Guys: would you date a girl with herpes

[Art_Critic]

I believe you actually told me at one point to "stop whining"!

 

I do believe you are ill-informed - I do believe you are presenting misinformation. I'm sorry that you find that so difficult to deal with that you have to put words in my mouth.

 

Asking you to stop whining isn't an insult or meant as one..

 

I read your post and you quoted me and by the way I read your words you were whining...

 

I'm sorry that I told it the way I read it...

 

You are telling me I am ill-informed... how is that any different ?.. you have no idea who I am

 

 

How about showing me and all the other posters out there all the misinformation I have posted ?????

 

A good bit of the misinformation that I have read in this thread didn't come from me...

[macon]

"The irony is you damn well know you are putting others lives at risk to contract HSV"

 

I'm sorry? How am I doing this? Do you seriously believe HSV is life-threatening? Can someone tell me what this is if it isn't a serious lack of education!

[Trialbyfire]

This thread reminds me of the Hillary camp of debating, through character assassination.

 

Now back on track. Would I sleep with someone with an STD? No, I wouldn't. Does it make the person with STDs a bad person? Some with STDs are irresponsible people and others aren't, same as the rest of the population. Does it make me a bad person for not wanting to contract? No, it doesn't.

[Art_Critic]

I do believe you are presenting misinformation.

 

I do believe that I was corrected on any misinformation that I posted so my posts stand corrected dude..

 

What is funny though is that I was only corrected with opinions.. nobody provided any fact to correct any misinformation that I may have posted.

[macon]

"You are telling me I am ill-informed... how is that any different ?"

 

That is different because it is possible to make a judgement about someone's level of information based on written words. It is not possible to derive a judgement from the written word, which would actually require you to HEAR the words. Whining is a tone of voice. I'm amazed you think that is possible.

[Art_Critic]

"You are telling me I am ill-informed... how is that any different ?"

 

That is different because it is possible to make a judgement about someone's level of information based on written words. It is not possible to derive a judgement from the written word, which would actually require you to HEAR the words. Whining is a tone of voice. I'm amazed you think that is possible.

 

 

[macon]

""I have noticed something else within this thread. The camp that is pro-STD appears to love to negate through character assassination. The camp that is anti-contraction, negates the minimalization of the STDs."

 

I am not pro-STD at all (what does that mean?!) - I am pro-education and pro-reality. I'd also say I am pro-safe sex and anti-contraction - again a fact which you choose to ignore again and again and again and again and again ....."

 

Why don't you respond to this? As other posters have noted, you do seem to ignore posts which point out you are putting words in the mouths of others.

[tanbark813]

I think I'm done with this thread as it's devolved to the point of no return. It started out innocently enough with pandagirl asking people's opinions because of her new love interest. Apparently people like TBF and Replicant believe she should remain forever celibate and undeserving of a loving relationship. I, for one, disagree and wish her and her new man well. He sounds like a good, non-judgmental guy.

[dreamergrl]

Macon and tanbark, both of you need to review your own behaviours previous to making accusations. The situation is very pot, kettle, black.

 

I could wax eloquent with examples of such but more importantly, we all have different perspectives and are providing facts from these different perspectives. The reality is that there are two camps. Those that are attempting to convince others that it's not a big deal to contract STDs and those who don't want to contract them.

 

In minimalizing the impact of STDs, the risk is that people won't take it as seriously as it really is, thus causing the spread to increase rapidly through irresponsible behaviours.

 

Fact:

• Herpes can cause neonatal encephalitis.
  
• Herpes is a danger to people who have compromised immune systems which includes but isn't exclusive to, people with cancer, AIDS, severe burns or taking immunosuppressant medications.
  
• While HSV-1 usually resides in the mouth, it can be transferred to the genitals. The reverse holds true for HSV-2. In either situation, both viruses more than often not, loose much of their impact.
  
• If you have either virus, it is less likely that you will acquire the other in the same location, since your immune system has already built up resistance.
  

To expand on what another member stated previously, those of you with STDs may lose some of your options for people who will sleep with you but the only people who can make you lose your value, are yourselves.

 

There's no one who's universally attractive. To expect that people will be okay acquiring a disease they don't have by minimalizing it, isn't realistic or effective.

 

1. Who the hell said catching an STD is no big deal?

2. You can't just blame the spread of herpes on "irresponsible people". When was the last time you told someone to get screened for HSV 1 before kissing them?

3. If "If you have either virus, it is less likely that you will acquire the other in the same location, since your immune system has already built up resistance." were true, there would be less then 40-45 million Americans with HSV 2. What IS true is the fact that it's harder to get an INFECTION. You can just as easily carry one orally and two genitally. HSV 1 is actually more dangerous should it spread to other areas (such as your eye) then HSV 2 genitally. HSV 1 and 2 only share 50% of the DNA - and display different infections (fever blisters and sores).

4. The reason why people lose value is because of people who display uneducated opinions about a disease. "Promiscuous people have herpes" "I carefully choose my partners, don't date whores, and stay away from skanks so I don't get an STD".

[macon]

"What is funny though is that I was only corrected with opinions.. nobody provided any fact to correct any misinformation that I may have posted."

 

Do you only believe facts if a web link is provided? Personally I've read books - I would also say that firsthand experience is invaluable. I have literature at home - I have also had information given to me by doctors - I'm sorry that this is not the link to wikipedia that you seem to need to prove a fact.

[Replicant]

"The irony is you damn well know you are putting others lives at risk to contract HSV"

 

I'm sorry? How am I doing this? Do you seriously believe HSV is life-threatening? Can someone tell me what this is if it isn't a serious lack of education!

 

Cloud the disease all you want with your junk rhetoric. Your bias is that you have it therefor you stand on high ground to attack those opposed to various aspects of contraction and prevention which ultimately becomes YOUR responsibility regardless of how you got it. Regarding mortality, i do know that exists with infants alone. But you cannot speak for everyones immune capabilities and the level in which it will effect them. The threat is to their health incurring and incurable disease, however you wish to distort reality.

 

If attacking my education is the best you've got to try to trump the reality of an incurable disease, i don't blame others for calling you a whiner.

[dreamergrl]

Thank you. I do agree.

 

I have noticed something else within this thread. The camp that is pro-STD appears to love to negate through character assassination. The camp that is anti-contraction, negates the minimalization of the STDs.

 

You can be "anti getting into an accident" but that doesn't mean it wont happen.

 

No one is PRO STD either. We are PRO on being educated, not ignorant, not self righteous, and unbiased. No one here is saying "Go get an STD is cool".

[macon]

"If attacking my education is the best you've got to try to trump the reality of an incurable disease, i don't blame others for calling you a whiner."

 

Replicant, you have stated that Herpes is life-threatening. That is 100% incorrect. You clearly have absolutely no education about HSV whatsoever, yet you hold strong views. You, and others like you, concern me greatly.

[Replicant]

You can be "anti getting into an accident" but that doesn't mean it wont happen.

 

No one is PRO STD either. We are PRO on being educated, not ignorant, not self righteous, and unbiased. No one here is saying "Go get an STD is cool".

 

Considering the population of the USA, how does a number like 40 million infected cases which you stated the other day reflect "Pro-Education"? Seems more to me like Pro-Epidemic through political correctness.

[dreamergrl]

 

This thread is supposed to be about whether or not we would date someone who has herpes and it seems to have turned into people who have herpes telling the people who don't have that we are ill informed about a disease that we don't want to contract and that we don't know what we are talking about because we don't have herpes..

I find that logic absurd...

 

I don't have to own a gun to know that it can kill or that it can have horrible consequences on life if used improperly.

 

I don't feel that I should have to have a medical degree in herpes in order to make an opinion to whether I want the disease or not..

 

The absolute worst argument that I have seen on this thread is that since you don't have herpes then you cannot know anything and you should therefore only believe what is posted by people who have herpes.

 

 

 

What I do know about herpes and STD's has kept me free of them for 45 years to date so I'm guessing that I know enough..

 

I was taught safe sex as a child by a mother/nurse that dealt with Aids patients on a daily basis.

I was also taught about testing and how important it is and how important knowing your partner and asking them to be tested is..

 

It is a shame to me that some posters instead of asking someone to explain a post or position that they call you ignorant or ill-informed.

 

I have seen that word used by some posters who have herpes so many times in this thread that you can not count them all.

 

The word ignorant is used so many times because people make uneducated remarks. People assume that just because the lead a certain life style they are free and clear. People assume the worst about those with an STD because of the social stigmata that carries with it.

 

And I don't care what your learned about safe sex as a child - it's irrelevant with HSV and HPV because a condom doesn't guard you. Both live in the boxer shorts region, so there's no safe sex when it comes to these diseases.

[macon]

Replicant, are you unconcerned about learning the facts about something that you're speaking so passionately about? You've just learned that your misconception about HSV being life-threatening is totally incorrect. Don't you think it might be a good idea to get some correct information before you continue arguing about this?

[dreamergrl]

Considering the population of the USA, how does a number like 40 million infected cases which you stated the other day reflect "Pro-Education"? Seems more to me like Pro-Epidemic through political correctness.

 

The numbers rise mainly because so many people don't realize they have it. They don't show symptoms. Many don't realize then when taking a blood test, a certain time needs to pass before you are considered clear. Many people don't understand viral shedding, and think that you can't pass it when you don't have an ob. Many people don't realize HSV and HPV isn't part of the standard STD testing.

 

So those of us who do understand, and are educated try to explain to other people. Because if more people would be educated, it wouldn't spread as much.

 

I also believe that if so many people weren't so biased and nasty to those who have a disease, people wouldn't be as scared to get tested or tell their partner. It doesn't make it right - but society plays a big part in how people react and handle these situations.

[Replicant]

Replicant, are you unconcerned about learning the facts about something that you're speaking so passionately about? You've just learned that your misconception about HSV being life-threatening is totally incorrect. Don't you think it might be a good idea to get some correct information before you continue arguing about this?

 

I don't feel i need to re-quote or re-post information that has already been presented here by many others from valid disease centers..period. Like i said i know very well mortality can effect infants alone..period. Once again that is a percentage of risk. The disease is life altering and permanent, once again you cannot speak for everyones immune systems and how it will effect them so downplaying ferrying a disease over to a partner is not realistic to me regardless of safe sex/suppressants. What may effect you to a limited degree may effect them seriously, honestly how can you speak for someone else? That's gambling with other peoples health. If statistically there is 40 million with such a disease in the USA and their total population is around 300 million circa 2007. To me that is a pretty disgusting figure for a first world nation especially one whom points fingers at third world countries to get their act together in regards to STD's.

 

Like i said, others have linked to relevant disease information here so if you feel i should do it over again..well tough. If i did not know something, i did take the time to read through seeing as they linked to it as part of what they were stating. Statistical studies are just a baseline, anyways. There always will be opposite extremes. Besides pharmaceutical companies will always paint a certain picture, there's billions of dollars to be made here.

[macon]

I am not speaking for someone else - I have read the facts. HSV is not a life-threatening disease. That's a medical fact. Why are you saying it is?

[macon]

Replicant, you have also said I am putting other people's lives at risk. The facts are I have a non life-threatening virus, and I am honest and open and I practice safe sex. How can this put lives at risk?

[Art_Critic]

And I don't care what your learned about safe sex as a child - it's irrelevant with HSV and HPV because a condom doesn't guard you. Both live in the boxer shorts region, so there's no safe sex when it comes to these diseases.

 

 

See.. now that is speaking misinformation..

 

It is being spoken out of not being educated enough or being ill-informed or is it just ignorance ?

 

According to the CDC:

 

The surest way to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, including genital herpes, is to abstain from sexual contact, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and is known to be uninfected.

 

Genital ulcer diseases can occur in both male and female genital areas that are covered or protected by a latex condom, as well as in areas that are not covered. Correct and consistent use of latex condoms can reduce the risk of genital herpes.

 

Persons with herpes should abstain from sexual activity with uninfected partners when lesions or other symptoms of herpes are present. It is important to know that even if a person does not have any symptoms he or she can still infect sex partners. Sex partners of infected persons should be advised that they may become infected and they should use condoms to reduce the risk. Sex partners can seek testing to determine if they are infected with HSV. A positive HSV-2 blood test most likely indicates a genital herpes infection.

 

http://www.cdc.gov/std/herpes/STDFact-herpes.htm

[Replicant]

The numbers rise mainly because so many people don't realize they have it. They don't show symptoms. Many don't realize then when taking a blood test, a certain time needs to pass before you are considered clear. Many people don't understand viral shedding, and think that you can't pass it when you don't have an ob. Many people don't realize HSV and HPV isn't part of the standard STD testing.

 

So those of us who do understand, and are educated try to explain to other people. Because if more people would be educated, it wouldn't spread as much.

 

I also believe that if so many people weren't so biased and nasty to those who have a disease, people wouldn't be as scared to get tested or tell their partner. It doesn't make it right - but society plays a big part in how people react and handle these situations.

 

This makes it almost sound scandalous, if this was the case. Then seeing the average person gets a check up once a year on average. Screenings should be in place for HSV seeing we get blood work done every time (all ages), if the government or health officials felt prevention was a means of eradication of an incurable disease you can bet it would exist on a higher level.

 

Like i stated previous, there is too much money to be made here so leaving it up to peoples various irresponsibilities like with any communicable disease will allow it to eventually get way out of control. This does not just apply to herpes.

[macon]

"it's irrelevant with HSV and HPV because a condom doesn't guard you. Both live in the boxer shorts region, so there's no safe sex when it comes to these diseases.

 

See.. now that is speaking misinformation.."

 

How is that misinformation? Perhaps she should have said "100% guard you", but still, what you pasted said exactly the same:

 

"Genital ulcer diseases can occur in both male and female genital areas that are covered or protected by a latex condom, as well as in areas that are not covered. Correct and consistent use of latex condoms can reduce the risk of genital herpes."

 

Yes, a condom can help reduce the risk, but it does not 100% protect. This is because HSV is site specific - you pass the virus through infected skin-to-skin contact. If the area you get HSV is one that is covered by the condom, then yes, a condom reduces the likelihood of skin to skin contact and so reduces the risk of transference. If the area you get HSV is not covered by the condom, then a condom does not reduce the risk at all. Again, though, it is down to skin-to-skin contact, so if that area does not come into contact with your partner's body, then the risk is reduced again. If there are no symptoms present then the risk is even more greatly reduced - most doctors speculate that viral shedding, if it exists, occurs on less than 5% of days on average.

[macon]

Again, Replicant, I'll ask you -

 

You have said I am putting other people's lives at risk. The facts are I have a non life-threatening virus, and I am honest and open and I practice safe sex. How can this put lives at risk?

[Krytie TV]

Wow, I hope that if I ever get genital herpes that I don't become one of these people trying to convince others it doesn't matter.

 

"What do you mean you won't sleep with me because I have herpes? Come on, you probably already have it you ignorant moron... now let's do it! Woohoo!"