3 ms·
> Am I nuts for thinking along these lines? Probably. Unless some "gay gene" was identified and this virus was targeting carriers very specifically, any weapon
by outworlder 4y ago
> Am I nuts for thinking along these lines?
Probably. Unless some "gay gene" was identified and this virus was targeting carriers very specifically, any weapon like this is completely indiscriminate. Even if they somehow deliberately infected them, it would not be contained in the community for long.
> Feels like the gay community have been the most affected, which seems odd to me.
It can be sexually transmitted (among other vectors). Homosexual behavior is not the issue. Unprotected sex is (much higher chance if it's anal, as in most sexually transmitted diseases). And, it seems, any sort of close contact is sufficient. It's understandable that the gay community would be the canary for this issue. There's also some percentage of the population that will engage in unprotected sex regardless of orientation.
- lwhi 4y agoI like your candour :) > It can be sexually transmitted (among other vectors). Homosexual behavior is not the issue. Unprotected sex is (much higher chance if it's anal, as in most sexually transmitted diseases). And, it seems, any sort of close contact is sufficient. It's understandable that the gay community would be the canary for this issue. There's also some percentage of the population that will engage in unprotected sex regardless of orientation. I thought all that was needed was close physical contact (rubbing against a sore, sharing a towel etc). I don't think unprotected sex / anal sex is the issue here. Definitely doubt a condom is going to help much .. .. and as far as I know, Monkey Pox isn't a sexually transmitted disease. All seems very odd to me. However, as for me being nuts; maybe there is a high probability :)