A spectrum of stupidity, if you will. **
[/QUOTE]
An important distinction! I’m not seeking to excuse bad choices - but we haven’t a prayer of getting people to stop unless we understand their origins.
A spectrum of stupidity, if you will. **
[/QUOTE]
An important distinction! I’m not seeking to excuse bad choices - but we haven’t a prayer of getting people to stop unless we understand their origins.
Like I mentioned earlier. maybe stupid isn’t the word. But I don’t know what you call someone who makes stupid decisions, often repeated stupid decisions.
If I drive my motorcyle on the streets without a helmet and get in a wreck and crush me skull, wouldn’t I be described “stupid enough to drive a bike without a helmet”. No one mentions that I made a bad decision, or didn’t get the proper information about the dangers of driving without a helmet, or I was too poor to buy a helmet.
The point of this post is to explore the alternatives to the standard govt explanation of “we are trying to get the outbreak stopped but some communities are getting it”. I think the answers lies in the belief that there will be a cure soon, that you can live normally with it (look at magic johnson), its destiny, the cost of love, just the breaks,…
all whiny reasons that circumvent the fact that we all make decisions and some can kill us. We have to live or die with those decisions .
Not everyone who is HIV infected had a choice in that “decision.” For example, the rates of HIV infection for married women in the U.S. increased because of cheating husbands. Sure, you could say that all married women should insist on condoms all the time on the off chance that their husbands are secretly frequenting male prostitutes but that’s not very realistic.
Also, for women in some cultures outside the U.S., there are no choices at all. None. They have no “decisions” to make about becoming infected because it is not their choice.
Also, I’m pretty sure that someone who becomes infected because of rape wasn’t involved in any decision there, either.
For more info on HIV infection and the “decision-making process,” I suggest you read Infections and Inequalities by Paul Farmer.
ok xcheopis, I agree that not everyone makes the decision to get it. but what percent of innocent people are infected? 1% or 2%? that still leaves the crisis up to the 98% who decide to buck the odds.
Well, for some information on young women specifically the CDC is always a good bet. You can also just browse through the main HIV/AIDS page for information on infection rates.
Perhaps we have a different definition of “risk.” I would amend that to - “But only if you don’t know that your sex partner isn’t infected.” To me, so long as there is uncertainty, there’s still risk involved.
Um… Wow…
Are you speaking about reasonably-well-educated white people in the US? Or are you making a blanket judgement about people in other demographic groups, and people in other countries?
In sub-Saharan Africa, men believe that sex with a virgin will cure AIDS. They believe it, and receive no information to the contrary. So younger and younger pre-teen girls are getting raped by strangers, aquaintences and family members hoping to cure their disease.
You sound very set in your ideas, while many of the alternate views put forward in this thread make a great deal of sense.
Duh, forgot to make the point that these little girls are in no way, shape or form “choosing to get it or trying to get it.”
The fact remails that you can only contract this infection from a person who is infected. If you don’t know your partner’s status, then you are at risk. But the first fact is inarguable.
Is this headed to GD, too?
let me clarify:
I am talking about US population. white and non white. Unless someone can argue that the information only gets to whites.
so who in the above groups gets it without trying to (taking the risks)? That is my idea and I haven’t seen anything in this post to change it. Have I missed an alternate view that explains this better than my assertion?
Justin, how is your health behavior? Do you use a condom for every act of intercourse or oral sex? Do you smoke, are you overweight, do you exercise regularly? Do you ever drink and drive? Ride a bicycle without a helmet, tailgate on the freeway, wear your seatbelt every time you ride in a car? Do you always wash your hands after using the bathroom? Ever stay outside on a golf course when there is lightning present? Maybe we can go from there and help you understand the complexity of health behavior.
So what’s the whole point? That people do stupid things and don’t act in their best interests? That society as a whole can suffer because of this? This is news? We can rant and rail that “those people” should have to suffer the consequences of their errors without help from us. Then the next victim turns out to be our father, or sister, or daughter, or friend, and then maybe a little humanity can creep into the situation, with less judgementalism.
I’ve seen my patients ignore my best advice, and watched them suffer and die. I’ve seen them do their damnedest to do right for themselves and their families, only to get the same outcome. There ain’t no justice, there is just me and you and the rest of the gang.
QTM
I’m a White Man, Heterosexual, and I have a next to zero chance of getting G.R.I.D. What chaps my ass is the Federal Gov. spending billions of my tax dollars on a disease that homosexuals are spreading amongst themselves.
By the way, the only heterosexual population that has a high risk for G.R.I.D. is the negro male population. That and the people who have sex with the negro male population. It’s only because of the high rate of promiscuity among the negro male populace.
By the way, G.R.I.D. stands for “Gay Related Immunodeficiency Disease” which is what AIDS was originally called. Yep, It started and was spread by the homosexual lifestyle.
Instead of spending billions of taxpayer dollars on a disease which is spread by voluntary “livestyles”. I propose the Federal Government halt all G.R.I.D. education spending and instead have a top government official give the following Public Service Announcement:
“If you are a man, do not stick your penis into another mans anus. Likewise, if you are a man, do not allow another man to stick his penis into your anus. If you are a woman, do not allow a man who has put his penis into another mans anus to stick his penis into any orifice in your body.”
There, problem solved.
*Originally posted by Yogi Yorgenson *
** What chaps my ass **
If your ass is chapped, use chapstick. I recommend a big tube.
Qadgop, MD
Hardy har har… Man, your a card.
Hardee har har…BTW… why would I want to use a big tube on my ass? … Theres nothing wrong with ME! You see, I’m a NORMAL man. I would NEVER allow another male to sodomize me! Are you jelouse?
Originally posted by Yogi Yorgenson
By the way, G.R.I.D. stands for “Gay Related Immunodeficiency Disease” which is what AIDS was originally called. Yep, It started and was spread by the homosexual lifestyle.
At least 90% of the people on this planet with AIDS or HIV infection are heterosexuals. If you have “normal” sex with multiple women–or “normal” sex with one woman who has had “normal” heterosexual sex with multiple partners–you may get AIDS, while the two guys down the street who only have anal intercourse with each other will not. AIDS is a disease of promiscuity, not of sexual orientation. Its spread can be prevented by monogamous sexual relations–you support gay marriage, I’m sure, right?–or, barring that, by people using condoms whenever they have sex outside of strictly monogamous relationships.
I didn’t know Fred Phelps had joined the boards! Here, have some tea and cookies.
What chaps my ass is the Federal Gov. spending billions of my tax dollars on a disease that homosexuals are spreading amongst themselves.
This is also kind of a weird sentence. I kind of doubt you’re Bill Gates, or that you, personally, pay “billions” of dollars in taxes. The federal government spends billions of dollars on medical research of all different kinds. It spends money on breast cancer, which disproportionately affects women. It spends money on prostate cancer, which only affects men. (Well, only affects them in a medical sense–I suppose having their fathers and brothers and husbands and sons die affects women.) It spends money on lung cancer, which disproportionately affects smokers. All of this research is paid for by taxpayers, who are white people, black people, brown people, men, women, young people, middle-aged people, old people, heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, smokers, non-smokers, born-again Christians, atheists, Wiccans, Catholics, city-dwellers, suburbanites, country folk, coal miners, nuclear power plant operators, airline pilots, and endless other categories.