|
|
|
Kajet
|
I say it's cause people don't like to take the "hands on" approach in anything anymore...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Mink
|
Is it stupidity, stubbornness, or just plain lust that drives people to act in this manner?
I'll venture a guess and say... D.) All of the above |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2007-09-05, 20:31 by Thomas Mink »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
McDeth
|
Now let's see... if you abstain from sex you can't get a disease, and if you're 100% monogamous with an uninfected mate who is also 100% monogamous with you then you won't get a disease and you don't need a flimsy piece of latex getting in the way of your "togetherness". I don't understand why this is this such a difficult concept for people to grasp. Is it stupidity, stubbornness, or just plain lust that drives people to act in this manner?
Some couples use condoms to prevent procreation. My wife and I used "male elastic contraceptives prophylactic devices" for the awhile before we turned to other methods of birth control. I don't understand why people view condoms as a symbol of promiscuity. That is to say I don't disagree with your underlying point, Pho. I just wanted to make a point that you haven't. Edit: Did I mention that I love the active spell checker on this message board? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Beer? I'm down.
|
|
|
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
Team Member
Elite (3k+)
   
Posts: 3330
|
In a related note, I remember reading in Sperm Wars by R. Baker (a good read by the way) that 1 out of every 10 children is "fathered" by someone other than their biological father. The book also deals with many aspects of human sexual life that might help explain "stupidity, stubbornness and lust" from a biological standpoint. Aside from that, it's also quite entertaining (more so than the academic study by the same author). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
| Tabun |
?Morituri Nolumus Mori? |
| |
|
|
|
|
Kajet
|
I know that there's a lot to be said of monogamy but... what about completely 100% monogamous couples where one person has something that the other doesn't?
while condoms are standard issue one night stand equipment they exist to prevent the spread of disease and pregnancy, I'm just saying that not all couples have the blessing of perfect health and/or tied tubes/vasectomies.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
Tab: I think I'll pass. I'll throw the whole topic off-topic if I express my opinion on that subject, and it will probably turn into a very ugly rant as well. I'd like to avoid that here. I'm already ranting. Don't throw off my rant!
Kajet: Everyone always brings up the "exceptions to the rule" when I was simply pointing out that the whole notion of just throwing condoms at the problem of HIV infections is not going to work. People changing their behavior is the only thing that will work. Consider an alternate, somewhat absurd illustration of the problem:
A local police shooting range has trouble with fatalities. People keep walking out into the firing line and getting shot. They keep telling people "wear a vest!". In order to cut down on fatalities, police have begun placing free bullet-resistant vests along the edges of the firing range so that people have easy access. It now turns out that some of these vests that were made in China are defective, potentially allowing bullets to pass through.
Now that does sound absurd doesn't it? Wouldn't anyone with common sense say "Hey, just stay off the gun range you dummy!" But this is exactly how HIV and other STD's get treated. The excuse is always "well people are going to do it anyway". So changing people's behavior is hard so why bother, right? Funny, I thought politicians, advertisers, etc, try to do that all the time.
I think the problem is two-fold. First is that people are relying on the government to provide an answer instead of, as Kajet said initially, taking matters into their own hands. The government won't solve it. It will take the cheapest option, which happens to not be very effective or the disease would be gone by now, and of course now they're handing out defective condoms anyway. The second is that people want a quick fix, an easy way out, instead of changing their behavior to adapt to the disease. They want to eat their cake and have it too. To me the idea of just handing out condoms is condoning the dangerous behavior and saying "Here, use this and it will all be OK". No, it won't, and it's not.
I understand about one person having something and the other not, and I understand that neither has to "cheat" to get infected. I know there are bad blood transfusions and I understand there's a very ugly evil called rape, but again, I'm not talking about that sort of situation. I'm talking about the overall picture as to how you end up with a news article like this in the first place. The solution is simple. Perhaps not easy, but Murphy's Rules of Combat states that the important things are always simple, and the simple things are always difficult... and the easy way is always mined.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
  I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Kajet
|
Most of the problem is the mentality of "I'm going to get laid, and nothing else is as good."
I don't think I need to say that there are... alternatives.
But I guess using some kind of toy is less appealing than someone you meet in a bar that could potentially be diseased, or its not as fun to brag about a hot night with a piece of plastic/glass/whatever...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
That someone would feel the need to brag in the first place speaks volume about their character. As for toys... I think that's a problem right there. So many humans see each other as nothing but toys, or objects of use. I don't mean just sexually either, I mean that humans get off on manipulating each other, humiliating each other. Instead of raising up those who are thrown into the dirt, it's more entertaining to stand there, pointing and laughing at the unfortunate soul whose misery is now someone else's crude entertainment. Perhaps that is the root of the problem - there is so little love in sex because there is so little love in mankind? How much do people respect each other that use each other in this way? How much do they respect themselves? I think very little, if at all. I think if people had more compassion and respect for their fellow man they would know when not to do something, and look ahead to the consequences of their own actions. I see much leaping, but never any looking, except for scapegoats after the fact. This is why we have senators soliciting sex in airport bathrooms. Does anyone respect themselves anymore?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
scalliano
Elite
Posts: 1095
Yup, that's me
|
There's an entire "reality TV" argument there, but that's another thread ...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
PSN ID: scalliano
The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
|
|
|
Tekhead
Elite
Posts: 1110
|
A local police shooting range has trouble with fatalities. People keep walking out into the firing line and getting shot. They keep telling people "wear a vest!". In order to cut down on fatalities, police have begun placing free bullet-resistant vests along the edges of the firing range so that people have easy access. It now turns out that some of these vests that were made in China are defective, potentially allowing bullets to pass through.
Now that does sound absurd doesn't it? Wouldn't anyone with common sense say "Hey, just stay off the gun range you dummy!" But this is exactly how HIV and other STD's get treated. The excuse is always "well people are going to do it anyway". So changing people's behavior is hard so why bother, right? Funny, I thought politicians, advertisers, etc, try to do that all the time. Using that analogy would imply that there would be some sort of reason or motivation for the lemmings-turned-police to wander into live fire. Unlike being a wandering target however, there are numerous reasons to copulate beyond simple matters of the flesh. I'm not sure if you're implying that there's something inherently wrong with intercourse in itself or that sexual experimentation is an atrocity of modern society, but I disagree with both. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
McDeth
|
In reply to Phoenix's post: The issue here is, the Government cannot regulate behavior when the behavior is inherently a freedom. The Government cannot regulate promiscuity, it just simply cannot be done. With whether or not I agree or disagree with your underlining points aside, it's up to the social norms to change, not regulation.
It takes a society to make change. As you already implied/said yourself, humanity is incapable of social evolution.
I believe a King, wise beyond his time once said, "there is nothing new under the sun."
Whether or not the Government can instill regulations to coax this theoretical social change is debatable and requires more insight than I can provide right now.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2007-09-07, 01:23 by Phoenix »
|
Logged
|
Beer? I'm down.
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
Tekhead: You're over-analyzing my example; It's assumed there already is a motivation, hence their wandering onto the firing lane. It was the equal danger of both actions I was using for illustrative purposes. 
I am not implying anything, and I don't know where you read that I would think intercourse is inherently bad. I have stated no opinion of the act in and of itself, and I have only discussed the context in which it transpires in relation to disease prevention. I am simply questioning the wisdom of trusting one's life to a potentially defective piece of congealed tree sap (or the synthetic equivalent) when there are more sure methods of protecting one's self from HIV, foremost of which is a behavioral change. I am also exploring the reasons why such a behavioral change, while 99.9% effective if put into practice, is shunned in favor of the more risky behavior. Please do not confuse behavioral changes with any implication of a moral component. I am trying desperately not to bring morals into the equation because that will throw the topic way off track, and it will inevitably end up with the usual back and forth of science vs religion, people not wanting to be told what to do, etc, that I frankly have no interest in engaging in at this time. I am simply discussing changes in behavior in regards to combating disease, and speculating on the human capacity (or apparent lack thereof) to make wise decisions when it comes to risk-taking.
McDeth: I never suggested the government could solve this problem. In fact, I think I stated the exact opposite - that its attempts at solving the problem have failed for precisely the reasons you've put forth, and that change, if any is to occur, must begin at the level of the individual. The question is not in what choices the individual has - those have not changed - but how aware the individual is of their options and the effectiveness of those options, and to what degree that individual is motivated to choose the most effective path. The factors that determine that motivation are many and complex, but I think what is lacking is an understanding of what works and what does not. I think the facts have not been clearly and accurately presented. I believe the government is partly to blame in this, seeing that education - including sexual education - is run by the government for the majority of people. A person can only make decisions based on the information available to them, and if that information is inaccurate or based on faulty data - in this case the trustworthiness of government-distributed condoms - then the chances of making a good decision diminish greatly as a result.
And please refrain from quoting an entire post in a reply. That's kind of redundant. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
McDeth
|
McDeth: I never suggested the government could solve this problem. In fact, I think I stated the exact opposite - that its attempts at solving the problem have failed for precisely the reasons you've put forth, and that change, if any is to occur, must begin at the level of the individual. The question is not in what choices the individual has - those have not changed - but how aware the individual is of their options and the effectiveness of those options, and to what degree that individual is motivated to choose the most effective path. The factors that determine that motivation are many and complex, but I think what is lacking is an understanding of what works and what does not. I think the facts have not been clearly and accurately presented. I believe the government is partly to blame in this, seeing that education - including sexual education - is run by the government for the majority of people. A person can only make decisions based on the information available to them, and if that information is inaccurate or based on faulty data - in this case the trustworthiness of government-distributed condoms - then the chances of making a good decision diminish greatly as a result.
I'm aware. I just stating how broad the problem is and the issues involved in finding a finite problem. I'm sorry if you misunderstood my tone. I'm not a writer. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Beer? I'm down.
|
|
|
|
