Trojan condom commercial.

Dec 02, 2006 16:36

Today on A&E I saw a commercial that said 1 in 4 people with HIV don't tell their partner that they have it because they don't know they do - then the commercial went on to plug Trojan, and showed a man kissing a woman ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 35

zermatt December 2 2006, 23:40:52 UTC
You make this sound as if homosexual males don't fuck women.

Reply

mattcanning December 2 2006, 23:53:54 UTC
Good point!! And to be honest, I hadn't thought that the guy might be bi, so I thank you for pointing out something that I missed. I consider myself very analytical but I sometimes miss things. Less often than not, but that possibility did not cross my mind ( ... )

Reply

zermatt December 2 2006, 23:55:33 UTC
Europe shows commercials with homosexuals.
Also about HIV.

It's not because you live in a retarded place (Ontario) that this goes for the rest of the world.

Reply

mattcanning December 3 2006, 01:56:24 UTC
Europe seems to be more intelligent and less criminal than North America, in general. It might be religiously oriented but I'm not sure.

Reply


anonymous December 2 2006, 23:43:12 UTC
how true very well done matt

Reply


zermatt December 2 2006, 23:52:03 UTC
Ok a more scientific reply.

There is a big difference between HIV in the Western world, and HIV in Africa. In Africa, almost everyone has it, for the medical reasons you mentioned before. This is the true AIDS epidemic, this is the biggest concern to the world I think.

In the Western world HIV is a gays disease (88%), as you pointed out, but not for the reasons you posted. HIV is a promicuity disease and simple statistics prove it. Most straight couples don't fuck around with hundreds of people.

But look at the scientific studies. Even for gays the chance of catching HIV is tiny. HOWEVER, a sizeable number of gays - and this is politically very incorrect - tends to be oversexed, and fuck everyone and everything, men and women. And this demographic, even if only 5% of the gay community, is spreading HIV among the gay community and among unsuspecting women. As they have sex with thousands of male and female partners, HIV is still spreading ( ... )

Reply

mattcanning December 3 2006, 01:47:17 UTC
I would consider it slander if it was solely promiscuity that resulted in the increased incidence of HIV for homosexuals. But as I pointed out, scientifically, their sexual activities have a higher transmission efficiency rate than for hetero couples - by far, so by the very nature of what they do sexually, they are at a higher risk for this virus. It's not simply because they are more promiscuous, even though they are as you pointed out. However, I do agree that the risk is relatively low for transmission of HIV amongst homosexuals too, but it is still vastly higher than for heteros and coupled with the greater number of homosexuals currently with HIV, that transmission rate is compounded further.

While I do give some credence to Geoff's comment that homosexuals are in some sense made to seek gratification furtively, the obvious (common sense) reason why they have more unprotected sex is because there is no risk of pregnancy. There are plenty of times where that is the only reason hetero couples use protection. Often, once a ( ... )

Reply

zermatt December 3 2006, 10:08:40 UTC
You can apply the same reasoning to black men and criminality.

You cannot stigmatise an entire community because of the actions of 5%. It's slander, it's promoting hatred, and it's illegal.

Reply

mattcanning December 3 2006, 23:08:04 UTC
You could do it if you could prove that genetically being black resulted in criminality, as you can show that scientifically, there are greater risk factors for homosexual activity and HIV. It would be the same as saying smoking results in lung cancer.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

mattcanning December 3 2006, 03:15:53 UTC
Yes, another excellent post. This post you wrote is the most important one in the last thread:

LINK

Although Linda's was pretty level too and there were some other good comments in there. At least you guys understand what I'm presenting and also explain a much better alternative to some of the current campaigining. Like you said, there are a lot of other STDs that are a lot more likely out there. The point about young people not being invincible is an important one - bodies are resilient and that's why we get away with so much. Even with my immune system as strong as it is, I got sicker than ever with pneumonia, so this kind of thing can happen.

HIV these days is also a quite manageable illness - much like diabetes. The medications for it have side effects, but they too are also manageable. It is no longer the death sentence it used to be. Mainstream media should stop treating it that way.

Reply


crazy_on_you_ December 3 2006, 05:14:53 UTC
But aren't some IV drug users heterosexual males?

Reply

mattcanning December 3 2006, 23:13:30 UTC
Yep. Linda had learned that 85% of people in Thunder Bay with HIV are heterosexual. Of course, they also happen to be IV drug users, but what the hell, that's just a minor detail right?

Reply

zermatt December 4 2006, 00:05:09 UTC
hahahaha. this one is so cheap I won't even bother to comment because you would snap. hahahahahaha.

Reply

mattcanning December 4 2006, 06:44:49 UTC
ic.

Sounds like you know something I don't.

Englighten me.

btw, that was no diss on Linda, just the presenter of that information.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up