’s chance of death. That’s why the number of times one has unprotected sex with someone new is a better indicator of one’s risk of getting an STD than anything else, even sexual orientation, race, gender, age, or socioeconomic level.The latter factors can increase how statistically likely one is to get an STD by a multiple, but the number of people an STD has access to increases exponentially with each new partner of unprotected sex.

          • Biff Henderson

            Looking for love. The phrase smacks of hypocrisy as predatory usury is the driving force in the homosexual community. I reject your premise that sexual orientation does not put one at a greater risk to contacting a STD. The risk factor is heightened because the plumbing wasn’t designed for, as Daniel delicately described it,, discordant sex. That’s the rub. Anyone that peddles a lifestyle choice that is inherently a risk to one’s well-being doesn’t deserve an ounce of respect. There is one that has withstood the test of time that has no need for oft-ignored caveats of the enlightened age.

          • Biff Henderson

            I used the euphemism Tom, **** and Harry and the profanity filter removed my edited post. Suffice it to say I will not reduce myself to using objective terminology and slide into the sewer of relativist rhetoric.

          • ziggy zoggy

            “Cultural differences.” That’s about as objective as a needle in the arm, you dillrod.

      • ziggy zoggy

        There is a reason to think they bend over more often.

      • A Z

        Bob,

        Maybe it is not about race maybe it is about demographics. If you normalize by age groups you might not see any difference

        Second, it has been shown in Africa that one of 2 reasons for a increased incidence of HIV infections was viremia. African had the same # of life time zexual partners as people in America, the just had more at one time. So if they had contracted HIV they were more likely to spread it. Transmission rates are higher in the 1st months after infection. I wonder if we have that dynamic here. The other problem was the ideal that rough zex provided more stimulation. this leads to more micro tears and such in the skin enabling increased transmission.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      They don’t, but considering how few of those there are, especially in the US, it’s a non-issue.

      We’re talking about the gay population in general and the consequences of popularizing a proven-to-be-dangerous lifestyle.

      • Bob Jones

        “[Lesbians] don’t [factor into your analysis] but considering how few of those there are, especially in the US, it’s a non-issue.

        Really, because the data I’ve seen suggests that the proportion of gay men to women isn’t incredibly lopsided. For example, according to Pew Reasearch Center’s publication “A Survey of LGBT Americans” “Four-in-ten respondents to the Pew Research Center survey identify themselves as bisexual. Gay men are 36% of the sample, followed by lesbians (19%) and transgender adults (5%)” That’s a factor of less than two, not more than ten. I have not seen any statistics or articles that demonstrate why homosexuality would favor either gender and find the claim very dubious. Would you mind telling me how you came to your conclusion?

        • ziggy zoggy

          He was referring to “MARRIED” lesbians, you imbecile.

          The Pew figures are ridiculous. Why don’t you just read my gay astrology forecast.

          • Bob Jones

            Which part of their methodology do you dispute?

          • ziggy zoggy

            The sample group. Not that it has anything to do with the tiny percentage of fuzzy bumpers who think they’re married.

      • Daniel

        There are 100,000 married same-sex couples in the US alone. You obviously never bothered to research this, and you use your own ignorance to then justify your journalistic laziness.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          The 100,000 figure is fraudulent.

          • Daniel

            No it is not. But funny that you didn’t even mention it, or any other statistic for that matter. My dad would call you a lazy bum. And BTW, you STILL haven’t given attribution to the quote from Mr. Cooke’s article on National Review. Do you have any ethics at all?

  • JeremyBeadleswitheredhand

    Daniel, I enjoy reading a lot of your articles, but I honestly have no idea where you get A lot of your ideas on homosexuality. You Get some figures then make up A bunch of stuff to fit an article. aids was never a ‘gay disease’, and unprotected sex inside of a marriage with someone who you know, trust and have been tested with is not really that bad a thing. The people spreading diseases around are obviously having unprotected sex casually Or are cheating, something straight people to do a lot of themselves. I’ve never been a fan of the gay scene, it seems to promote this kind of behavior and I think better educating people on the Dangers of unprotected sex would probably help greatly. From what I’ve seen sex ed in America can be sorely lacking in places, many skills refusing to do it instead teaching abstinence leaving people totally ignorant.

    I am gay, and never really cared about marriage since there is a secular alternative that could just be made equal to marriage in every way (in the uk at least it offers about half the legal rights of marriage), and forcing a religious group to marry people who they don’t want to is against their religious rights. It’s also another method of bullying Christianity because it doesn’t attack homicidally, just try telling a mosque they should marry two men!

  • nobocy

    Gay life = Gay death

    • Skeptical_thinker

      Human life = Human death.

      You had a point?

      • A Z

        When it is pointed out that 50% to 60% of new HIV infections are related to MSM people like JMG cry that 98% of gay men are HIV free.

        Therefore the argument goes the gay life style is as good as the hetero lifestyle.

        So 98% are HIV free. but better than > 98% of heteros are HIV free. there is is a difference between 98% and > 98%.

        It is a matter of degree but life comes down to a matter of small degrees. You take every edge you can.

        You are not skeptical at all except in self description.

        • Skeptical_thinker

          You make an interesting assumption that there is a statistical difference between what you refer to as 98% and >98%. On what do you base this assumption?

          • A Z

            When JMG admits that 985 of homozexuals are HIV free, he admits that 2% are pos (positive).

            Now if 2% of the hetero community were pos, gays would not be 50% of new HIV infections year after year after year.

            There would just be no way.

            Plus the same people, which your community tout as having breakthrough research on gay marriage (Tolerance & HIV) Mialon et al, also had a another study that gave transmission rates for different types of coitus.

            I would find it very interesting, if your community touted one of their studies but not the other.

            But … they do.

            So you can pretend all you want.

          • BagLady

            There is 98% and then there is greater than (>) 98%

  • Biff Henderson

    For the most part the fe*al compactors in our society have been granted the legal status they coveted. Unprotected pleasuring of each other with re*tal stimulation a proven path to a deadly curse. As an unwilling member of ObamaCare’s risk pool my financial exposure is heightened by what I consider to be the deviant behavior of unprotected sex. If I declare myself a smoker the health insurance premium is higher. Is there a similar financial penalty for those that are practicing re*tal renegades and if not why would they be shown preference over another proven killer? What percentage of the heterosexual community would feel themselves being taken advantage of for having to subsidize the healthcare costs of a group that is morally repugnant to their way of thinking? Heck, you can be a supporter of fundament foragers and still find it objectionable they aren’t placed in a higher risk pool. Anyone know if the butt breakers get a break in this regard?

  • Biff Henderson

    For the most part the fe*al compactors in our society have been granted the legal status they coveted. Unprotected pleasuring of each other with re*tal stimulation a proven path to a deadly curse. As an unwilling member of ObamaCare’s risk pool my financial exposure is heightened by what I consider to be the deviant behavior of unprotected $*x. If I declare myself a smoker the health insurance premium is higher. Is there a similar financial penalty for those that are practicing re*tal renegades and if not why would they be shown preference over another proven killer? What percentage of the heterosexual community would feel themselves being taken advantage of for having to subsidize the healthcare costs of a group that is morally repugnant to their way of thinking? Heck, you can be a supporter of fundament foragers and still find it objectionable they aren’t placed in a higher risk pool. Anyone know if the butt breakers get a break in this regard?

  • ziggy zoggy

    Only 57% of men with HIV are gay? Yeah, right. 40% of male HIV cases are probably liars who claim they’re straight.

    And of course gay couples have high breakup rates. Gay guys are more promiscuous than college students, and lesbians treat every relationship as a battle for dominance.

    Activists need to leave marriage to the people who instituted it for themselves and come up with their own tradition. And stop lying about statistics. Being gay is passé but everybody hates a liar – even other liars.

    • A Z

      Some psychologists say that every relationship is a battle for dominance. Be that as it may men and women have different spheres so it works out.

      I remember a gay guy from college. I remember him complaining about all he wanted was a relationship. It seemed that it was lacking in the gay community. It wasn’t much better in the lesbian community either.

      • BagLady

        It’s not brilliant in the heterosexual world either.

        • A Z

          I did not say it was brilliant. I said it works out.

          Most of the angst is from people overrating themselves and jockeying for position. Once that is over or mostly over life is good.

          It is like the rolling Stones song: “You don’t always get what you want, but sometimes… you get what you need.”

    • Neil Cameron

      If 40% of male cases are gays in the closet, then how did the females get it? Lesbian sex is the least risky sex in regards HIV infection, the women had to get it from somewhere and it wasn’t the gays, they are gay.

      You claim “Gay couples have high breakup rates”. If you checked the divorce stats for same sex marriage in countries or states with at least 7 years data you would find that gay male marriages are the least likely marriages to end in divorce. Straight marriages in the middle, and Lesbian marriages are most at risk of ending in divorce. The claim that gay men are a gang of promiscuous bed-hoppers is a spurious generalization based on nothing but propagandist fabrication.

  • Daniel

    Do you notice that there are block quotes throughout this post? Was this text from the CDC? Is it Greenfield’s original research on Norwegian gay divorce rates? In fact, Greenfield has plagiarized entire paragraphs from an op-ed piece in National Review. The piece is by Charles Cooke and was published in May 2012. Greenfield is a fellow at a center on journalism, but he violates the most basic norms of ethical journalism.

    As for the substance of the plagiarized text, the National Review piece is not a scholarly work. In fact, the statistics are both inaccurate and incorrectly identified. Cooke gleaned them not from Norwegian or Swedish government statistics, which are publicly available, but instead relied on a study published 9 years ago, which concerned not gay marriage but partnership arrangements permitted under law in Norway in the 90s.

    Actual gay divorce rates are much LOWER than the hetero divorce rate. Recent statistics from Vermont, Massachusetts, or civil partnerships in the United Kingdom. show that the gay divorce rate is about 50% of the hetero divorce rate in all of those jurisdictions. Those aren’t stats plagiarized from a political opinion magazine which in turn was lifting them from a 9 year old inapt study. Those stats come directly from the jurisdictions that catalog marriage and divorce statistics. All of these numbers are available online. Why does the “Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center” not do any actual research for his posts here?

    As for the overall lower percentage of married gays, how is it remotely fair to insist that gay people match hetero marriage rates in a few years. The hetero married population includes folks who married over the course of many decades and in all 50 states and in all countries. And every hetero person has been made aware since childhood that marriage is not only a legal option, but a preferred course in life.

    No living gay adult has had this option for a lifetime and there is no gay person alive who has been steered toward marriage from childhood. Gay marriage showed up as an option in the last decade and has only become more widely available globally and within the US in the last 5 years.. In just that brief time, and with no life-long societal steering, the gays are rapidly closing the marriage gap. This is further seen in data from Minnesota and Washington in recent weeks. For example, here’s a report today that 17% of marriages in WA state have been gay marriages. And surprise, surprise, research is already out that shows married gays to be the healthiest and to report being the happiest, when compared to singles or cohabitating gays.

    Gay people are people. They are susceptible to the same incentives and disincentives as straight people. If they are barred from marrying and if they face personal or professional harm from having open stable relationships, then they will resort to unhealthy, short-term ones. If they are encouraged to marry and given respect and status for their commitment, they will marry. And they are. Why Greenfield wants to sabotage this, I can only imagine.

    • Daniel

      I forgot to include the link to today’s report about WA marriages. A similar report about Minnesota appeared a few weeks ago.
      http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/gay-weddings-17-percent-washington-marriages-21112859

      • A Z

        “Gay Weddings 17 Percent of Washington Marriages”

        And?

        I would think it is pent up demand as far as percentages are concerned.

        The 62% that are lesbian I think would last longer than the gays ones.

        • Neil Cameron

          The stats for same sex divorce from countries & states that have had SSM for longer (eg the Netherlands since 2001), have destroyed the assumption that gay male marriages will be most at risk of divorce.

          Gay male marriages have so far proved to be least likely to end in divorce, followed by straight marriages and then lesbian marriages most at risk.

          The stats had Sociologists scratching their heads for a while. Apparently in straight divorces it is the woman who is most likely to initiate the divorce. Lesbian marriages have two women & so are more prone. Gay male marriages have no women in them and so less likely.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The block quotes refer to material being quoted that can be found by following the links.

      • Daniel

        There was no link to the NR article. I thought you might try to pull something like this, so I made both a screen shot and a screen video capture of this page.

        You have now added a link one but without any explanation to the reader that the link was previously omitted. And your comment above is intended to suggest that a link was always there, which is false. Demonstrably false, given my documentation. So you have now not only plagiarized an article from National Review, but you are actively covering it up.

        If you don’t promptly add a statement to this post explaining that a link to Mr. Cooke’s article was improperly omitted and then later added and apologizing for the error,I will take this matter up with both Front Page and with the Freedom Center.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          You may want to take a few deep breaths and find a hobby.

          The Cooke material was always in quotes and at no time was presented as my own. I didn’t notice that it wasn’t one of the linked materials until you threw a fit over it leading me to double check.

          You don’t care about Cooke. You do care about sidetracking the central argument for obvious reasons.

          • Parque_Hundido

            Danny, it appears you’ve been caught cheating. Plagiarism is a very serious offense, one that could prevent you from graduating. You should apologize and correct your error. Besides, this is not a good piece at all. Why bother to plagiarize bad writing?

    • A Z

      Plagiarization?

      Pray tell how?

      The point is more of quick news items for information and comment .

    • ziggy zoggy

      The gay divorce rate for every country that allows it can “easily” be found on government websites that record them? That would be why you didn’t provide a link? Because it’s so easy to find them? Because your claim that gay “marriages” are more stable than straight ones is true? Shyeah. And the only reason you linked to a story from the ultra reliable ABC about WA state is because gay “marriage” is brand new there so it’s way too soon to track its stability level.

      And where do gays face personal or professional harm that straights don’t? Saudi Arabia? only countries that allow gay “marriage” are being discussed, and none of those countries persecute gays. quite the contrary.

      Gays are people. So are deceivers.

      • Skeptical_thinker

        It is nearly impossible to track same sex divorces in Massachusetts. First, gender is not recorded on the marriage license, Second,the divorce case dockets are usually in the form of J. Smith vs. A. Smith. Does that mean Jane Smith vs. Anne Smith, John Smith vs. Andrew Smith or Joseph Smith vs Angela Smith. Unless you show up in court or there is something newsworthy about the divorce, you can’t know.

        I have yet to see any documented information that compares stability of heterosexual marriage to homosexual marriage. What is known is that Massachusetts, the first state to permit same-sex marriage, has the lowest divorce rate in the country.

        Correlation is not causation, but the correlation exists. It will take real studies based on real data to show if there is causation.

      • Daniel

        I deliberately did not include those links or the link to the news story on the very high marriage rates by MN gays because I think it is appalling that Greenfield does not do the research to back up his posts. I am not going to do the work for him. But what I have said is true and you can find those stats very easily: the gay divorce rate so far is 1/2 the hetero divorce rate. I did include the link to the ABC News story because that just came out today, so its absence from this post is not a result of Greenfield’s laziness.

        As for “personal and professional harm,” every gay person in the US in most of the 20th century risked extreme consequences if they would have attempted to have an open, honest, long-term relationship. They would have faced arrest, loss of job, social ostracism, familial rejection and violence. And this would have been the case in all 50 states. In recent years, fear of prosecution waned, but the other disincentives to stable relationships persisted, albeit at lower levels. And no encouragement from any quarter encouraged gays to enter stable relationships.

        By contrast, during all that time, every straight American in all 50 states was not only free to pursue stable relationships and marriage, but was actively encouraged to do so. So when Greenfield compares the straight marriage rate in 2013 to the gay marriage rate, he is including all those millions of still-living straight people who married over all those decades, when not a single gay person could get married or even cohabit in safety. Greenfield expects gay people to make up all that difference in a few years and if they don’t, he condemns them and uses that as an argument as to why they shouldn’t be able to marry. That says a lot about what kind of a man Greenfield is.

    • Parque_Hundido

      I think Daniel is a high school student. This web page is their school project. Still, plagiarism is a serious offense. I hope his teacher. Takes vigorous action. Besides, this is another terrible attempt at writing. Why plagiarize bad writing?

  • A Z

    I’m confused.

    Andrew M. Francis & Hugo M. Mialon researched an published the papers
    “The Optimal Penalty for Sexually Transmitting HIV” & “Tolerance and HIV”

    The LGBT community was very effusive about “Tolerance and HIV”. Gay marriage was supposed to reduce the HIV rate per the study. The theory was the “closeted” gays would come out and with a larger pool of non-infected partners the infection rate would be lower. Would it stay lower?

    Now the 1st study is interesting. If you read down (or skim) page 31 of 40, you see probabilities given that show how much worse gay coitus is the regular coitus. But the LGBT activists want us to make believe along with them that gay coitus and regular coitus are interchangeable and no different.

    http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~hmialon/

  • Neil Cameron

    The divorce rates for same sex couples in Norway is an anomaly when looked at in context with the rates for other countries that have legalized SSM.
    The divorce rates across the board seem to indicate that Lesbian marriages have the highest tendency to end in divorce, followed by heterosexual marriages, with gay male marriages the least likely to end in divorce.

    Divorce rates appear to actually show an inverse relationship with HIV risk. The higher the risk of HIV in a particular group, the lower the risk of divorce. This is reinforced strongly by the data from the Netherlands, the first country to legalize SSM (13 years worth of data) and a country that has long accommodated homosexuals and homosexuality allowing gays to live a lifestyle away from extremist fringe activities.

    The data from the Netherlands is most likely the data which will more accurately describe the societal outcome of legalized SSM.

    Cherry picking from the fringe anomalies in the data and building any argument that applies to the non fringe population will result in the argument being labelled “SPECIOUS” .

    Gay marriage, being such a new aspect of homosexual life has a long way to go before it actually does provide useful statistics. Any stats that come out of the early days of Gay marriage “history” speak more to the current & past state of the homosexual community than it does to future trends. It provides a means of quantifying the impact of non registered and undocumented relationship behavior.

    Tying HIV to same sex marriage is a ridiculous argument. HIV has been around for decades, SSM has not.
    The HIV sample that is the USA data is not representative of the global reality of HIV.

  • Parque_Hundido

    Oh, isn’t this that student who keeps writing those sad homophobic screeds? Doesn’t he have a teacher to edit these things? I see he got his facts wrong, again. Won’t someone stop this poor fool from embarrassing himself and his whole high school debate club?

  • A Z

    Yes, but the ACA will let us know everything in excruciating detail.

    Remember the SS was gay until it was not. We know where the LGBT community ended up.

    So yes Obama is your best friend for now.

    • Skeptical_thinker

      Your response seems misplaced. Perhaps you made an error when clicking “reply” as nothing you stated refers to my comment.

      • A Z

        “Correlation is not causation, but the correlation exists. It will take real studies based on real data to show if there is causation.”

        The ACA will if nothing collects gobs of information. It will be a gold mine of information. Statisticians will be able to tease out causation from correlation. Maybe not after a few false starts, but they will get the job done

        Maybe for such a self described thinker you should try thinking.

        • Skeptical_thinker

          Why do you think the ACA has anything to do with same sex marriage or that what we know about HIV rate changes (in either direction) has to do with same sex marriage?

          The dissemination of personal medical information is not changed by the ACA. That is still controlled by HIPPA. Since the US government has not nationalized the US health system, it will have no more access to identifiable personal information after the ACA is fully implemented than it had before the law was passed.

  • A Z

    “AMSTERDAM, Netherlands — According to statistics released by the Dutch government on Monday, the divorce rate of gay and lesbian couples in the Netherlands, where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2001, is nearly identical to that of heterosexual couples.”

    Based on 4 years data? I suppose so based on large enough samples. Still not convinced governments lie about data. In the U.S. they lie about inflations and the unemployment (U3) rate. The U3 lie was discovered/admitted in September/October and it was ho hum. there was not even a call to Move On.

    What percentage of gay males get married compared to the general population.

    As far as women initiating divorce (lesbian or straight), I’ll hazard they have more invested hypothesis (egg etc).

  • A Z

    You are a single cause commenter.

    Be that as it may you are the most intelligent LGBT comment I have seen.

    Let’s re-open the bath houses that were shut down at the height of the AIDS crisis and see what is the norm.

  • Parque_Hundido

    “Predatory usury”? Folks, let’s try to stick to words we actually understand. And why talk about risk for STI’s when that’s clearly not your expertise?

    • Biff Henderson

      “The surest way to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, including genital herpes, is to abstain from sexual contact, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and is known to be uninfected.” – CDC Website

      Do I need to be an expert in STD’s for this to sink in? Viral shedding can and does occur outside the confines of condom use. Jumping through hoops to lessen your exposure to deadly diseases is for suckers sucker.

      If you are deluded into thinking casual sexual liaisons outside of a lifelong commitment is not predatory usury you have a high opinion of others that I do share. What you demand of an intimate is entirely yours alone and that mutually agreed upon nonsense that goes with it.

      • Parque_Hundido

        You don’t understand “usury”, which is a legal term for loan sharking.

        Sorry, but you don’t appear to understand STIs either. Sexual orientation and marriage have nothing to do with the risk of getting an STI.

        I would encourage you to speak to your parents or a responsible adult and let them know you need help understanding these things. Stay in school and don’t give up. With some effort, you can learn to stay safe!

        • Biff Henderson

          I stand corrected. Usery, as in using or taking advantage of a situation.

          I assume that in the past you coming off like a condescending little pr*ck hasn’t served you in forwarding an opinion. If you’re going to pull off the arrogant scrunt routine it requires a tad more than throwing out a blanket statement without backing it up with particulars.

      • Guest

        Sounds like someone has a hard time taking constructive criticism! You’re not going to learn if you spend your time bad mouthing those who are trying to help you.

        If you’d like to ask a question about sexually transmissible infections, go ahead and I’ll try to answer. But you’ll be better off if you take my suggestion that you speak to your parents or another responsible adult.

        And I know that it’s tough to learn how to use language metaphorically, but ‘usury’ is just too specific, it comes straight out of the penal code. Sorry, it just doesn’t work in the sentences you’ve tried so far. But definitely keep trying, it takes years of practice to master English!