Post: #1

On the manosphere we are always trying to guess the next crazy crusade from the leftist. Last week it was transexual rights,so now I bring you guys, HIV acceptance.
http://touch.aplus.com/a/social-experime...9JY&ref=ns

Long story short. Finnish man had a sign that said touch me i have hiv and people did.

Post: #2

I walk past a guy everyday in Manhattan. He's sitting on the sidewalk panhandling with a sign that says hiv+ and homeless. He can't be more that 35ish white male. I think he genuinely has. He's not the typical homeless guy. Looks like he's fairly intelligent. Just had some bad luck.

I don't know how to really feel about it.

Post: #3

Notes from Toronto: There's already a campaign (dates back to 2014): "It's not the STI that's the monster .. it's the stigma!"

Their 'argument' is that the negative stigma around STI's prevents people from getting tested.

Post: #4

Yeah im right there with you. I know i wouldn't take the chance of touching the guy. Call me a bigot, but i wouldn't risk touching an open sore or scratch on their hand.

Post: #5

Its funny you say that, i actually had to do a presentation on hiv and sti stigma in college.

Post: #6

I remember in middle school we had some class discussion about what we would do if a new student who we knew had HIV was assigned to sit next to us.

"I would move because they could hit their knee on a desk,and bleed on me" was the wrong answer. Back in these days I played outside,and got scabs; it was common to randomly have blood pouring out of my leg or notice a random cut on my arm.

Post: #7

There once was an experiment where a researcher taught chimps to paint. They fucking loved it! They just couldn't get enough of creating new random colorful stuff.

The researcher then introduced a reward, in the form of peanuts. Quickly, the chimps caught on and instead of painting for hours, they would simply throw as little shit on the canvas as they knew they could get away with in order to get the reward, the peanuts.

This experiment sums up the leftist. At one point they actually did try to tackle important issues for the sake of interest, enjoyment, and actually improving something. Then along came the internet, social media, and instant gratification. They realized that instead of devoting long hours and effort into real issues, they could get the same reward from quick click-bait style issues.

This is the result. A quick share of a news story, the retweet of someone talking about the flavor of the month crusade, or just simply touching another human being. Nothing is gained nor achieved, they simply do the least they possibly can to get the reward.

Post: #8

People who have HIV are gays and drug users, and fully deserve to be stigmatized, and should continue to be for the future (excepting those that contracted it accidentally via botched blood transfusions or were born to HIV parents.) I honestly don't even want it to be cured.

Post: #9

(06-30-2015 10:34 PM)CactusCat589 Wrote:  People who have HIV are gays and drug users, and fully deserve to be stigmatized, and should continue to be for the future (excepting those that contracted it accidentally via botched blood transfusions or were born to HIV parents.) I honestly don't even want it to be cured.

If HIV gets cured then that means science would have the cure for all viruses, so I desperately hope it gets cured. As it stands there is no cure for any virus, just vaccines. How do you feel about herpes? The vaccine for that will be ready for humans in the next five years.

Post: #10

(06-30-2015 09:55 PM)AntiTrace Wrote:  There once was an experiment where a researcher taught chimps to paint. They fucking loved it! They just couldn't get enough of creating new random colorful stuff.

The researcher then introduced a reward, in the form of peanuts. Quickly, the chimps caught on and instead of painting for hours, they would simply throw as little shit on the canvas as they knew they could get away with in order to get the reward, the peanuts.

This experiment sums up the leftist. At one point they actually did try to tackle important issues for the sake of interest, enjoyment, and actually improving something. Then along came the internet, social media, and instant gratification. They realized that instead of devoting long hours and effort into real issues, they could get the same reward from quick click-bait style issues.

This is the result. A quick share of a news story, the retweet of someone talking about the flavor of the month crusade, or just simply touching another human being. Nothing is gained nor achieved, they simply do the least they possibly can to get the reward.

Damn. Absolutely. If this doesn't encapsulate the spiral of Western society . . . . Great connection.

Post: #11

(06-30-2015 10:34 PM)CactusCat589 Wrote:  People who have HIV are gays and drug users, and fully deserve to be stigmatized, and should continue to be for the future (excepting those that contracted it accidentally via botched blood transfusions or were born to HIV parents.) I honestly don't even want it to be cured.

Also women who have sex (knowingly or unknowingly) with bisexual men.

Post: #12

Fair post, but I don't see the connection between trannies and AIDS. One is a mentally ill person who chooses the ultimate form of self mutilation, the other is a person who maybe fucked up and did IV drugs, but more likely just fucked the wrong person. If I dislike a fag with AIDS, I'm going to dislike him because he has obnoxious mannerisms and checks out my ass when I walk away, not because he has AIDS. It might be a legitimate cause for avoidance and I wouldn't touch a stranger with AIDS either, (to show my friends how tolerant I am? WTF is with these SJWs...) but not a cause for scorn like a sicko who cuts off his balls and grows tits.

(06-30-2015 11:01 PM)Horus Wrote:  Also women who have sex (knowingly or unknowingly) with bisexual men.

And the men who have sex with them, at half the transmission rate. - http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/191/9/1403.full A gay "catcher" is 35 times more likely to contract HIV than a straight dude who fucks a girl raw in her pussy. - http://www.catie.ca/en/pif/summer-2012/p...posure-hiv

Hey, that is a lot more fags catching it. But there are also a lot more straight people than fags, despite what the media tells us. Put another way, for every 35 fags with AIDS, there is one straight guy who never had his dick anywhere beside a female pussy, and he has AIDS too. Not a drug user, not gay, just a dude who likes pussy like all of us here. Hell, he might even have been a forum member. (No, I do not have AIDS.)

And then there's this

(06-30-2015 10:34 PM)CactusCat589 Wrote:  People who have HIV are gays and drug users, and fully deserve to be stigmatized, and should continue to be for the future (excepting those that contracted it accidentally via botched blood transfusions or were born to HIV parents.) I honestly don't even want it to be cured.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1560238/

Let those babies die to teach the fags a lesson! Mutually beneficial, selfish, altruistic, or spiteful?

Post: #13

I remember a short while ago when somebody printed a magazine and the ink used was made from HIV-infected blood as part of a campaign of normalize the disease.
I honestly don't know what it was more - morally repugnant or physically disgusting.
   
It kills people. It needs to be stigmatized.

Post: #14

Agree-and-amplify.

Start a campaign to end the stigma surrounding rabies, then sit back and enjoy the fireworks.

Post: #15

When the gay plague "came out" it was originally called GRID:

Gay
Related
Immuno
Deficiency

It was only after normal people started dying from tainted blood transfusions that the name was changed to AIDS.

Post: #16

(06-30-2015 09:55 PM)AntiTrace Wrote:  There once was an experiment where a researcher taught chimps to paint. They fucking loved it! They just couldn't get enough of creating new random colorful stuff.

The researcher then introduced a reward, in the form of peanuts. Quickly, the chimps caught on and instead of painting for hours, they would simply throw as little shit on the canvas as they knew they could get away with in order to get the reward, the peanuts.

This experiment sums up the leftist. At one point they actually did try to tackle important issues for the sake of interest, enjoyment, and actually improving something. Then along came the internet, social media, and instant gratification. They realized that instead of devoting long hours and effort into real issues, they could get the same reward from quick click-bait style issues.

This is the result. A quick share of a news story, the retweet of someone talking about the flavor of the month crusade, or just simply touching another human being. Nothing is gained nor achieved, they simply do the least they possibly can to get the reward.

Is this the same mentality behind all these random people with the "free hugs" sign? I can never figure out why the hell anyone is doing this.

Post: #17

(06-30-2015 09:55 PM)AntiTrace Wrote:  There once was an experiment where a researcher taught chimps to paint. They fucking loved it! They just couldn't get enough of creating new random colorful stuff.

The researcher then introduced a reward, in the form of peanuts. Quickly, the chimps caught on and instead of painting for hours, they would simply throw as little shit on the canvas as they knew they could get away with in order to get the reward, the peanuts.

This experiment sums up the leftist. At one point they actually did try to tackle important issues for the sake of interest, enjoyment, and actually improving something. Then along came the internet, social media, and instant gratification. They realized that instead of devoting long hours and effort into real issues, they could get the same reward from quick click-bait style issues.

This is the result. A quick share of a news story, the retweet of someone talking about the flavor of the month crusade, or just simply touching another human being. Nothing is gained nor achieved, they simply do the least they possibly can to get the reward.

The leftist as a utopian even when dealing with real issues or contrived issues before the internet and social media as well as instant gratification. Always in small scale experiments fail in their approaches to reality. Given that their analysis of the situation is inherently faulty and based on false premises and their solutions to create the perfect society always invariably end up creating dystopias like the Soviet Union and always leaving many casualties in their wake.

Better that they fetter their hours away on the internet than do more real world damage that they have already done.

Post: #18

the dude saying he hopes hiv doesn't get cured is a toxic human being. Who says shit like that? I would quote you but I'm on my phone. But seriously? Are you some sort of sociopath?

Post: #19

(07-01-2015 10:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Is this the same mentality behind all these random people with the "free hugs" sign? I can never figure out why the hell anyone is doing this.

I've seen a lot of this in recent years - usually from unattractive neckbeards and weeaboos. The nearest I can figure is that it fills some kind of void for physical intimacy or it's a ploy for an introduction with hopes that it'll lead to a bang. Either way it's pathetic.

Post: #20

(07-02-2015 12:14 AM)Fortis Wrote:  the dude saying he hopes hiv doesn't get cured is a toxic human being. Who says shit like that? I would quote you but I'm on my phone. But seriously? Are you some sort of sociopath?

I don't blame you for calling me that, but no I am not.

I'd rather double up the researchers on alzheimers or cancer. Let me point out that symptoms of HIV can already be treated to the point their life-expectancy is just as long as yours or mine. They just take an Emtriva pill in the morning, and it's as if they're HIV-negative. They can't transmit it.

I didn't mention HIV-positive babies because those are now curable upon birth. So that's not an issue.

HIV should become extinct in a generation without spending another dollar on research. The only thing that keeps that from being true is if HIV-positive people keep propagating it. No one's forcing these people at gunpoint to infect someone else. The fact that they do, that, to me, is psychopathic. I'm someone who never sneezes without covering it with my elbow. It's just hard for me to sympathize with people who are different.

Post: #21

That may all be true, but how can one say "I hope they never cure X Disease?" That in undeniably toxic. Riddle me that.

Post: #22

(06-30-2015 09:19 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  I walk past a guy everyday in Manhattan. He's sitting on the sidewalk panhandling with a sign that says hiv+ and homeless. He can't be more that 35ish white male. I think he genuinely has. He's not the typical homeless guy. Looks like he's fairly intelligent. Just had some bad luck.

I don't know how to really feel about it.

Shit like that pisses me off. What was wrong with him just writing 'homeless' alone as a way to garner sympathy. Instead he wanted to up the ante with HIV. Its the same with homeless people that have pets to gain more sympathy. Hey, maybe if you didn't have to spend money and time feeding your animal you'd be in a better situation, and I might give you something.

Who am I kidding, no I wouldn't. I come across too many that have been asking for just a few cents to get a bus ticket... for a year

Post: #23

I'm honestly not that scared of HIV. I don't take IV drugs and I don't sleep with men. I've touched a ton of people with HIV and Hep C and so far I'm clean. It's not really something I go out of my way to do but I don't lose sleep over it.

Post: #24

(07-02-2015 12:26 PM)Medic42 Wrote:  I'm honestly not that scared of HIV. I don't take IV drugs and I don't sleep with men. I've touched a ton of people with HIV and Hep C and so far I'm clean. It's not really something I go out of my way to do but I don't lose sleep over it.

Likewise. I did socially interactive missionary work in South Africa for 30 days in an area where 40% of the population was HIV positive. Had myself tested 6 months after my return to the US and was clean as a whistle. If you're a straight, sober man and you don't do anal (at least not with coke addicts), your chances of contracting HIV-AIDS are virtually zero. Liberals and Conservatives alike pushed the AIDS hysteria to level 10 in the 80s/early 90s, wouldn't be surprised if the SJWs and TradCons joined forces again to push a re-packaged "anyone can get AIDS" agenda today.

Post: #25

(07-02-2015 01:51 PM)blacknwhitespade Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 12:26 PM)Medic42 Wrote:  I'm honestly not that scared of HIV. I don't take IV drugs and I don't sleep with men. I've touched a ton of people with HIV and Hep C and so far I'm clean. It's not really something I go out of my way to do but I don't lose sleep over it.

Likewise. I did socially interactive missionary work in South Africa for 30 days in an area where 40% of the population was HIV positive. Had myself tested 6 months after my return to the US and was clean as a whistle. If you're a straight, sober man and you don't do anal (at least not with coke addicts), you're chances of contracting HIV-AIDS are virtually zero. Liberals and Conservatives alike pushed the AIDS hysteria to level 10 in the 80s/early 90s, wouldn't be surprised if the SJWs and TradCons joined forces again to push a re-packaged "anyone can get AIDS" agenda today.

What is your opinion of Aids statistics in "Sub-Saharan" Africa, especially in Southern Africa? I fully understand that HIV has a diagnostic criteria and presumably this criteria is equally applied wherever in the world people try to establish HIV prevalence. But I have problems...

Male homosexuality, or more broadly "Men who have Sex with Men", and intravenous drug use are no more prevalent in Southern Africa than anywhere else in the world. So why are HIV rates in Southern Africa orders of magnitude higher than, really, anywhere else at all? The way HIV is explained in medical circles really means that they consider it a reliable indicator of "slutiness" in whatever group is being measured. While they obviously don't state this directly since it is politically incorrect/impolite, I don't see how one could reach a different conclusion. So why is Southern Africa supposedly at the centre of the epidemic?

People have come up with all sorts of exotic explanations such as the supposed African practice of "dry sex" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_sex), or weird theories about eating monkeys and what not. I really don't buy it. Not that I support him completely, but I understand why the previous South African president, Thabo Mbeki, made a big stink about mainstream HIV statistics and medical practices. Got himself into massive trouble internationally and was derided as a "Quack", "Aids Denier" etc. by the New York Times and others. Mainstream (Western) science are basically saying that Sub-Saharan Africans, especially those from Southern Africa, are the worlds biggest sluts. From a local perspective it just seems ridiculous. With homosexual men you can buy the "sluttiness" argument for the obvious reason that you are dealing with two male sex drives and brains. So many homosexual men have enormous numbers of partners. Also, anal sex is much more likely to lead to infection. But the general heterosexual black population in Southern Africa is not having the kind of massive multi-partner sex that would lead to HIV spreading as fast as it supposedly has.

I have no answers, obviously, but the whole situation has always seemed weird to me. As far as I know no scientist has come up with a non-ridiculous explanation for the prevalence of HIV at such high rates in the heterosexual black population in Southern Africa.