3 ms·
They're using terrible, imprecise terms. Homosexual vs heterosexual sex is irrelevant here. What matters is the orifice/method (and whether giving or receivin
by curryst 5y ago
They're using terrible, imprecise terms. Homosexual vs heterosexual sex is irrelevant here.
What matters is the orifice/method (and whether giving or receiving). The CDC has data here [1]. Anal sex has a much, much higher rate of transmission (especially receptive), regardless of the gender of the participants. Oral sex has almost no transmission, regardless of the gender of the participants.
Just as a counterpoint to the "gay AIDS" narrative, AIDS is extremely low in the lesbian community because I don't think there are even any high-risk sexual activities available.
It's kind of humorous to me that lesbians are above the straight community on the "STDs as a judgement of moral purity" scale. Somebody tell the TV pastors that they're going to have to rework it.
1. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/estimates/riskbehaviors.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/estimates/riskbehaviors.html
- thaumasiotes 5y ago> Homosexual vs heterosexual sex is irrelevant here. > What matters is the orifice/method (and whether giving or receiving). No, this isn't what matters. Anal sex has a higher rate of transmission. Receptive sex (of any variety) has a higher rate of transmission. But that isn't what matters. What matters is the sexual behavior of the community as a whole. The higher transmission rate of anal sex is not enough to explain why heterosexual sex was so insignificant as a vector for AIDS -- heterosexual sex is safer, but there's much, much more of it! But the only way to participate in the gay sexual culture of the period, which is what caused the problem, was by having gay sex.