Conference quark::human_relations-v1

She should tell the guy to take a hike.  Having an AIDS test once doesn't
make it safe to not use a condom, especially if multiple partners are
involved.  It also seems that he'd prefer to put all the burden (and most
of the risk) on her.

If the two of them enter into a monagamous relationship, get AIDS tests and
continue to use condoms for at least six months, then get another test and
if that test is negative, it's somewhat less risky to dispense with the
condom (though what is she using for contraception?) 

But my reaction is that the guy wants to put his convenience ahead of hers
(and her health), and that doesn't make for a good relationship.

				Steve

This is a bizzarre situation... Aside from abstinence, a condom is
the only way to have (relatively) safe sex. AIDs will not
necesarily show up in a blood test right away. It can be dormant
for quite a while (5-7 years is it?)

Frankly, it sounds like this guy wants to f**k your friend, literally
and figuratively. She would be entirely and completely out her mind
not to INSIST on a condom.

just MHO.

dee

ps Obligitory referral: For more onformation on AIDS and HIV, contact your
   local chapter of the AIDs action committee, or send me mail and I'll send
    some stuff.  
   

I just realized that the first paragraph of my last reply could be 
misinterpeted... the *virus* can be dormant for along time (5-7 years) 
before you develop AIDS, and as Steve said, it can take a while to show up in a
blood test. 

dee

    I echo the previous comments -- something's definitely fishy here.
    If the relationship has progressed far enough for sex, I would think
    that both partners should be willing to take the steps needed
    to be safe, and that means the continued use of condoms,
    abstention, etc. until all the tests and promises are made for a 
    monogamous relationship.  
    
    That sort of request might make me paranoid about _his_ HIV
    status... if he's having sex with other women, he certainly can't
    prove that he isn't carrying HIV that easily, so your friend 
    should remain careful (or better yet, get out of it completely!).
    
    I was under the impression that one reasonable way to be certain you 
    weren't carrying HIV was to abstain/be_safe for six months or so, then 
    take a test (easier said than done for some people, though).  Isn't there 
    some amount of time that it takes between when someone is exposed and 
    when the virus will show up on the tests?  [This is essentially 
    what Steve said in .1, is that generally true?  I've seen this
    in magazine articles and other discussions about HIV].
    
    Of course, no methods are foolproof.  It's a strange world
    we live in...  always best to play it safe when your life 
    could be at risk.
    
    /Mitch.
    

    The "general wisdom" is that it may take "up to" six months after
    you become infected for an HIV antibody test to show a positive
    result.  But the six months isn't written in stone, it could be
    longer.
    
    There are also a number of other STDs out there which are much more
    prevalent and contagious than AIDS.  One problem the medical community
    is seeing is that with the focus on AIDS, which is still relatively
    uncommon, people are forgetting about herpes, syphillis,
    and a number of other "no longer fashionable" STDs which are more
    likely to get you than AIDS.  True, these other diseases can be
    cured or arrested if detected early enough, but they've been forgotten
    to such an extent that they're spreading faster than they did in
    years past.
    
    Keep in mind, also, that the greatest risk of HIV transmission is
    from male to female.
    
    My view is that there should not be an inequality in responsibility,
    be it for contraception or disease prevention.  Given that the most
    reliable method of preventing disease transmission, other than
    abstinence, is a condom, the guy in question should willingly use
    a condom until such a time that both partners agree that it is
    no longer necessary.  (And with this guy, from the sounds of him,
    I wonder if that time would ever come.)
    
    					Steve

    Re .0 - it makes me think of a news story I heard last year, about a
    woman who was HIV+ who would go to bars every night and pick up men,
    and sleep with them without condoms.  Her rationale: "If I have to die,
    I'm going to take as many people with me as I can."
    
    I heard a program on the radio about HIV testing - there's a higher
    percentage of "false negatives/positives" than was realized so the
    doctor recommended that if you tested negative, you should wait 3-4
    weeks and take another test just to be sure (this is aside from the ~6
    months).  
    
    And, reiterating what Steve said - right now there's a gonnorhea
    epidemic in the NY/NJ area, a result of the emphasis on AIDS testing at
    the expense of other STDs.  The cases they've been discovering are all
    in advanced stages; apparently a lot of people don't have any symptoms
    in the early phases.
    
    I think your friend ahould tell this guy where to go (even if he does
    agree to use a condom).
    
    
    Ginny

.2> the only way to have (relatively) safe sex. AIDs will not
.2> necesarily show up in a blood test right away. It can be dormant
.2> for quite a while (5-7 years is it?)
    
    By 3 months, 80% of those infected will test positive with Elisa and
    Western Blot, by 6 months, 99.5% will test positive.
    
    re:.0
    
    I think you're assuming too much about the guy, namely that he's having
    unsafe sex with other women, and that because he's not yet ready for a
    "couple relationship" that's somehow significant.
    
    I see a lot of speculation in .0 and the responses that follow.
    
    Personally, I think his attitude is legitimate.
    
    If I were in a relationship and we were having unprotected sex, I'd
    sure as hell want her to a) abstain from sex with others, or b) if she
    does sleep with others, to practice safe sex.

    
>     I think you're assuming too much about the guy, namely that he's having
>     unsafe sex with other women, and that because he's not yet ready for a
>     "couple relationship" that's somehow significant.
    
    Ahem.  If he doesn't want a "couple relationship", that sort of 
    implies that he has (or wants) other partners.  Actually, we can
    examine (okay, speculate) both possibilities:
    
    	* He has no other partners:  He's serious enough to be with her
          for sex, but will not be in a "couple relationship"??
    	  If I were her, I wouldn't trust my life to someone like that.
    	  He's saying "I don't want to use a condom, so make sure
    	  everyone else does so I won't get an STD, but I don't 
    	  want a serious relationship with you."  If this is true, 
    	  doesn't it sound like all he wants from her is sex?  
    
    	* He has/wants other partners:  IMHO, this is the default
    	  assumption that _she_ should make.  In this case, there's no
    	  guarantee that any of his other partners are _not_ carrying
    	  an STD, so if she wants to be safe, she should deny his
    	  request and insist on protection, or get out of it entirely.
    
    The common thing here is that if he's not serious about her, she 
    should not let him get away with something serious, and potentially 
    dangerous, just for his own pleasure.

        
>     Personally, I think his attitude is legitimate.
    
    I don't.  If he wants safe sex without a monogamous, "couple
    relationship", he should use a condom.  If she wants to be safe 
    from him, she should insist that he use a condom (and perhaps
    take other steps as well).
    
>     If I were in a relationship and we were having unprotected sex, I'd
>     sure as hell want her to a) abstain from sex with others, or b) if she
>     does sleep with others, to practice safe sex.
    
    You said it yourself: "If I were in a _relationship_."  Clearly 
    these two aren't, or aren't in a relationship of enough merit to provide
    for safe unprotected sex.  Sure, he should insist that she be safe.
    Likewise, she should also insist that he be safe.  It's a two-way 
    street.
    
    Just MHO.
    
    /Mitch.
    

.8> He's saying "I don't want to use a condom, so make sure
.8> everyone else does so I won't get an STD, but I don't 
.8> want a serious relationship with you."
    
    Why isn't he saying "I'm not ready to get emotionally involved with
    you, or anyone for that matter, but I like you, and would like to get
    to know you better, and that might include sex, if we get along well
    and we both want it. I want to be safe and would rather not have to
    wear a condom, so I'm asking that if you have sex with anyone else,
    you practice safe sex, so as not to become infected with HIV."
    
    I know it's more fun to assign some shadier, sneakier intentions to the
    guy, but the facts in .0 (all in the 2nd paragraph) don't justify it,
    IMO.

    
    
    I would suggest waiting to have sex with him until he was
    sure he wanted a "couple relatonship", and then both of you
    get tested at the same time by the same lab.  From what I
    gained at the Aids Education Seminar put on by DEC, the
    HIV virus can show up in blood tests within 3 months of 
    initial infection.  However, a six month retest is suggested.
    You can be infected with the HIV virus and never show symptoms
    of it as it may continue to be dormant.  Also, it doesnt 
    necessarily mean it is going to progress to full blown
    AIDS.  
    
    Use a condom each and every time if you do choose to have
    sex until the results of the three and six month tests
    are available and come back negative.  
    
    Michele

    re .9, I agree that what you describe could be the way his mind is
    working.  His reasoning could be as innocent as that.  He may not
    deliberately be trying to use or deceive anyone.  We do live in
    confusing and interesting times as far as sex and relationships go.
    
    Lorna
    

    
    	Well, I'll wade in here to put in my two cents and say...
    	for me...I wouldn't want to have any sex (protected or not)
    	with someone who is telling the that he is planning to have
    	sex with other people. It keeps the whole thing pretty 
    	simple for me. 
    
    	Old fashioned..perhaps. C'est la vie.
    
    	Dotty

    re .12, well, it keeps it simple for you, if that's the way you want to
    live.  Some people choose abstinance if they don't have a monogamous 
    relationship, while others would rather have multiple partners if
    they're not currently in a couple relationship and for those of us who
    had previously enjoyed this lifestyle, things are a little more
    complicated these days and we have to stop and decide how we're going
    to deal with the changes.  
    
    For those of us who enjoyed taking full advantage of reaching adulthood 
    after the pill and before AIDS (that brief, glorious era), things
    aren't so simple anymore.  :-(
    
    Lorna
     

    I would advise her to run like h*ll.  Not ready for a couples
    relationship?  But *real* ready to "couple" with no protection....
    
    In the (paraprhased) words of a standup comic I saw on A&E late one
    night, a lot of guys think wearing a condom is like taking a shower
    wearing a raincoat.  But in these times, NOT wearing a condom is like
    taking a shower wearing a *radio*.
    
    Leslie

>    Why isn't he saying "I'm not ready to get emotionally involved with
>    you, or anyone for that matter, but I like you, and would like to get
>    to know you better, and that might include sex, if we get along well
>    and we both want it. I want to be safe and would rather not have to
>    wear a condom, so I'm asking that if you have sex with anyone else,
>    you practice safe sex, so as not to become infected with HIV."
    
    Unfortunately, he's leaving out the _other_ thing she has to do so as
    not to become infected with HIV: to practice safe sex with him as well. 
    
    I don't think his intentions are shady or sneaky -- he doesn't want to
    use a condom but he wants to preserve the illusion that he's preserving
    his health.  Those intentions are common and understandable.  That
    doesn't make them well thought-out.
    
    Ray

    In my own opinion, I can't understand why a woman would even CONSIDER
    staying with this person after he said such a thing to her...
    
    

    re .16, maybe because she thinks there might be something good in it for
    her, too?  Maybe he's one of the most attractive & interesting men
    she's ever known, and the thought of passing up some kind of a
    relationship with him makes life seem unbearably dull and boring in
    contrast.  Maybe if AIDS didn't exist, she wouldn't care who else he
    had sex with as long as she could be one of them.  Maybe she either is
    having or wants to have sex with other people herself.  Maybe she's
    like a couple relationship, but is willing to settle for less if she
    finds a person desirable enough.  Who knows.
    
    Lorna
    

    RE. -.17
    
    
    Maybe if this woman told this man that is against her principles to 
    sleep with other people during a relationship he would respect her 
    more and commit with her?
    
    OR...
    
    She can go buy a body rubber and hope for the best...hahahaha<

    re .18, maybe this woman thinks that people who respect others, based on
    who they have sex with, are jerks.
    
    I view people's sex lives as a matter of their own personal choice, not
    criteria as to whether they deserve my respect.  
    
    Lorna
    
    
    

    re- .19
    
    To each his own...
    

>                   -< People will be people, unfortunately >-
    
    Hey, wuddya expect in a conference called HUMAN_relations?
    
    Ray

    Hold it...  LEt's back up and re-group a bit.  
    
    
    First of all, if the guy means one thing and says something different,
    Then he needs to SAY what he means.
    
    
    Second thing, the more people invovled in sex without a condum the more 
    the chances of aids slipping in.  "I promise to were a condumn when
    having sex with someone"  I spent 10 years in the Navy and believe me 
    when it came down to one liners... That's a classic one!  In addition,
    the there IS no garuntee that the condum will be effective in
    preventing HIV/AIDS... So the more people envovled along the line....
    the more safe sex becomes a bit less safe.  
    
    IF you can trust the guy, and you want to have sex with him, then in 
    no uncertain terms TELL HIM... 
    
    1)  I'll get tested.... you get tested ... we wait six months.
    
    2)  I'll have sex with you... ONLY if you have sex with me and we BOTH
    have sex with NO ONE ELSE.... (It's the ONLY SAFE way!)
    
    Stasticially, a condumn reduces the chances of contracting AIDS.. it
    does not PREVENT it.   And from the senerio you've described if you 
    choose to have sex with more then one guy, or he chooses to have sex 
    with more then one girl.... You'd both be better off in taking a gun 
    with 10 cylinders... putting in one bullett, and play russian roulette.
    
    ESPECIALLY when you add in the other various problems along with the 
    HIV/AIS virus... Further you should consider that the more commone 
    social dieses' are becoming more and more varilant, and alot more  
    harder to treat, and some of them CAN'T be treated.
    
    No this attitude of 'promise me' and the implications of what it means 
    should be cleared up now!  And feel free to tell him if he does intend
    to have sex with more than just you.... regardless how much he promises 
    he's going to use a condum.  Tell him to take a hike, your life means 
    too much to you to play games.
    
    THat is UNLESS he's going to get continual HIV testing and willing to 
    wait the 6 months after each test.... Remember, a condum is good, but 
    it's NOT a garuntee that the user will not contract HIV... the only 
    way to be sure of not getting it is to test, make sure neither of you 
    have it, then abstain from sex with ANYONE else.  
    
    Morals aren't at issue here, it's a matter of your own health and well 
    being.  
    
    Now then, For what it's worth, my personal opinion on the guy, is he 
    should either say what he means, that is if Mike is correct in his 
    assumption.  Or... tell him to take a hike, you don't need any
    slim-balls hanging around.  
    
    But, that's my own opinion on it, you see, I don't believe in
    'settling' for something.  And it sounds like this is what you want 
    to do.  He doesn't want a magnanimous relationship, hell from the way 
    you describe it, he doesn't even want a friendship, he just wants to 
    drill you to the wall.  (Please forgive the terminology... but I use 
    it to 'illustrate' the point).  He doesn't want to make love with you,
    he wants to dip his quik.  Swap belly sweat... etc. etc. etc. etc.
    
    So much for IMHO and things for you to consider.
    
    Skip  

    re .22, Skip, you certainly have a way with words!  :-)
    
    Not to make light of a serious topic, but I admit some of your
    descriptions gave me a chuckle.
    
    (Also, thanks for the opinions.  I will pass them along to my friend.)
    
    Lorna
    

    Re. 23,
    
    These are 'stereo-typical' comments that a guy would make who was only 
    intersted in 'sex'.  I made them with the thought that they'd get 
    my point across more effectively.  (Sometimes you can drive home a 
    point with a chuckle more efficently then with a hammer).
    
    Thanks.
    ;-)
    Skip

    Tell him to take up of hobby of HIKING is he crazy or something?

    re .24, but what if the woman feels the same way about the guy?
    
    Does that mean they're in love?  :-)
    
    Lorna
    

    Huh?  I'm not sure what you mean... but, 
    
    If she likes the idea of swapping belly sweat... then in means
    they're in lust.  I like to think 'Love' is a bit more complicated 
    then that.  
    
    Skip  

    re .27, I was making a joke.
    
    I think love is more complicated than that, too, but I don't *like* to
    think it.  I more grudgingly acknowledge it.
    
    Lorna
    

    I was joking also... ahh well... guess I'll stick to visual
    descriptions and leave the more subtle bit's of humor along.
    
    >I more grudgingly acknowledge it.
    
    Hmmmm sounds almost ominous... think I'll leave it alone though.
    
    ;-)
    Skip

    re:.14
    
    Don't be silly, having sex w/o a condom is not like taking a shower
    wearing a radio.
    
    Depending on your particular lifestyle and testing habits for you and
    your SO, you can be quite safe from HIV, without using prophylactics.
    
    To those who say "assume your SO is HIV+" ... once you do that, why
    would you even WANT to have sex with that person again, condom or not?

>    To those who say "assume your SO is HIV+" ... once you do that, why
>    would you even WANT to have sex with that person again, condom or not?
    
    Because you still love that person?
    
    Ray

    Re.30
    
    
    Mike, sorry but she's right.  It's one thing to have sex with a single 
    partner, but the more people to start getting envovled in it, the
    higher the risk gets, and from the sound of it, he doesn't care if she 
    gets envovled with others... condumns aren't a 100% effective...
    (REMEMBER ???) and it stands to reason after a comment like that, that
    he WILL probably have sex with more then one partner... So there you 
    further increase the odds... and if he has the same understanding with 
    them.... the odds increase even further!
    
    HIV can show up as late as *6 YEARS* after the fact.... rare but true.
    So when you take all this into consideration.... it's a HIGH risk
    situation... with or without testing and condums.  Granted they reduce 
    the risk... but they don't make it disappear.
    
    That's why the specialists strongly recommend magnanomous relationships 
    even if it's 'just for sex' over the 'sleeping around' mentality.  If 
    you decide to 'change' sex partners... then go through the tests again.
    
    Meanwhile... the more people envovled in a 'sexual' contact chain... 
    the greater the risks.  The fewer, the better.
    
    Skip

    
     I Agree with Steve in reply .1 " Tell the guy to take a hike".
    
      I always find it surprizing when co-workers or friends tell me
    that they have had 50 or more different partners !!!!  You would
    think that after 6 or 7, they would know what kind of person
    ( physically ) they would be compatable with. Then look for 
    someone whose emotionally compatable with those physical traits.
    I use to play tennis with a guy whose been with over 200 different
    women.  And now, it's all just a blur to him...he doesn't have a
    clue as to what he wants....can't even get comfortable with one
    person for too long.   He's also VERY AFRAID  to get an AIDS test !
    
       To the basenoter.....it sounds like this guy just wants many
    partners for some time to come.
    
    
    

.31> Because you still love that person?

    Speaking only for myself, I'd try to find other ways to express love.
    
    
.32> Mike, sorry but she's right.  It's one thing to have sex with a single 
.32> partner, but the more people to start getting envovled in it, the
.32> higher the risk gets, and from the sound of it, he doesn't care if she 
.32> gets envovled with others... condumns aren't a 100% effective...

    It's obvious that risk rises with the # of partners ... so?

    You're assuming the guy wants to sleep around, but really, that's just
    speculation.  See .9 and .11.

>    Speaking only for myself, I'd try to find other ways to express love.
    
    Why not try to find safe ways to express lust as well?  They don't all
    involve direct mingling of bodily fluids, y'know... 
    
    Put together the two attitudes you're expressing
    
    	1) HIV+ people are impossible to have sexual feelings about
    
    	2) A guy shouldn't have to worry about safe sex, his partners
    should be taking care of safety for him
    
    and you have one way the disease spreads: Your bedpartner knows that if
    he/she tests positive you'll leave him/her (strong incentive not to get
    tested or not to tell); meanwhile you refuse to take precautions
    because you'd rather trust your bedpartner. 
    
    Ray

    re  So?
    
    
    So as I stated before if he intends to have sex with just her, he
    should SAY that.  
    
    If Aids is as promenent a concern in an individuals mind to have make this 
    statement, it would seem to me that any intelligent individual would 
    further state if THEY intended to have sex with only one person.  
    
    
    Otherwise, the assumption that they DON'T intend to be exculsive with 
    their sexual encounters is typically a 'given'.  
    
    So?  So it's logical to assume that the situation on his part is going
    to include more then a single sexual encounter.
    
    So... he has further offered to allow HER to have encounters with more 
    then a single individual....
    
    So... this increases EVEN WITH A THE USE OF A CONDUM the possibility of 
    HIV/AIDS being spread within the 'group' of individuals now envolved 
    in sexual relations.
    
    So... I don't know about you, but personally..... I would not like to 
    find myself in this type of situation.  
    
    So... It's a fact Mike... the more individuals envolved in sexual
    relationships EVEN WITH CONDUMS the larger the risks of contracting 
    harmful dieses' or virus'.  
    
    So... your comments aren't exactly very self standing or supporting.
    
    RE.35 brings up the further issue of being CERTAIN that within this 
    now multiple peopled group, EVERYONE is using their condums
    appropriatly at all times... one slip can be the first step in a now 
    suddenly large chain of individuals contracting something.
    
    So... as I said before IF he meant he was only going to have sexual 
    relations with her, 
    
    1) HE SHOULD SAY IT.
    
    2) HE should further encourage her to only have sexual relations with
    him.  Not state that if she has sexual relations with others would she 
    kindly use a condum.  
    
    Skip

    .30> Don't be silly, having sex w/o a condom is not like taking a shower
       > wearing a radio.
    
    Well, I *was* trying to glom on to the A&E comic's humor, so the
    silliness was intentional; I think, though, that the comment is all too
    true.  The radio is hermetically sealed and there's no way to tell if
    there are batteries in there...  Even if you are the qualified medical
    professional who performed and read your SO's test(s), you would have
    to be sure of the SO's whereabouts (er, make that "whomabouts" :-} ) 
    at all times.  It's hunky-dory to be loving and trusting and blindly
    confident of the monogamous nature of one's relationship.  It can also
    be suicide.  I felt that in the situation posed by the basenote, there
    was more than enough ambiguity to initiate the Monty Python rallying
    cry: "RUN AWAY!  RUN AWAY!!!"
    
    Sure there are relationships and marriages with no threat of HIV, and
    such relationships can be forged even now, but, IMO, only if the parti-
    cipants realize that unprotected sex = swapping fluids with every partner 
    each of you has *ever* had.  That's the way it works, that's one very big 
    way (however you want to define) "decent" people end up testing positive.
          
    Leslie                         

.35> Why not try to find safe ways to express lust as well?  They don't all
.35> involve direct mingling of bodily fluids, y'know... 
    
    I was referring to sex acts where a condom was necessary.
    
.35> 1) HIV+ people are impossible to have sexual feelings about
    
    I didn't say that.
    
.35> 2) A guy shouldn't have to worry about safe sex, his partners
.35> should be taking care of safety for him
    
    I didn't say that, either.

    re:.36
    
    Skip, you keep addressing what you THINK the guy is doing (eg: having
    sex with other women) and that's preventing the discussion from moving
    toward other possibilities, which are equally legitimate.

    Heard on CNN this morning:
    
    "A survey has said that of most heterosexual people who have sex with
    more than one partner, only 17% of them use condoms every time"
    
    Ugh .. what a statistic.  What a shame.
    
    Holly
    

    I had heard 20% (can't remember what station).
    

    Mike,
    
    You asked the question So?  I answered the question So?
    
    If you didn't want or expect an answer or felt the answer wasn't 
    necessary... 
    
    DON'T ASK THE QUESTION.
    
    Skip

    re:.40, .41
    
    Those survey results don't surprise me at all.
    
    Not only was the survey question loaded, "using a condom every time,"
    but the fact is that lots of heterosexuals have unprotected sex once
    they feel safe.