• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Don't ask, don't tell' repeal in doubt

It's pretty much common sense in the gay community. Oral sex and masturbation have low riskss for HIV transmission and anal sex has high risks. Therefore, approximately half of gay men simply don't have anal sex. Not to mention a hell of a lot of gay men find the act disgusting and prefer frotting or other sexual practices. I met one not long ago who said he was totally turned off by the idea of fecal matter around his penis.

Anywho, anal sex is in no way a prerequisite to being a gay man.

Masturbation yeah but not oral sex...where you have and orfice (the mouth) you can catch AIDS as well as other STDs which I already mentioned..Masturbation is absteinence...Of course you won't get infected that way......
 
Anal sex is more a heterosexual thing than a homosexual one.

I doubt that verry seriously but either straight or gay to me its disgusting.......Like I said tha anus is designed to export body waste..............
 
Masturbation yeah but not oral sex...where you have and orfice (the mouth) you can catch AIDS as well as other STDs which I already mentioned..Masturbation is absteinence...Of course you won't get infected that way......

Actually, HIV is bloodborn. You need an open sore in order for it to transmit. Saliva is caustic to the virus. The CDC has established estimates on this. They say per 10,000 exposures to an infected source of receptive anal sex, approximately 200 will be infected. Whereas per 10,000 exposures to an iinfected source of oral sex, approximately 1 will be infected.

If you don't have any open sores in your mouth, it is extremely unlikely that you will contract HIV from giving or recieiving oral sex.
 
Last edited:
Being followed to the shower?

All these comedians out of work and then there is you..a little advice........don't quit you day job..............

Way to add something of substance to the debate by attacking another member.........sad............
 
Actually, HIV is bloodborn. You need an open sore in order for it to transmit. Saliva is caustic to the virus. The CDC has established estimates on this. They say per 10,000 exposures to an infected source of receptive anal sex, approximately 200 will be infected. Whereas per 10,000 exposures to an iinfected source of oral sex, approximately 1 will be infected.

If you don't have any open sores in your mouth, it is extremely unlikely that you will contract HIV from giving or recieiving oral sex.

since HIV is still pretty much a death sentence, I don't think it would be worth the risk.
 
since HIV is still pretty much a death sentence, I don't think it would be worth the risk.

HIV doesn't always = AIDS. and it's really not so much a death sentence anymore. at least not in the short term.
 
Those statistics are based on urban centers in the industrialized world in the 90's before the advent of many of the most effective antiviral treatments for HIV.

And if you want to be technical, they measure the life expectancy of people infected with HIV, not gays. I could take a sample of people in Uganda and argue that black women have a life expectancy of 10-20 years less. It doesn't make it true.

actually your wrong...................It was that way when AIDS was at its height but now with ways to combat it gay young men are going back to their old ways of unprotected sex and daisy chains in bath houses in the Peoples Republic of San francisco snd Seattle............
 
since HIV is still pretty much a death sentence, I don't think it would be worth the risk.

It isn't a death sentence anymore, but your life is pretty ****ed up. You have to go get your blood drawn once a week and you have to take antiviral meds with some rather unpleasant side effects. That aside, modern antivirals cause the virus to be pushed so far into remission that it can't be detected. Unfortunately, the moment someone stops taking their antivirals, the disease comes back in full force. So basically your medication becomes your lifeline.
 
actually your wrong...................It was that way when AIDS was at its height but now with ways to combat it gay young men are going back to their old ways of unprotected sex and daisy chains in bath houses in the Peoples Republic of San francisco snd Seattle............

That, unfortunately, is true. The introduction of antivirals have lead to skyrocketing unprotected sex rates among the urban homosexual population.

But my point still stands. You can selectively take a sample anywhere and make it show a segment of the population has significantly lower life expectancy. However, a gay man in backwoods Nebraska probably would have a much higher life expectancy than one in San Fransisco California simply because the primary behaviors that lead to lowered life expectancy are promiscuity and unprotected anal sex not being gay.
 
Last edited:
I would assume they're as truthful as your military dudes are going to be with the Pentagon survey regarding DADT.

As for refuting your latter statement, I have no interest in refuting it since it is irrelevant.

the survey being given is a whole different ball game.It does not refer to ones personal beahvior........
 
the survey being given is a whole different ball game.It does not refer to ones personal beahvior........

Really doesn't matter. Either you believe the people surveyed are being truthful, or not. Just because you don't like the results of a survey doesn't mean the participants were lying.

Since nearly 40% of heterosexuals surveyed said they engaged in anal sex, you think they're lying too? With what motivation?
 
That, unfortunately, is true. The introduction of antivirals have lead to skyrocketing unprotected sex rates among the urban homosexual population.

so what is it? are young gay men just incredibly stupid or what? given the fact that the HIV rate among gays is much higher than average, why risk unprotected sex?
 
Actually, HIV is bloodborn. You need an open sore in order for it to transmit. Saliva is caustic to the virus. The CDC has established estimates on this. They say per 10,000 exposures to an infected source of receptive anal sex, approximately 200 will be infected. Whereas per 10,000 exposures to an iinfected source of oral sex, approximately 1 will be infected.

If you don't have any open sores in your mouth, it is extremely unlikely that you will contract HIV from giving or recieiving oral sex.


It needs a wet orfice like the mouth, vagina or anus to cultivate.......That is why a straight man engaged in straight sex with a condom is less likely to catch AIDS then anyone else...............
 
It needs a wet orfice like the mouth, vagina or anus to cultivate.......That is why a straight man engaged in straight sex with a condom is less likely to catch AIDS then anyone else...............

No.... it needs access to the bloodstream. That's it. You could rub HIV all over someone's twat and as long as there aren't any open sores/cuts/scratches/etc, it isn't going to enter the bloodstream and infect them. And even if it DOES enter the bloodstream, there's a good chance the body will fight it off.

And actually, the people less likely to catch the virus (who are sexually active) are lesbians.
 
Last edited:
so what is it? are young gay men just incredibly stupid or what? given the fact that the HIV rate among gays is much higher than average, why risk unprotected sex?

Fatalism. A lot of gay men think that they are going to get the disease no matter what they do so they seek it out in order to get it over with. There use to be bugger parties where people would deliberately get infected.

Some gay men like the thrill. To them it is a game of life and death. It adds to the sexual excitement.

Others are just poorly educated about the disease and what they can do to prevent it. Many went to schools where they were taught that condoms are completely ineffective at preventing the disease. I was one of those.

And yes, some guys just get caught up in the heat of the moment and think with their dick and not with their head. I unfortunately have found myself in that postion and it is no fun having to wait 8 weeks to get tested and then going back to get retested every 3 months to make sure you are not.

It's dangerous and it is much, much better if you are in a long term, committed relationshiip, but those are hard to come by in the current political climate.
 
It has more functions then that and I think you know that.....The anus only has one function............

You mean body parts can serve more than one purpose? Whodathunkit?

Given the prevalence of anal sex, I think we've found a secondary use for the anus.
 
at the moment none thatn God and that is the way I want it...........

But its ok for you to run around and talk about boinking somebody else's wife while her husband is out serving our country?

Sounds like a double standard to me.

Why is ok for you to brag about your sexual deviancy and yet gay people can't talk about their sex lives because that they way you want it?
 
No.... it needs access to the bloodstream. That's it. You could rub HIV all over someone's twat and as long as there aren't any open sores/cuts/scratches/etc, it isn't going to enter the bloodstream and infect them.

not entirely correct. even though access is slower, HIV can enter the body through mucus membranes. so don't get any HIV jism in your eyes or up your nose either.
 
That, unfortunately, is true. The introduction of antivirals have lead to skyrocketing unprotected sex rates among the urban homosexual population.

But my point still stands. You can selectively take a sample anywhere and make it show a segment of the population has significantly lower life expectancy. However, a gay man in backwoods Nebraska probably would have a much higher life expectancy than one in San Fransisco California simply because the primary behaviors that lead to lowered life expectancy are promiscuity and unprotected anal sex not being gay.



I did not make that up...I think gay groups acknowledge that gay men have a a shorter life expectancy then straight men....
 
It's dangerous and it is much, much better if you are in a long term, committed relationshiip, but those are hard to come by in the current political climate.

I beg to differ. It may be hard (damn near impossible) to get married but that shouldn't stop gays from being in long term committed relationships. I know many hetero couples who have been in long term relationships for years with getting married. Claiming that long term gay relationships are hard to come by due to the political climate strikes me as a bull**** copout excuse. IMHO
 
Back
Top Bottom