4 ms·

>This is not assigning blame specifically. It’s discussing the origin of a disease. If you point at a character flaw and say that it allowed to spread a diseas

by treis 4y ago

>This is not assigning blame specifically. It’s discussing the origin of a disease. If you point at a character flaw and say that it allowed to spread a disease that's assigning blame. Not assigning blame would use neutral language and sound something like "British sailors spread HIV to Europe after contracting it from African prostitutes". >Would you rather it not be known and discussed? This is so slimey. Nobody is saying it should not be discussed and you know that.

prepend 4y ago
First, promiscuous is not a character flaw. Second, the promiscuity is an important factor in the spread. So it’s useful information to understand what happened to defeat future diseases. People should be treated with compassion and shouldn’t be assigned blame for things. But if a characteristic is relevant, it should be shared. I meant that would you prefer that we not discuss how the women who were part of the early spread were promiscuous? Or that we leave out the transmission chain?
- treis 4y ago
  >First, promiscuous is not a character flaw. Call a woman in your life promiscuous and let us know how it goes
boppo1 4y ago
>character flaw the other commenter was not insulting the African women. You are the one connoting promiscuity with negativity.