Current Events > A fact many refuse to accept as true:

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
BalanceLost 03/20/22 4:32:18 AM #1:	One of the safest sex partners you could have is someone who is HIV-positive and properly medicated. Since if youre properly medicated the risk of transmitting HIV through sex is about zero. https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/3/2/AANvmLAADDBw.jpg --- "BalanceLost has a steam-powered PS2 because Sweden don't have electric" - dimeanatrix <cite>BalanceLost posted [p:963601048] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>One of the safest sex partners you could have is someone who is HIV-positive and properly medicated. Since if youre properly medicated the risk of transmitting HIV through sex is about zero. https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/3/2/AANvmLAADDBw.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
viewmaster_pi 03/20/22 4:33:13 AM #2:	viral load --- Damn the dark, damn the light <cite>viewmaster_pi posted [p:963601052] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>viral load </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DB_Insider 03/20/22 4:37:45 AM #3:	viewmaster_pi posted... viral load Amedori --- https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/179741-omega-labyrinth/79814320 <cite>DB_Insider posted [p:963601087] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>viewmaster_pi posted... </cite> <quote>viral load</quote>Amedori </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nexigrams 03/20/22 4:39:34 AM #4:	about zero =/= zero that's the kind of roll that a person like me would lose every single time --- http://imgur.com/SYiqIRC <cite>nexigrams posted [p:963601108] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>about zero =/= zero that's the kind of roll that a person like me would lose every single time </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#5	Post #5 was unavailable or deleted.
Tonyjaa 03/20/22 4:41:23 AM #6:	Hell to the no <cite>Tonyjaa posted [p:963601128] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Hell to the no </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Doe 03/20/22 4:47:07 AM #7:	This might be true. It's also true that someone telling you this is almost certainly std positive --- https://imgur.com/gallery/dXDmJHw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75GL-BYZFfY <cite>Doe posted [p:963601163] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>This might be true. It's also true that someone telling you this is almost certainly std positive </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pinky0926 03/20/22 4:59:45 AM #8:	nexigrams posted... about zero =/= zero that's the kind of roll that a person like me would lose every single time Its "about zero" in a science statistical sense, though. No one is getting HIV from someone with an undetectable viral load. --- CE's Resident Scotsman. http://i.imgur.com/ILz2ZbV.jpg <cite>pinky0926 posted [p:963601243] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>nexigrams posted... </cite> <quote>about zero =/= zero that's the kind of roll that a person like me would lose every single time</quote> Its "about zero" in a science statistical sense, though. No one is getting HIV from someone with an undetectable viral load. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#9	Post #9 was unavailable or deleted.
viewmaster_pi 03/20/22 5:08:00 AM #10:	so is this a shab alt or what --- Damn the dark, damn the light <cite>viewmaster_pi posted [p:963601315] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>so is this a shab alt or what </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
NeonOctopus 03/20/22 5:08:49 AM #11:	Tonyjaa posted... Hell to the no --- http://i.imgur.com/nlaY1qH.jpg http://i.imgur.com/zHJ1OCo.gif http://i.imgur.com/btBPP4E.jpg http://i.imgur.com/1B3bMHw.gif https://i.imgur.com/2aof3ao.jpg <cite>NeonOctopus posted [p:963601321] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Tonyjaa posted... </cite> <quote>Hell to the no</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Imit8m3 03/20/22 5:25:48 AM #12:	Shut the fuck up! --- Yes, I am aggressively handsome. Thanks for noticing. <cite>Imit8m3 posted [p:963601457] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Shut the fuck up! </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#13	Post #13 was unavailable or deleted.
Slayer_22 03/20/22 5:33:45 AM #14:	Wasn't there a guy who said this before, then said he doesn't tell his partners about it? Pretty sure that happened. --- "And no I'm not signing your twitter after this type of attitude so don't ask..." - IIINCORRUPTIBLE <cite>Slayer_22 posted [p:963601537] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Wasn't there a guy who said this before, then said he doesn't tell his partners about it? Pretty sure that happened.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nfearurspecimn 03/20/22 5:53:41 AM #15:	Slayer_22 posted... Wasn't there a guy who said this before, then said he doesn't tell his partners about it? Pretty sure that happened. Shablagoo --- Wake up. You have to wake up. currently a preta/hungry ghost Dai Grepher: I was wrong. My entire theory is incorrect. Zero Mission IS a remake of Metroid. <cite>nfearurspecimn posted [p:963601725] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Slayer_22 posted... </cite> <quote>Wasn't there a guy who said this before, then said he doesn't tell his partners about it? Pretty sure that happened.</quote>Shablagoo </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pinky0926 03/20/22 6:05:51 AM #16:	Doe posted... This might be true. It's also true that someone telling you this is almost certainly std positive Whats the reasoning here --- CE's Resident Scotsman. http://i.imgur.com/ILz2ZbV.jpg <cite>pinky0926 posted [p:963601823] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Doe posted... </cite> <quote>This might be true. It's also true that someone telling you this is almost certainly std positive</quote> Whats the reasoning here </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Guerrilla Soldier 03/20/22 6:20:08 AM #17:	what's the difference between "effectively" and "completely"? --- Disclaimer: There's a good chance the above post could be sarcasm. Die-hard Oakland A's fan --- Keep the A's in Oakland! <cite>Guerrilla Soldier posted [p:963601924] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>what's the difference between "effectively" and "completely"? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rayman2943 03/20/22 6:48:43 AM #18:	Wasn't that bsp77 supporting Shablagoo too? These are men with questionable views of consent. --- Cute dog lover <cite>Rayman2943 posted [p:963602191] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Wasn't that bsp77 supporting Shablagoo too? These are men with questionable views of consent. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BalanceLost 03/20/22 6:56:41 AM #19:	Doe posted... This might be true. It's also true that someone telling you this is almost certainly std positive pinky0926 posted... Whats the reasoning here Typical CE posting with pulling an opinion from your colon and saying it is a fact. Slayer_22 posted... Wasn't there a guy who said this before, then said he doesn't tell his partners about it? Pretty sure that happened. That is fucked up though. Im clearly advocating for knowing your partners status with the OP. Plus know your own status by getting tested every 3 months if you engage in behaviour where you potentially expose yourself to HIV. Guerrilla Soldier posted... what's the difference between "effectively" and "completely"? Completely mean that no possible unknown factor could show up and is thus a word less possible to use in regard to science. English isnt my native language so this is the best way I can explain it. --- "BalanceLost has a steam-powered PS2 because Sweden don't have electric" - dimeanatrix <cite>BalanceLost posted [p:963602259] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Doe posted... </cite> <quote>This might be true. It's also true that someone telling you this is almost certainly std positive</quote> pinky0926 posted... </cite> <quote>Whats the reasoning here</quote>Typical CE posting with pulling an opinion from your colon and saying it is a fact. Slayer_22 posted... </cite> <quote>Wasn't there a guy who said this before, then said he doesn't tell his partners about it? Pretty sure that happened.</quote>That is fucked up though. Im clearly advocating for knowing your partners status with the OP. Plus know your own status by getting tested every 3 months if you engage in behaviour where you potentially expose yourself to HIV. Guerrilla Soldier posted... </cite> <quote>what's the difference between "effectively" and "completely"?</quote>Completely mean that no possible unknown factor could show up and is thus a word less possible to use in regard to science. English isnt my native language so this is the best way I can explain it. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spikethedevil 03/20/22 7:10:49 AM #20:	Yeah you should still tell your partners and not telling them is scummy as fuck and also a crime in most places iirc. --- A garbage pod!? It's a smegging garbage pod! <cite>spikethedevil posted [p:963602386] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Yeah you should still tell your partners and not telling them is scummy as fuck and also a crime in most places iirc. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChandlerLife 03/20/22 7:12:47 AM #21:	Tonyjaa posted... Hell to the no <cite>ChandlerLife posted [p:963602406] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Tonyjaa posted...</cite> <quote>Hell to the no </quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
joe40001 03/20/22 8:32:34 AM #22:	"One of the safest sex partners you could have" is not the same as "about zero risk of HIV transmission" Anybody without HIV would have literally 0 risk of HIV transmission, and thus by definition they would all be safer partners unless they had another STD they could transmit. This isn't to say HIV positive people can't be very safe all or whatever, I'm just saying the "one of the safest" is a false statement. Put simply, even insanely well managed, a STD positive person is going to be a less safe sex partner than a person with 0 STDs. Doesn't make anybody bad, it's just a matter of fact. --- "joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori http://i.imgur.com/TheGsZ9.gif <cite>joe40001 posted [p:963603122] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>"One of the safest sex partners you could have" is not the same as "about zero risk of HIV transmission" Anybody without HIV would have literally 0 risk of HIV transmission, and thus by definition they would all be safer partners unless they had another STD they could transmit. This isn't to say HIV positive people can't be very safe all or whatever, I'm just saying the "one of the safest" is a false statement. Put simply, even insanely well managed, a STD positive person is going to be a less safe sex partner than a person with 0 STDs. Doesn't make anybody bad, it's just a matter of fact. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ivynn 03/20/22 8:38:07 AM #23:	viewmaster_pi posted... viral load Name of my AC/DC cover band --- http://i.imgur.com/vDci4hD.gif <cite>Ivynn posted [p:963603181] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>viewmaster_pi posted... </cite> <quote>viral load</quote> Name of my AC/DC cover band </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Raikuro 03/20/22 8:43:12 AM #24:	If it's someone I already know and trust, sure. But any rando can falsely claim to be properly medicated. <cite>Raikuro posted [p:963603249] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>If it's someone I already know and trust, sure. But any rando can falsely claim to be properly medicated. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BalanceLost 03/20/22 8:49:01 AM #25:	joe40001 posted... "One of the safest sex partners you could have" is not the same as "about zero risk of HIV transmission" Anybody without HIV would have literally 0 risk of HIV transmission, and thus by definition they would all be safer partners unless they had another STD they could transmit. This isn't to say HIV positive people can't be very safe all or whatever, I'm just saying the "one of the safest" is a false statement. Put simply, even insanely well managed, a STD positive person is going to be a less safe sex partner than a person with 0 STDs. Doesn't make anybody bad, it's just a matter of fact. A person who guaranteed has no STDs/STIs is of course the safety sex partner of all, but that doesnt change my statement that an HIV-positive person on successful treatment is one of the safest sex partners. Because if we look at this from a real world perspective, which is what safe sex needs to be based on, the risk is higher if you have sex with a person who regularly OR just sometimes have new sexual partners and think they are negative because a test they took last week said so but they took the test less than 3 months after their last sexual encounter. Because it could be a false negative since enough time hasnt gone by for the test to detect HIV, but the person could be infectious by the time you sleep with them. A person could have only had sex once some time ago, and gotten infected without knowing and they took a test too soon or not at all, and then they infect their second partner since both think all is well and there is no need for a condom. --- "BalanceLost has a steam-powered PS2 because Sweden don't have electric" - dimeanatrix <cite>BalanceLost posted [p:963603311] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>joe40001 posted... </cite> <quote>"One of the safest sex partners you could have" is not the same as "about zero risk of HIV transmission" Anybody without HIV would have literally 0 risk of HIV transmission, and thus by definition they would all be safer partners unless they had another STD they could transmit. This isn't to say HIV positive people can't be very safe all or whatever, I'm just saying the "one of the safest" is a false statement. Put simply, even insanely well managed, a STD positive person is going to be a less safe sex partner than a person with 0 STDs. Doesn't make anybody bad, it's just a matter of fact.</quote>A person who guaranteed has no STDs/STIs is of course the safety sex partner of all, but that doesnt change my statement that an HIV-positive person on successful treatment is one of the safest sex partners. Because if we look at this from a real world perspective, which is what safe sex needs to be based on, the risk is higher if you have sex with a person who regularly OR just sometimes have new sexual partners and think they are negative because a test they took last week said so but they took the test less than 3 months after their last sexual encounter. Because it could be a false negative since enough time hasnt gone by for the test to detect HIV, but the person could be infectious by the time you sleep with them. A person could have only had sex once some time ago, and gotten infected without knowing and they took a test too soon or not at all, and then they infect their second partner since both think all is well and there is no need for a condom. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BalanceLost 03/20/22 8:49:51 AM #26:	Raikuro posted... If it's someone I already know and trust, sure. But any rando can falsely claim to be properly medicated. Am I saying to stick your dick raw in people / have someone stick it in you raw just willy-nilly? --- "BalanceLost has a steam-powered PS2 because Sweden don't have electric" - dimeanatrix <cite>BalanceLost posted [p:963603329] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>Raikuro posted... </cite> <quote>If it's someone I already know and trust, sure. But any rando can falsely claim to be properly medicated.</quote>Am I saying to stick your dick raw in people / have someone stick it in you raw just willy-nilly? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nfearurspecimn 03/20/22 8:50:35 AM #27:	BalanceLost posted... A person who guaranteed has no STDs/STIs is of course the safety sex partner of all, but that doesnt change my statement that an HIV-positive person on successful treatment is one of the safest sex partners. Because if we look at this from a real world perspective, which is what safe sex needs to be based on, the risk is higher if you have sex with a person who regularly OR just sometimes have new sexual partners and think they are negative because a test they took last week said so but they took the test less than 3 months after their last sexual encounter. Because it could be a false negative since enough time hasnt gone by for the test to detect HIV, but the person could be infectious by the time you sleep with them. A person could have only had sex once some time ago, and gotten infected without knowing and they took a test too soon or not at all, and then they infect their second partner since both think all is well and there is no need for a condom. I mean that's true but also a person could lie about taking the meds... --- Wake up. You have to wake up. currently a preta/hungry ghost Dai Grepher: I was wrong. My entire theory is incorrect. Zero Mission IS a remake of Metroid. <cite>nfearurspecimn posted [p:963603334] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>BalanceLost posted... </cite> <quote>A person who guaranteed has no STDs/STIs is of course the safety sex partner of all, but that doesnt change my statement that an HIV-positive person on successful treatment is one of the safest sex partners. Because if we look at this from a real world perspective, which is what safe sex needs to be based on, the risk is higher if you have sex with a person who regularly OR just sometimes have new sexual partners and think they are negative because a test they took last week said so but they took the test less than 3 months after their last sexual encounter. Because it could be a false negative since enough time hasnt gone by for the test to detect HIV, but the person could be infectious by the time you sleep with them. A person could have only had sex once some time ago, and gotten infected without knowing and they took a test too soon or not at all, and then they infect their second partner since both think all is well and there is no need for a condom.</quote>I mean that's true but also a person could lie about taking the meds... </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheOtherMike 03/20/22 8:53:08 AM #28:	nfearurspecimn posted... I mean that's true but also a person could lie about taking the meds... Why would they lie about being medicated instead of lie about not being poz? <cite>TheOtherMike posted [p:963603352] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>nfearurspecimn posted... </cite> <quote>I mean that's true but also a person could lie about taking the meds...</quote> Why would they lie about being medicated instead of lie about not being poz? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DeadBankerDream 03/20/22 8:56:22 AM #29:	viewmaster_pi posted... so is this a shab alt or what Fun fact: That Shab alt that was insisting it wasn't a Shab alt hasn't been logged into since Shab came out of his suspension. --- "That thick shaft that causes women to shudder!" <cite>DeadBankerDream posted [p:963603405] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>viewmaster_pi posted... </cite> <quote>so is this a shab alt or what</quote>Fun fact: That Shab alt that was insisting it wasn't a Shab alt hasn't been logged into since Shab came out of his suspension. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
joe40001 03/20/22 8:56:30 AM #30:	BalanceLost posted... A person who guaranteed has no STDs/STIs is of course the safety sex partner of all, but that doesnt change my statement that an HIV-positive person on successful treatment is one of the safest sex partners. Because if we look at this from a real world perspective, which is what safe sex needs to be based on, the risk is higher if you have sex with a person who regularly OR just sometimes have new sexual partners and think they are negative because a test they took last week said so but they took the test less than 3 months after their last sexual encounter. Because it could be a false negative since enough time hasnt gone by for the test to detect HIV, but the person could be infectious by the time you sleep with them. A person could have only had sex once some time ago, and gotten infected without knowing and they took a test too soon or not at all, and then they infect their second partner since both think all is well and there is no need for a condom. I don't know what some of those terms means. But "one of the safest" implies like top 10% maybe, and I'd imagine well over 10% of people don't have STDs. So they wouldn't be "one of the safest" because they'd be less safe than everybody who didn't have an STD. --- "joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori http://i.imgur.com/TheGsZ9.gif <cite>joe40001 posted [p:963603406] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>BalanceLost posted... </cite> <quote>A person who guaranteed has no STDs/STIs is of course the safety sex partner of all, but that doesnt change my statement that an HIV-positive person on successful treatment is one of the safest sex partners. Because if we look at this from a real world perspective, which is what safe sex needs to be based on, the risk is higher if you have sex with a person who regularly OR just sometimes have new sexual partners and think they are negative because a test they took last week said so but they took the test less than 3 months after their last sexual encounter. Because it could be a false negative since enough time hasnt gone by for the test to detect HIV, but the person could be infectious by the time you sleep with them. A person could have only had sex once some time ago, and gotten infected without knowing and they took a test too soon or not at all, and then they infect their second partner since both think all is well and there is no need for a condom.</quote> I don't know what some of those terms means. But "one of the safest" implies like top 10% maybe, and I'd imagine well over 10% of people don't have STDs. So they wouldn't be "one of the safest" because they'd be less safe than everybody who didn't have an STD. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spikethedevil 03/20/22 9:01:20 AM #31:	joe40001 posted... I don't know what some of those terms means. But "one of the safest" implies like top 10% maybe, and I'd imagine well over 10% of people don't have STDs. So they wouldn't be "one of the safest" because they'd be less safe than everybody who didn't have an STD. What terms dont you know? @joe40001 --- A garbage pod!? It's a smegging garbage pod! <cite>spikethedevil posted [p:963603461] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>joe40001 posted... </cite> <quote>I don't know what some of those terms means. But "one of the safest" implies like top 10% maybe, and I'd imagine well over 10% of people don't have STDs. So they wouldn't be "one of the safest" because they'd be less safe than everybody who didn't have an STD.</quote> What terms dont you know? @joe40001 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dat_Cracka_Jax 03/20/22 9:04:40 AM #32:	So safe sex is just not getting HIV? What about all the other things you could catch? --- http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/8131/flame201010170949481638.jpg http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/5517/cateyes.gif Rams: 7-9 <cite>Dat_Cracka_Jax posted [p:963603503] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>So safe sex is just not getting HIV? What about all the other things you could catch? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Heartomaton 03/20/22 9:04:56 AM #33:	It's still a responsibility to disclose all the information to your partner. If they're willing to do sexual things with you, then they have every right to know, and not being honest in that situation is objectively a scummy move. It's obviously different, but I'd never sleep with anyone without informing them of my herpes, even though I've never had an outbreak after the first one in the years I've had it. --- https://www.youtube.com/user/Heartomaton Heartomaton for President 2028. <cite>Heartomaton posted [p:963603512] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>It's still a responsibility to disclose all the information to your partner. If they're willing to do sexual things with you, then they have every right to know, and not being honest in that situation is objectively a scummy move. It's obviously different, but I'd never sleep with anyone without informing them of my herpes, even though I've never had an outbreak after the first one in the years I've had it. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
joe40001 03/20/22 9:07:31 AM #34:	spikethedevil posted... What terms dont you know? @joe40001 I was a bit confused by how you phrased your statement so I read it as "sex with a person who regularly OR" and I thought OR might be some kind of acronym. Nevermind, I now understand the post, and yeah disagree like I said before. --- "joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori http://i.imgur.com/TheGsZ9.gif <cite>joe40001 posted [p:963603544] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>spikethedevil posted... </cite> <quote>What terms dont you know? @joe40001</quote> I was a bit confused by how you phrased your statement so I read it as "sex with a person who regularly OR" and I thought OR might be some kind of acronym. Nevermind, I now understand the post, and yeah disagree like I said before. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nfearurspecimn 03/20/22 9:20:55 AM #35:	TheOtherMike posted... Why would they lie about being medicated instead of lie about not being poz? because people will lie cheat and steal their way to whatever they want --- Wake up. You have to wake up. currently a preta/hungry ghost Dai Grepher: I was wrong. My entire theory is incorrect. Zero Mission IS a remake of Metroid. <cite>nfearurspecimn posted [p:963603723] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>TheOtherMike posted... </cite> <quote>Why would they lie about being medicated instead of lie about not being poz?</quote>because people will lie cheat and steal their way to whatever they want </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spikethedevil 03/20/22 9:25:22 AM #36:	joe40001 posted... I was a bit confused by how you phrased your statement so I read it as "sex with a person who regularly OR" and I thought OR might be some kind of acronym. Nevermind, I now understand the post, and yeah disagree like I said before. Wasnt my post lol but fair enough. --- A garbage pod!? It's a smegging garbage pod! <cite>spikethedevil posted [p:963603790] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>joe40001 posted... </cite> <quote>I was a bit confused by how you phrased your statement so I read it as "sex with a person who regularly OR" and I thought OR might be some kind of acronym. Nevermind, I now understand the post, and yeah disagree like I said before.</quote> Wasnt my post lol but fair enough. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
joe40001 03/20/22 9:26:52 AM #37:	spikethedevil posted... Wasnt my post lol but fair enough. I just assumed it was the same person I was responding to, I wasn't paying much attention, my bad. --- "joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori http://i.imgur.com/TheGsZ9.gif <cite>joe40001 posted [p:963603817] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>spikethedevil posted... </cite> <quote>Wasnt my post lol but fair enough.</quote> I just assumed it was the same person I was responding to, I wasn't paying much attention, my bad. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheOtherMike 03/20/22 9:29:24 AM #38:	nfearurspecimn posted... because people will lie cheat and steal their way to whatever they want That doesn't answer the question. There's no good reason to lie and say "I'm poz but on meds and have an undetectable viral load" in preference to lying and saying "I test regularly and am negative." Why specifically use the former lie when the latter lie is more likely to get sex? <cite>TheOtherMike posted [p:963603859] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>nfearurspecimn posted... </cite> <quote>because people will lie cheat and steal their way to whatever they want</quote> That doesn't answer the question. There's no good reason to lie and say "I'm poz but on meds and have an undetectable viral load" in preference to lying and saying "I test regularly and am negative." Why specifically use the former lie when the latter lie is more likely to get sex? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Funkydog 03/20/22 9:31:29 AM #39:	A big issue is people actually properly taking medication, and given how useless so many people are...! But yeah, if they are properly taking it and can show they are at negligible levels then it's basically as safe as anything else. You should still 100% disclose it though, as with any STD, and should really be getting checked if you are engaging in any sustained promiscuous behaviour. --- Let's make biscuits! <cite>Funkydog posted [p:963603893] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>A big issue is people actually properly taking medication, and given how useless so many people are...! But yeah, if they are properly taking it and can show they are at negligible levels then it's basically as safe as anything else. You should still 100% disclose it though, as with any STD, and should really be getting checked if you are engaging in any sustained promiscuous behaviour. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nfearurspecimn 03/20/22 9:35:26 AM #40:	TheOtherMike posted... That doesn't answer the question. There's no good reason to lie and say "I'm poz but on meds and have an undetectable viral load" in preference to lying and saying "I test regularly and am negative." Why specifically use the former lie when the latter lie is more likely to get sex? the reward would be getting sex whereas otherwise you would not get sex if honest --- Wake up. You have to wake up. currently a preta/hungry ghost Dai Grepher: I was wrong. My entire theory is incorrect. Zero Mission IS a remake of Metroid. <cite>nfearurspecimn posted [p:963603947] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>TheOtherMike posted... </cite> <quote>That doesn't answer the question. There's no good reason to lie and say "I'm poz but on meds and have an undetectable viral load" in preference to lying and saying "I test regularly and am negative." Why specifically use the former lie when the latter lie is more likely to get sex?</quote>the reward would be getting sex whereas otherwise you would not get sex if honest </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
joe40001 03/20/22 9:35:33 AM #41:	I don't think I will ever understand how cavalier people are about sex. I still don't even understand how people can have regular sex even with condoms and/or birth control since neither is a guarantee against pregnancy. --- "joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori http://i.imgur.com/TheGsZ9.gif <cite>joe40001 posted [p:963603948] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>I don't think I will ever understand how cavalier people are about sex. I still don't even understand how people can have regular sex even with condoms and/or birth control since neither is a guarantee against pregnancy. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheOtherMike 03/20/22 9:39:44 AM #42:	nfearurspecimn posted... the reward would be getting sex whereas otherwise you would not get sex if honest Why would you reply if you aren't going to bother reading what you reply to? <cite>TheOtherMike posted [p:963603995] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>nfearurspecimn posted... </cite> <quote>the reward would be getting sex whereas otherwise you would not get sex if honest</quote> Why would you reply if you aren't going to bother reading what you reply to? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Fony 03/20/22 9:47:57 AM #43:	This is false, the safest sex partners are ones without STD's. So on top of being a pile of simps, no standard having morons, and general losers you guys on here also don't get STD screenings from women(or share yours) during your extended talking phase(lol)? On the rare occasion you guys fuck a girl day 1 of meeting her, don't you know how to use condoms? Or is this another weird topic by someone who is really talking about themselves? Probably so. --- It's not the end of the world, but we can see it from here. <cite>Fony posted [p:963604128] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>This is false, the safest sex partners are ones without STD's. So on top of being a pile of simps, no standard having morons, and general losers you guys on here also don't get STD screenings from women(or share yours) during your extended talking phase(lol)? On the rare occasion you guys fuck a girl day 1 of meeting her, don't you know how to use condoms? Or is this another weird topic by someone who is really talking about themselves? Probably so. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Naysaspace 03/20/22 9:53:27 AM #44:	BalanceLost posted... One of the safest sex partners you could have is someone who is HIV-positive and properly medicated. Since if youre properly medicated the risk of transmitting HIV through sex is about zero. What a strange, hyperbolic way to interpret facts Humph. There's always someone. --- Nothin' like a slice of meat lover's after a good night -Larry Enticer <cite>Naysaspace posted [p:963604204] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>BalanceLost posted... </cite> <quote>One of the safest sex partners you could have is someone who is HIV-positive and properly medicated. Since if youre properly medicated the risk of transmitting HIV through sex is about zero.</quote>What a strange, hyperbolic way to interpret facts Humph. There's always someone. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nfearurspecimn 03/20/22 12:39:51 PM #45:	TheOtherMike posted... Why would you reply if you aren't going to bother reading what you reply to? he seems to think naively that no one will not be getting treatment and lie and say they're fine --- Wake up. You have to wake up. currently a preta/hungry ghost Dai Grepher: I was wrong. My entire theory is incorrect. Zero Mission IS a remake of Metroid. <cite>nfearurspecimn posted [p:963607098] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>TheOtherMike posted... </cite> <quote>Why would you reply if you aren't going to bother reading what you reply to?</quote>he seems to think naively that no one will not be getting treatment and lie and say they're fine </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#46	Post #46 was unavailable or deleted.
IShall_Run_Amok 03/20/22 12:59:47 PM #47:	https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/1/5/4/AAJBROAAC7DK.jpg --- Star Wars is about guys who show up and then you clap. <cite>IShall_Run_Amok posted [p:963607521] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/1/5/4/AAJBROAAC7DK.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Choco 03/20/22 1:06:27 PM #48:	BalanceLost posted... One of the safest sex partners you could have is someone who is HIV-positive and properly medicated. this sentence confuses me because surely it's still a little less safe than sex with someone who is hiv-negative? that said this is interesting and good to know and the reactions itt are really fucking weird --- https://i.imgur.com/286sD4e.png http://error1355.com/ce/Choco.html <cite>Choco posted [p:963607660] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>BalanceLost posted... </cite> <quote>One of the safest sex partners you could have is someone who is HIV-positive and properly medicated.</quote>this sentence confuses me because surely it's still a little less safe than sex with someone who is hiv-negative? that said this is interesting and good to know and the reactions itt are really fucking weird </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#49	Post #49 was unavailable or deleted.
hockeybub89 03/20/22 1:15:02 PM #50:	joe40001 posted... I don't think I will ever understand how cavalier people are about sex. I still don't even understand how people can have regular sex even with condoms and/or birth control since neither is a guarantee against pregnancy. I mean they can, or should be able to, just get an abortion in the off chance all birth control fails them. I'm a kissless virgin asexual and I don't understand how much people care about people having lots of sex. If that's what they want to do, more power to them. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:963607835] in A fact man... [t:79950852]...</cite> <quote>joe40001 posted... </cite> <quote>I don't think I will ever understand how cavalier people are about sex. I still don't even understand how people can have regular sex even with condoms and/or birth control since neither is a guarantee against pregnancy.</quote>I mean they can, or should be able to, just get an abortion in the off chance all birth control fails them. I'm a kissless virgin asexual and I don't understand how much people care about people having lots of sex. If that's what they want to do, more power to them. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > A fact many refuse to accept as true: (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > A fact many refuse to accept as true: