bugchasing and HIV

[Kulindahr]

No..that is forcing your will on them.

So is locking up people who engage in other kinds of assault.

 

[eastofeden]

So is locking up people who engage in other kinds of assault.

Do the assaults have the important part of the equation I presented? Consenting Adults?

 

[Rolyo85]

What's alarming is your view that reality changes due to geographical location.

Inflicting harm on someone else is criminal, whether they ask for it or not. Crying about mental health doesn't change that -- people doing this should be locked up regardless, until they stop being destructive.

Actually, I find it ludicrous that you DON'T think it changes due to geographical location. Not that I was even talking about what you think I was talking about...

By your definition skat, blood play and BDSM should be considered assaults. How very tea party of you.

 

[Rolyo85]

Do the assaults have the important part of the equation I presented? Consenting Adults?

He is just having libertarian outrage for supposedly having to pay for their treatment afterwards. As if the vast majority of HIV+ people don't pay for it out of their own pockets.

 

[cgymike]

don't mind kuli...the Oregon coast has rusted what little brain he had.

 

[Kulindahr]

Do the assaults have the important part of the equation I presented? Consenting Adults?

Sometimes. A chick here some years back asked her BF to beat her. She ended up with some broken bones. Regardless of the fact that she'd asked, he went to jail.

Getting HIV is a lot more damage than broken bones.

 

[Kulindahr]

By your definition skat, blood play and BDSM should be considered assaults. How very tea party of you.

No, they shouldn't.

- - - Updated - - -

He is just having libertarian outrage for supposedly having to pay for their treatment afterwards. As if the vast majority of HIV+ people don't pay for it out of their own pockets.

So only the filthy rich are HIV+? Wow.

Currently, the lifetime treatment cost of an HIV infection is estimated at $379,668 (in 2010 dollars)

 

[bankside]

In most countries, the question of cost is not abstract. We pay for everyone's necessary health care.

I would draw the line at voluntarily acquired diseases if I truly felt there was such a thing as a voluntarily acquired disease, but honestly I think it is just a side effect of the progression of mental illness. Better mental health support, and quarantining people willing to acquire HIV or who deliberately spread it, would deal with the situation.

I also do not think it violates the spirit of universal health care to require accident insurance of people who engage in extreme sports, and certainly raising taxes on cigarettes is no issue either.

 

[Rolyo85]

No, they shouldn't.

Actually yes they should. They all cause body harm and carry severe health risks.

 

[bankside]

On the issue of consent:

I consent to having monogamous sex with an uninfected man who tells the truth about his behaviour and his health, under terms that are binding unless otherwise negotiated in advance. Anything else is not consensual; i.e., rape.

 

[dereperez]

Of course consent should play a big part on whether the involved parties are guilty. But I feel something should be said for overall destructive behavior as well. There is a reason why attempted and assisted suicide were/are common law crimes in many parts of the world. Are we to incessantly allow mutually consenting adults to shoot each other up, slice each other's wrists, or poison each other with toxins? That is not an image or idea we'd want to promote as a society. After all is done and dusted and the participating members received their fatal wishes, friends and family members often have to pick up the pieces...and they often did not consent to such acts.

I bear in mind that many of these bugchaser folks need help, and I sincerely wish that they do. But that is different, IMO, from just overlooking what they are doing as just random harmless acts of their choice. Consent/non-consent in and of itself should not be the sole basis for whether an act is a crime.

 

[eastofeden]

Of course consent should play a big part on whether the involved parties are guilty. But I feel something should be said for overall destructive behavior as well. There is a reason why attempted and assisted suicide were/are common law crimes in many parts of the world. Are we to incessantly allow mutually consenting adults to shoot each other up, slice each other's wrists, or poison each other with toxins? That is not an image or idea we'd want to promote as a society. After all is done and dusted and the participating members received their fatal wishes, friends and family members often have to pick up the pieces...and they often did not consent to such acts.

I understand your point...but I disagree as I think assisted suicide is a compassionate act...we do it with animals all the time to "put them out of their misery" but we let people suffer. I firmly believe that consenting adults should decide what is best for them...period.

 

[dereperez]

I understand your point...but I disagree as I think assisted suicide is a compassionate act...we do it with animals all the time to "put them out of their misery" but we let people suffer. I firmly believe that consenting adults should decide what is best for them...period.

I agree that assisted suicide can be a compassionate act in the right circumstances (as opposed to couples shooting each up other with heroin so they could "enter the afterlife together", for example). But there are rules and regulations with medically assisted suicide. And if the truly ill individual can no longer make decisions for him/herself, then by all means a close family member should have the choice to put their loved one "out of their misery."

For the bugchasers, they are otherwise healthy individuals who actively choose to become stricken with disease and then to "spread their seed" among the population. Sure, they may not be "mentally healthy" to think the way they do, but that is why I full support them getting help, but do not condone their acts (not that you necessarily do). I feel there is such a premium placed on freedom of choice for the immediately involved individuals, that the choice for those around them (friends, family, neighbors) may often be sacrificed. Destructive behavior generally should not be encouraged whether by choice or by force.

 

[Rolyo85]

I think a big part of bug chaser mentality is the awareness that this is their own body and therefore nobody else's business. Not saying that's a very good way of thinking in this particular case, but it makes sense.

 

[eastofeden]

I agree that assisted suicide can be a compassionate act in the right circumstances (as opposed to couples shooting each up other with heroin so they could "enter the afterlife together", for example). But there are rules and regulations with medically assisted suicide. And if the truly ill individual can no longer make decisions for him/herself, then by all means a close family member should have the choice to put their loved one "out of their misery."

For the bugchasers, they are otherwise healthy individuals who actively choose to become stricken with disease and then to "spread their seed" among the population. Sure, they may not be "mentally healthy" to think the way they do, but that is why I full support them getting help, but do not condone their acts (not that you necessarily do). I feel there is such a premium placed on freedom of choice for the immediately involved individuals, that the choice for those around them (friends, family, neighbors) may often be sacrificed. Destructive behavior generally should not be encouraged whether by choice or by force.

The thing is...there is a stigma with AIDS...it is the "gay disease" for the majority of the population and "God's Punishment" for a select minority. Whether we like it or not.....we all internalize homophobia...especially gay people themselves. We are most vulnerable when it comes to internalizing homophobia...and also most able to overcome it if we can recognize it.

People are self destructive...LOTS of them...and we seem to pick and choose who we are going to ostracize. For instance...start talking about fat people....and the diseases and death they can potentially bring on themselves DESPITE all the warnings...and you will have tons of people lecturing you.

 

[Rolyo85]

I'm sorry, but that is both bad logic and enabling. They are doing active harm. By that rationale and the elevation of personal liberty, they could also justify an entire range of criminal behaviors that are harmful in society, either financially, to loved ones, or directly: speeding, public sex, public defecation, right to use bicycles on high speed traffic routes, public intoxication, disturbing the peace, etc.

There are ancillary effects to individual freedoms exercised. Society can and does legislate behaviors that cross the line of individual vs. collective good/harm.

They are not actually making excuses or trying to justify themselves though. They are perfectly aware of how the world sees them and are therefore pretty isolated.

That said, how would you go about legislating this situation?

 

[backagain]

so im graduating university soon (2 weeks) and my last paper has been on HIV infection and i stumbled upon bugchasing... i have a few words to say.

WHAT THE EVER LOVING FUCK IS GOING ON!

thats about it... my gays need to come up with some solutions for this... os some damn good explanations for this website called "breedingzone"

To each their own.

 

[bankside]

They are not actually making excuses or trying to justify themselves though. They are perfectly aware of how the world sees them and are therefore pretty isolated.

That said, how would you go about legislating this situation?

We already have quarantine laws.

 

[Rolyo85]

We already have quarantine laws.

And in what specific way could those be used to prevent a neg person from seeking a poz one and ask to be infected by them?

 

[eastofeden]

The intentional spreading of HIV or AIDS, whether surreptitiously or consentually, is a valid reason to list said person as a sex offender. It is an act that far exceeds any label such as "lapse in judgment." If a man would deliberately infect or seek to be infected, it is a sign of dangerous behavior and deserves to be the subject of an alert.

I disagree completely. The person who has been diagnosed with diabetes and continues to eat crap and refuses to exercise is engaging in EXACTLY the same behavior as the person who wishes to contract the bug. The person who contracts lung cancer and continues to smoke is also guilty of the same offense. These people are no less dangerous to themselves than the guy who seeks to be infected.

The irony here...so many of the arguments presented in this thread are the EXACT SAME ARGUMENTS used against gay men...how we are a threat to whatever the fuck they think we are threatening. What they "may" do is BS as well. We have heard for years what gay men "may" do..to the family...to children...to society...when the truth is what consenting adults do doesn't really affect anyone but the consenting adults...

One more thing...we all know that unprotected sex can possibly lead to HIV and AIDS...and at some point...we each have got to take responsibility for that as well. I have friends who have never had sex without a condom...even in long term relationships. For those who don't...they know the risks. We all do. Should anyone who has had sex without a condom be labeled sex offenders as well?