I presume he contracted aids by having unprotected sex with an aids infected person.
Nothing to do with his sexuality.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 13:48,
archived)
What in fuck's name are you on about?
His sexuality increased his risk of catching AIDS because of the lack of understanding of the disease at the time, what I was saying was that this changed nothing about the fact that he was immensely talented and changed rock music forever.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 13:52,
archived)
I think he thought you meant
that his sexuality was his downfall
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 13:53,
archived)
Yes, implyed strongly by the sentance
"His sexuality and the fact that his lifestyle was eventually his downfall"
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 13:56,
archived)
"....doesn't change [the fact that he was massively talented]"
Arsehole.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 14:01,
archived)
^This
She was saying that being gay doesn't affect anything, and neither does his lifestyle. Not that gayness make AIDS.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 14:05,
archived)
So are you claiming that Homosexuality is the cause for AIDs ?
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 13:54,
archived)
Not in the slightest
Promiscuity and unprotected sex increase the risk of contracting it, and although there are just as many promiscuous straight people as there are promiscuous gay people it is the gay deaths that get focused on because we still live in a largely homophobic society and it is yet another way of "demonising" homosexuals.
Please stop trying to put words in my mouth and accusing me of being homophobic. I am bisexual, I have gay, lesbian and bisexual friends, and I am going to Pride this weekend. So stop being confrontational.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 13:58,
archived)
Please stop trying to put words in my mouth and accusing me of being homophobic. I am bisexual, I have gay, lesbian and bisexual friends, and I am going to Pride this weekend. So stop being confrontational.
Exactly ! It's lifestyle, not sexuality, that eventualy lead to his aids.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 14:03,
archived)
no it isn't.
"His sexuality and the fact that his lifestyle was eventually his downfall"
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 14:07,
archived)
Oh for fuck's sake
He slagged it about with loads of people - he was a whore for a while. He got AIDS by having unprotected sex. End of.
He was a lovely bloke and an amazingly talented musician, and now he's dead. Can we leave it at the please? The compo is to design a safe sex campaign, not gay bash or start fights
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 14:09,
archived)
He was a lovely bloke and an amazingly talented musician, and now he's dead. Can we leave it at the please? The compo is to design a safe sex campaign, not gay bash or start fights
I was defining them as SEPARATE THINGS
Statement:
He was an extremely talented and lovely guy.
His sexuality and the fact that his lifestyle was eventually his downfall doesn't change that
Hence:
1. His sexuality....doesn't change that.
2. The fact that his lifestyle was eventually his downfall...doesn't change that.
His lifestyle - ie engaging in frequent unprotected sex - was what resulted in his AIDS. We just agreed on that. All I was implying was that his personal life didn't change the fact he was talented.
Learn to fucking read before you accuse people of being things they're not.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 14:12,
archived)
He was an extremely talented and lovely guy.
His sexuality and the fact that his lifestyle was eventually his downfall doesn't change that
Hence:
1. His sexuality....doesn't change that.
2. The fact that his lifestyle was eventually his downfall...doesn't change that.
His lifestyle - ie engaging in frequent unprotected sex - was what resulted in his AIDS. We just agreed on that. All I was implying was that his personal life didn't change the fact he was talented.
Learn to fucking read before you accuse people of being things they're not.
It's not B3ta that's the problem
It's wankers accusing me of being something I'm not just to be confrontational.
( ,
Thu 23 Aug 2007, 14:03,
archived)