81–90 of 106 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would have to assume most sexually active women in the US are on some form of birth control or just avoid hooking up near ovulation windows. I've had exactly one woman ever ask me to use a condom, but she was french. Not sure if they're more expected there. I'd happily raise any kid that came of it so I've never been worried.
My data point is that every woman under about 30 wants to use condoms. Above 30, there is a lot less of a concern.
I’m going to be very mad if there is a resurgence in HIV because of the asinine GOP. If people have to be worried again about their next sexual contact (condoms only offer between 70-90% protection against HIV), we will return to a prudish lifestyle again at a time the west can least afford it with falling birth rates.
If a condom doesn't break then it's 100% effective. When a condom breaks you fails in a manner that you will know it failed and then there is PEP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a condom doesn't break then it's 100% effective. When a condom breaks you fails in a manner that you will know it failed and then there is PEP.
There's no such thing as "100% effective".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no such thing as "100% effective".
Abstinence is as they like to tell you. But really most of the margin for infection for condoms is the result of poor use.
It is at risk. 20 years of investment have gone into it. Now, many renowned HIV researchers seem to be pivoting to help covid / long covid efforts, an epidemic within the pandemic. And they are finding it is similar to HIV - the only reason we cannot cure HIV is because the virus hides where the HIV drugs can’t go in. Leading to high inflammation.
Many researchers believe that if we go all in on one of these, it is possible we can make breakthroughs in HIV, ME/CFS, and post-acute infection syndromes (PAIS) in general. I remain hopeful.
We need a real moonshot here for many things. i.e. similar to what long covid is trying right now https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03225-w
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the parent may have been referring to actual laws that exist today, rather than DOJ recommendations. Like in California where it is perfectly legal for an HIV positive person to have unprotected sex with somebody else, without disclosing it, so long as it wasn’t specifically their intention to infect the other person. If it was specifically their intention to infect the other person (good luck proving that bt…
So, still a crime, even if a misdemeanor? Pretty sure it's still negligence if you actually infect someone, as per your link: > A defendant might be negligent for infecting a partner with HIV if: The defendant knew he or she had AIDS or was HIV-positive; The defendant was negligent in not disclosing his/her status and/or not using a condom or dental dam; and As a result of that negligence, the plaintiff acquired the…
It might still be a tort, but anything can be a tort.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok I’ll bite. Yes. Forcing people to marry early and stay in abusive relationships is bad. Having options is good.
Abusive is too wide of term that covers too many things. Marriages can be hard if it’s a partnership of equals. It needs to move back to the paradigm where the husband is the primary dominant and makes all the decisions. The wife needs to be submissive. Marriages of this variety are easy. We already have domestic violence laws in place so there are safeguards in place against actual abuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes I'm sure it's the religious people not the fact that 'creampie' is one of the most popular genres of online pornography, that was virtually nonexistent 20 years ago, and now at the forefront of the zeitgeist.
Oh come on, look back at the “golden age” of porn - not a condom in sight!