>>18731226
He was not interested in popularity.

He was not interested in political correctness.

He was interested in saving lives.

With that as his goal, he came to the conclusion that despite his own, personal moral conviction that sex should be saved until marriage and that people should enter solely into a lifelong, heterosexual, monogamous marriage blessed by God, the most effective method of prevention was widespread distributions of condoms, as well as graphic, detailed sexual health education to explain to people what was causing the virus, how the virus spread, and how you could reduce your chances of contracting the virus.

While others screamed about “encouraging” kids to have premarital sex, he had only one objective: To make sure those very same parents never had to hold their child, emaciated in a hospital bed, gasping for breath as death approached.

>>18731235
It's a shame, I wish that more of those fags had wasted away from AIDS in front of their families.

nobody's ever been able to explain why super-trad, homophobic Africa and Russia have record high HIV rates

Faggots aren't people, they're demons in human skin.

>>18731244
>Africa
eating bushmeat, sexual violence, etc.

>Russia
Drug use via syringe injection.

>>18731244
russians are closet cases, why do you think they're obsessed with raping other men

>>18731244
Or why Magic Johnson got AIDS when he was swimming in pussy.

>>18731237
Wrath. Enjoy burning :)

>>18731269
>magic 'no homo' johnson
i think you spelled bussy wrong

>>18731269
>Or why Magic Johnson got AIDS when he was swimming in pussy.
Magic was a notorious poonhound. Similar to Eazy-E.

>>18731265
>>18731244
>USA
Gay Republican's wives.

>>18731269
he's gay as shit, bro

Steve Jobs was gay too, he didn't actually have pancreatic cancer. He contracted AIDS during the early 80s but because he was rich he could afford drugs to suppress the virus and buy himself a few more decades, but inevitably he succumbed.

>>18731244
>third-world savaged with wicked sexual practices
>second-world shithole which is a wreck since the USSR collapsed
Meanwhile in the first-world, 16.7% lifetime risk for men-who-have-sex-with-men™, while heteros are at 0.2%.

>>18731293
all wealthy gay guys buy AIDS suppressant meds. the poorer fags can't afford them and die quickly.

File: 756341889_959050343816576(...).jpg (54 KB, 538x430)

54 KB JPG

>Sexually transmitted diarrhoea spreading rapidly among some networks of gay men in the UK, study finds

the HIV virus metastasises when shit is mixed with blood and cum in a faggot's torn up asshole

>b-but you can get HIV from women too
I know. It is important to be careful with women too. Yet I still remember the "bugchasing culture" reports. And as far as I know, "bugchasing" not a thing for anyone except pillowbiters.

>>18731313
>>18731260
>reposting posts made on Urban Dictionary in 2005 by homophobic 12 year olds

>>18731313
>the HIV virus metastasises when shit is mixed with blood and cum in a faggot's torn up asshole

The immune system reacts with an inflammatory response at the presence of semen in the rectum, which it interprets as a foreign substance. This does not happen with vaginal sex as the vaginal chemistry is set up in such a way as to suppress the normal immuno response when semen enters it.

in 1983, faggots in San Fran staged a march against a proposal to close the city's bathhouses while wearing towels and chanting "Today the bathhouse, tomorrow the gas chamber!"

>>18731354
They were right, telling them to stop being so disgusting and promiscuous is an attack on their identity, it's who they are.

>>18731354
the bathhouses weren't closed of course because Dianne Feinstein was the mayor. yet Ed Koch just went and closed them down in NYC despite widespread rumors that he was gay.

>>18731244
africans and russians have lots of homosexuals dawg

>>18731359
those who point that out don't quite understand faggots' mindset. they all hope to get AIDS and die as quickly as possible.

>>18731226
That's not true, HIV was everywhere in the 80s-90s. My dad got it just from sitting down on a wet seat in a dirty public toilet in NY.

File: Screenshot_20261009-084135~2.jpg (56 KB, 720x422)

56 KB JPG

>>18731226
>>18731269
Have you seen his son? Apple don't fall far from the tree.

I used to live in an artists colony neighborhood with a lot of gay dudes in it. They were creepy and gross, always checking you out on the street and sizing you up if you're interested in sex, not to mention the horrible rate of domestic violence they had. always starting fights, acting like bitchy women, gossiping, etc.

File: IMG_20261009_142943_217.jpg (71 KB, 738x699)

71 KB JPG

>>18731226

>>18731226
Tbh, most HIV criticism I heard is that the heart response was specifically sabotaged because the disease mostly affected gay men and the like.
>>18731354
While that is insane, AIDS discourse was actually getting to that point. The LaRouche movement actually proposed an internment camp system that got a fair amount of traction.

ITT: It occurs to nobody (certainly not /pol/ at any rate) that straightoids can also get STDs

>>18731508
See >>18731296

>>18731235
Accurate and powerful AI summary

HIV can be eliminated through frotting and killing drug dealers.

>>18731488
It baffles me how the social response to AIDS was to somehow become more tolerant to gay sex maniacs. There couldn't have been a more direct and obvious challenge to everyone involved and observing it. It's like if after WW2, everybody started burning and gassing Jews at a slow pace instead of being disgusted by seeing 6 million people die.

>>18731537
I think it's more that no one really wants to think about what they get up to behind closed doors. I know I certainly wouldn't want to know that a gay co worker spent his Saturday night in a bath house getting pissed on by multiple strangers

>>18731544
It's a real shame for humanity that drugs were invented to manage GRIDS

>>18731273
Huh?

>>18731244
1. More Christianity = More people exposed to the gospel = More reprobates = More homosexuals
2. Society doesn't waste resources trying to save people who eat feces from themselves.
Don't know about Russia, though.

>>18731226
>>18731235
>Let's spend money trying to save people who eat feces from themselves
Honestly, if you had a faggot son, would you even go to their hospital room while they "gasped for breath"? I might just to enjoy watching a fag die and let him know that in the end, I didn't love him a bit.

>>18731608
Imagine him going to reach for my hand. I'd pull it away and tell it "Don't touch me you disgusting rat."

true story. i know a guy in California who does reconstructive surgery, and among his jobs is fixing up gay boomers' old worn-out buttholes to be tight again. imagine being his parents, spending money to send your son to medical school, only for him to get a job surgically repairing old sodomites' buttholes.

>>18731508
It's just way rarer, especially with AIDS (you can sexo a chick with HIV multiple times and still have low chance of contracting it)

>>18731508
>straightoids can also get STDs
That's obvious. However, normal people aren't actively looking to get STDs. Only poofters are.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17166076/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gay-hook-up-apps-tied-to-higher-std-infection-rates-study/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/contact-tracing-stis-dating-apps-grindr-public-health/

>>18731244
Russia has an extremely robust homosexual community. They pretend it doesn't exist and cover it up with "cultural" explanations, but at the end of the day they're just men fucking each other in the ass, and they have the HIV epidemic to prove it.

>>18731244
Sodomy you dumb fag

>>18731282
Women actually can't easily spread HIV through sex. It's why the disease has always predominately affected the male homosexual community. Well, one of the reasons.

>>18731244
The USSR was reusing needles in a medical setting even during the 80s.

>>18731244
Russians and Africans are both mad gay on the downlow

>>18731537
That was absolutely not the social response to AIDS. That happened like twenty years later, at minimum. The social response to AIDS was to freak the fuck out and scream incoherently, then forget all about it after it was done.

And they absolutely moderated themselves after the AIDS epidemic. It's never going to be like it was during the late seventies. It's part of why they got acceptance eventually.

>>18732080
And anyway, what the fuck do you want society to do? Put them all in camps?

>>18731508
A straight man who only has sex in monogamous relationships, and uses a condom unless he is trying to have a child, has a very low chance of contracting an STD. The chances go up the more sexually active you are, and again increase by a lot if you don't use a condom. Guess what the typical gay person does? They are hyper promiscuous, with dozens of partners in a year, and eschew using condoms.

That's not even getting into how bad anal sex is as a vector for disease. The anus isn't meant for sex. Insertion can cause tearing and bleeding, which only increases the chances for diseases.

There's a reason gay men are exponentially more likely to contract HIV than anyone else. They are not careful as a rule about avoiding STDs, and their preferred method of sex is particularly effective at transmitting it.

>>18732080
>And they absolutely moderated themselves after the AIDS epidemic. It's never going to be like it was during the late seventies
They didn't moderate themselves, the people in that initial wave all got sick and started dying. The survivors were the ones who didn't engage in that behavior much in the first place. The ones who did are all dead now.

>>18732086
Yes. All queers should be put into extermination camps.

>>18732093
Enjoy hell :^)

>>18732091
It was a cultural thing. They're still wildly more promiscuous than average, that time was just particular.
>>18732093
Ah.

>>18732086
>society
Same-sex activity should not be legal. It doesn't have to be criminal, but it should strip you of your independence as you receive treatment. But any kind of services being provided to facilitate same-sex activities should be criminal and result in jail time or worse.

>>18732358
As if that would stop anything. The homosexual underground existed when buggery was a capital offense. And befire you bring it up, establishing some hypothetical totalitarian panopticon would not resolve the situation.
It's probably better for it to be legal anyway, purely from a harm reduction standpoint.

man-woman love
>two separate entities that are each missing something the other has
>when they mate they create a new life form that is equally made up from both of them

Man-man "love"
>no special missing part or bond between them
>no life form created by their "mating"
>only thing gained is the spread of decaying rotting feces between partners

Homosexuality is so clearly useless and inferior that it amazes me anyone tries to defend it. Homosexuals should be rightly grouped alongside grown men who suck their thumbs, enjoy touching burning stoves, or other strange and harmful acts. How can any sane, intelligent person compare the two and come to the conclusion that heterosexuals and homosexuals are equal?

>>18732423
>muh underground activity
>muh left-handedness chart
No. Permitting something will increase its prevalence, not just in public but at all. Just like the nonsense about marijuana use declining once it gets legalized has predictably failed to materialize, the same has occurred with same-sex activity. They are not equivalent to left-handed people.
>harm reduction
Unlike you I don't handwave away the existence of a common good, appealing to the fringes of society without a care in the world for ripple effects.

>>18731226
It was called gay cancer for a good reason.

>>18732447
>people ending their bloodlines isn't harm
>people engaging in inferior sexual relations isn't harm
>people making a mockery of nature isn't harm
>people tolerating bad behavior isn't harm
Liberals are mindfucked idiots. They have no idea about the common good because they don't even know what's good for themselves. There's a reason liberalism is strongly correlated with unhappiness and mental illness.

>>18732447
Gay people exist. It’s an evolutionary function of being intelligent with complex social structures. Harm reduction in this case means that if you push a behavior underground it will still occur, and if something, say a new virus is spreading through that community will not be reported. Finally, all the people forced into the closet, especially bisexuals become much more likely to transmit the disease to their heterosexual partners as well. Since you will never eliminate core human behaviors, driving them underground is a common hazard, not a common good.
>>18732454
No, liberals just try to make things better for everyone based on reality, and not fantasy. Cons and their enlarged amygdalae for example are something we just accept we have to deal with and placate their overactive fear responses as best as we’re able. We know they can’t help it. Much like gays actually.

>>18732596
>Gay people exist. It’s an evolutionary function of being intelligent with complex social structures.
Appeal to biology. All evil exists and in fact cannot by destroyed by mortal hands, merely kept at bay. And yes, restrictive sexual norms are such a way to keep it at bay.
The idea of tolerating a legal release valve for vices in order to avoid greater harm is much older than the enlightenment, and it has seen varying degress of success. Where it is more modern is in the context of sexuality, and it fails time and time again to "reduce harm". You can cling to the "left-handed" notion all you want, if you think the frequency of same-sex activity today is equal to its frequency 100 years ago you are delusional or maliciously dishonest.
>liberals just try to make things better for everyone based on reality, and not fantasy.
Your approach includes leaving an open door for homosexuals to become a majority of the population. That alone is a damning moral indictment.

>>18732605
>if you think the frequency of same-sex activity today is equal to its frequency 100 years ago you are delusional or maliciously dishonest
Are you actually retarded? The other anon never claimed this. Go back to first grade and learn to read.
>Your approach includes leaving an open door for homosexuals to become a majority of the population. That alone is a damning moral indictment.
So you just magically become homosexual? How does that happen exactly and why doesn't it happen in reverse? Oh because it's your baseless delusion, that's why.

>>18732605
If you’re finding yourself at risk of becoming gay, it’s alright. That just means you are gay, or at the very least bisexual. I know that’s an insult for you most likely, but it isn’t meant as one, and shouldn’t be one. Because you don’t just start to find the same sex attractive. Anyway, the frequency of homosexuality isn’t the issue. It’s the concealment of it that leads to problems.
>appeal to biology
A biological function is an appeal to biology? It’s just a fact of how our species evolved. You might as well start calling excretion and perspiration evil because it’s a bit yucky.

>>18732719
>Are you actually retarded? The other anon never claimed this. Go back to first grade and learn to read.
He absolutely made the claim that permisiveness/restriction is irrelevant to the "real" amount of same-sex activity.
>So you just magically become homosexual? How does that happen exactly and why doesn't it happen in reverse? Oh because it's your baseless delusion, that's why.
Permisiveness leads to increased social contagion. The "left-handedness chart" schtick is a false equivalence, the proper equivalence would be with marijuana use which never declined after being legalized, despite the promises that it would.
>>18732732
Resorting to the same old middle-school rhetoric is quite pathetic. Even the most sophisticated liberals end up using it.
>the frequency of homosexuality isn’t the issue
It absolutely is. An affront to proper sexual morality is a 'harm' to the heart of our continuity.
>It’s the concealment of it that leads to problems
Alas, evil cannot be destroyed outright. It can only be kept at bay. I don't prioritize the perspective of homosexuals here, nor should I.
>A biological function is an appeal to biology? It’s just a fact of how our species evolved. You might as well start calling excretion and perspiration evil because it’s a bit yucky.
You're confusing function with mechanism. Sexual pleasure is a mechanism, the function is procreation, which homosexuality violates. Murder and rape also occur in nature in abundance. If that's more up their alley and they refuse treatment then of course they could be provided with an option to accept exile from society.

>>18732756
Okay you clearly have no ability to understand sentences, sad.

>>18732756
>the proper equivalence would be with marijuana use
Source? your ass

>>18732447
>muh muh
Clearly you have had inane arguments about this for too long because I was not going to mention left-handedness. Nor was I arguing that tolerating homosexuality reduces incidence. I was saying that it reduces harm. Which it does, as you can then regulate it and better prevent harms that would have been endemic otherwise.

it happens because of being molested as a kid. that's how fags "reproduce", by molesting kids.

>>18732776
I read it pristinely clear. He said homosexuality being "core human behavior" is grounds to tolerate it in the open because otherwise you'd be caught by surprise at the latest strain of virus that their abhorrent lifestyle gives rise to. To me that sounds like extortion, and was downright inaccurate as during the 80's epidemic sodomy was already legal in its largest hotspots.
>>18732789
Marijuana use continues to rise today. That is not up for debate.
>>18732790
See above. I will continue to prioritize common good and human continuity over the experience of homosexuals. Extorting normal people with more and more diseases should still not be enough for your retarded harm-reduction delta, if only you weren't such a hedonist yourself and cared about second-order effects.

>>18732797
>Marijuana use continues to rise today. That is not up for debate.
Not what I meant. You are seriously illiterate, holy shit.

Faggots aren't the problem, "bisexual" men are. HIV hasn't died out because it would have died two generations of faggots ago if only they contracted it. The problem is men who fuck men AND women; an important part of HIV-positive people in southern and southeastern Africa are people who got it from their mother's womb, who had been infected by "bisexuals". HIV spreads across generations because these people keep infecting women.

>>18732797
hedonism is unrelated to this

>>18731244
those niggas are on the dl

>>18732756
>middle school rhetoric?
Do you actually think people just decide to be gay? As in they get bored and choose to bum their friends because they’re evil or something? No. People are gay or bisexual based on inherent genetic and environmental factors. It’s not any more evil than being a certain height.
>proper sexual morality
Doesn’t exist. Especially outside of what can only be defined as mutual consent.
>bizarre tirade about murder and rape, sex is ONLY about procreation
I’m sure glad we’ve got the social dynamics of paramecium. Seriously though, you’re missing the whole complex social structure thing. A wide range of species from bonobos to dolphins incorporate sexual behavior into their social structure just like humans. These things are natural and normal. Unless you think bonobos are evil? Or is this some kind of religious thing? Since if your argument is about your particular flavor of incorporeal divinity not liking anal? We can discuss this from a theological standpoint, but it really can’t be both that and a scientific one given there’s no overlap between the two.

>>18731711
Does he make a lot of money? Is he good at it? Is he happy doing it? That's all that matters for a job. Besides being illegal. Maybe.

>>18732878
>appeal to biology AGAIN
>conflating mechanism with function AGAIN
Cannibalism is moral in your twisted view of society. As long there's consent and you can regulate it, cannibalism is a-okay. You're a clown.
And the purpose of sex is 100% procreation. This is why it must be inseparable from marriage.

>>18731244
>explain why super-trad, homophobic Africa and Russia have record high HIV rates
(((vaccines)))

>>18732894
>unrelated buzzword 1
>unrelated buzzword 2
Can you stop shitting up the board? No, of course you can't. That would need you to be a little less retarded.

>>18731244
In Africa there are literal HIV Rape Armies who go around raping women and children and infecting them with HIV as a war tactic, funded by God knows who.

>>18732910
>In Africa there are literal HIV Rape Armies who go around raping women and children and infecting them with HIV as a war tactic, funded by God knows who.
nah, we ended USAID it's good now

>>18731527
I've never seen bots do three emphatic sentences and then switch to a long paragraph

>>18732440
what's harmful about sucking your thumb?

>>18732894
Okay. Let’s just calm down a little bit. Do you think people choose to be gay? Let’s not get lost in the weeds about marriage cannibalism or what not. Do you think people choose to be gay? Do you think they get up and decide that they achieve sexual arousal towards other males?

>>18733251
The stripping of agency as a segue to "if it's consensual why bother them" is all too predictable, but what I'm curious about is why earlier did you vehemently deny claiming that homosexuality doesn't increase under permisiveness, while now implying that it is a fixed demographic tied to genetics? You really do think that restrictions/permissions are irrelevant to the "true" number of homosexuals, which is also why you're a clown.
Also,
>Let’s just calm down a little bit
>Let’s not get lost in the weeds about marriage cannibalism or what not
I don't feel like letting go of that. You appealed to biology like a clown and now you feel uncomfortable with the implications so you want to pivot away? We're not doing that pal. And I'm not letting go marriage being inseparable with sex either, it's crucial to establish that the purpose and function of sexual intercourse is procreation, with pleasure being a mere mechanism. That means seeking that pleasure while sidestepping procreation is immoral and perverted: contraceptive sex, uncommitted sex(premarital, prostitution etc.), and of course sodomy, are all immoral and perverted.
Consent cannot be the sole component of sexual morality, it must be tied with the true purpose of sex - procreation.

>>18733251
>>18733273
At least the gays didn't chose the lifestyle, because that's the result of being gay being illegal and gay culture thus coming to be dominated by criminal risk-takers.

>>18733273
I didn’t appeal to biology. I stated that this is a function of the evolutionary biology of complex social organisms. You might as well argue that aerobic respiration doesn’t exist, but anyway. Given even the perception of marriage is purely cultural and subjective, I can’t really debate your personal moods there given it’s not that different from bickering with a Muslim about if pork is edible or not, because eating it is immoral and perverted or perfectly acceptable. There’s really one thing I just have to ask, assuming you don’t want to spiral into insults. Do you think people just choose to be gay? This relates to your fixation on permission. Do you think gay people choose to be gay? Surely there are bisexuals who can, by definition go both ways, but do you think homosexuals are homosexual by choice?

>>18733288
Mate it's clear that he's just a dogmatic religiontard. I don't understand why he doesn't simply say so instead of engaging in pointless arguments and avoiding your points.

>>18733309
Yah. I suppose he made it clear with all the sex, marriage, and morality somehow being critical for procreation stuff. Which given you can achieve one without the other really throws a wrench into that argument.

>>18732910
European colonialism and the CIA made them do it.

>>18733282
>gays didn't chose the lifestyle,
Queer detected.

>>18731244
no protection

>>18733288
>this is a function of the evolutionary biology of complex social organisms
False. The function is procreation, explicitly so in evolutionary biology. And it is vital to cultivate a sexual morality which not only prioritizes it, but closes the door to its perversions. You, full of hot air about "harm reduction", don't seem to care because you don't really care about human survival and continuity, merely human comfort and individual autonomy. Imposed social obligations, a bedrock of civilization itself, should be torn down to give people higher "freedom" so long as there's consent. That is the higher end for you, with no regard to second-order effects.
>Do you think people just choose to be gay?
Assuming they don't, it doesn't matter. A deviant is a deviant and as established, consent alone does not suddenly make it morally permissible.
Yes there are different cultures with different attitudes, and they compete. And monogamous sexual conservatism has outbred every competitor it has ever faces, including today where it is smothered by the social contagion of sexual liberation. Sexual liberals don't reproduce and rely on growing their numbers by parasitizing off the social conservatives who do reproduce. If an equilibrium is crossed and the social contagion kills off sexual conservatism, your society will necessarily go extinct. Cultural attitudes are not made equal, and yours is inferior.

>>18734333
>vital to cultivate sexual morality
Outside of mutual consent which is required to avoid violence between aggressors and aggrieved parties and their respective associates, you’ve simply failed to demonstrate a need for this, let alone a required set of guidelines. Marriage is obviously not necessary because people successfully reproduce outside of marriage, monogamy is obviously not required because polygamy for example is widely practiced in many parts of the world. Unless of course you’re coming around to the idea that sexual behavior isn’t exclusively about reproduction and has a wide range of social purposes. As is seen in other intelligent animals with complex social structures like, say, those degenerate bonobos. Are we paramecium who only have sex to exchange genetic material? Or are we intelligent social animals who use sex as a complex evolutionary behavior mechanism? It can’t be both, and if it’s the latter I’d say I’m much more concerned about human continuity than someone who wants to unnaturally, even perversely reduce it, degenerate it into a mere act of genetic exchange.
>It doesn’t matter
We’ve established that if humans are not paramecium, then our sexual relationships are part of our overall evolutionary survival strategy, and while I agree that it is profoundly deviant to try and reduce something that demonstrably helps define the evolutionary biology of intelligent social animals down to a mere zero sum gamete trading game? That still seems to be the degeneracy that sexual puritans pursue.
>admission that sexual practices are often just variations on culture
Cool, so can we just toss out concepts like marriage and monogamy in this given you’re apparently willing to admit that they don’t matter from an overall biological drive sense and instead are just cultural and social foibles? Still, if my cultural values are inferior, surely your pro paramecium outlook will eventually outcompete mine.

>>18731416
anon i.... i don't don't know how to break the news to you...

>>18734409
Your entire post is going in circles while pretending like I have not established things I have already said. I am not indulging in this kind of malicious argument.
Bottom line: The survival and continuity of a society is obviously more important than individual autonomy, making consent an incomplete component for morality and your "hard-reduction" models hilariously corrupt for refusing to incorporate continuity.
Cultural attitudes compete against one another, and the side tolerating the other loses. It is the interest of both a society of people and a culture to be socially restrictive and exclusive.

Your next post will now deliberately ignore all of that while still pretending as if consent alone enough is sufficient for a moral framework. Enjoy talking to yourself.

>>18734425
Kek'd

>>18734436
What did you establish? Just saying ‘it is so o algo’ isn’t establishing anything. I can’t even argue about consent given you’re still trying to say your cultural hangups are universal truth while openly admitting they’re not universal truth. That you’re now spiraling into some kind of zero sum culture war thing where trying to fight against what makes humans human is a good thing. I’ll take the attempt at dismissal as a sign that the cognitive dissonance has started to grow too uncomfortable for you.

>he's doing it again
As I called. The constant pretense and ignoring as if entire sentences were not written is repulsive.

>>18731296
Source? The risk is zero if you and/or your partners are on prep or getting tested and avoiding risky sex acts. It's actually relatively hard to get compared to some other STIs

>>18734634
>Source?
Biden's CDC.
https://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment-guidelines/msm.htm

>>18732087
>>18732605
>Your approach includes leaving an open door for homosexuals to become a majority of the population.
This is a biological impossibility

>>18734333
Is that why Haredi Jews are dependent on welfare and pork barrel legislation,

>>18734644
Ah so it's high risk if you're smoking crack or meth and having unprotected anal sex with randos every week.

Biologically speaking, the risk of contracting HIV if you're on PrEP and mostly having oral sex and using protection or having sex with people who test regularly is next to zero.

>>18734858
A damning snapshot on the lifestyle of a massive amount of MSMs if their numbers are this high then.

>>18733397
You didn't chose your lifestyle either. Your options are limited to what your nation, class and economic station permits.

>>18734333
The gays can engage in heterosexual procreation just fine. Their sexual orientation just makes that occur less frequently, which is why their % of the total population remains low.

>>18734862
That's a small percentage who are very high risk. A large percentage are at low to medium risk in my experience. They occasionally have partners who may or may not be getting tested, have some substance issues, and have more casual sex than straight men. They mostly trade head but occasionally may have anal.

File: IMG_2803.jpg (965 KB, 1150x2600)

965 KB JPG

Homophobia is leftist.

>>18734436
>It is the interest of both a society of people and a culture to be socially restrictive and exclusive.
Somehow they don't end up being the most popular. Theocracy is dying, as is absolute monarchy.

>>18734858
>Biologically speaking, the risk of contracting HIV if you're on PrEP and mostly having oral sex and using protection or having sex with people who test regularly is next to zero.

too bad that's ~~10% of gay men and not the overwhelming majority who are hedonistic sex fiends

>>18734875
Do you think 1 in 6 general risk is acceptable?

>>18734894
Practically speaking there's no such thing as general risk when you're looking at such disparate groups.
>>18734891
Actually it's a minority of guys who are at high risk. A majority of guys don't even do anal regularly

>>18734920
>Practically speaking there's no such thing as general risk when you're looking at such disparate groups.
1 in 6 is a huge proportion, even if it's solely limited to 16% who have a 100% risk themselves(which of course it isn't).

File: IMG_3957.jpg (36 KB, 720x361)

36 KB JPG

>>18731244
>Africa
One important caveat though.

>>18734891
^This. Their entire "lifestyle" is based around self-destruction.

Absolute majority of HIV infested shitholes are Eastern Europe and Nigger Africa, both hellholes where gays are massively persecuted

>>18734930
Except that average isn't really what most gay men face. It's like statistical averages of income in countries with high inequality.