Re: Is anyone else offended

[Guest guest]

I agree - personal health issues, including HIV, should be considered essentially personal and private. However, it your ad implies that you're seeking sex, your HIV status is obviously relevant (or at least, should be relevant) to the other party. Some sites offer alternatives to simple "yes" or "no" answers, such as "I will discuss this later" or "None of your business" (I frequently find that option next to the annual income question). On the other other side, I'm amazed at how many ads for "friends" or "penpals" require that the respondent be HIV negative. I've also seen a trend toward the claim of being "HIV positive but healthy" which seems to be an attempt to reassure that you won't be a burden if you become lifelong mates - so much for "in sickness and in health". By the way, can I examine your teeth? There is usually the option to leave some of the checkblocks unchecked. I think the checkblock concept

developed because many people feel intimidated when asked to compose their own paragraph describing themselves. Checkblocks allow them to chose descriptors even if they add nothing else. Like you, I prefer to reveal my HIV status (if I feel it's relevant) in my own words. And for those of us with facial lipoatrophy, adding a picture is often telling enough.Original message: Is anyone else offended by questions about HIV status on on-line pro Posted by: "Rhino88" rhino88@... Date: Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:37 am ((PDT))I realize this is not strictly speaking health related, but I want to get some feedback regardless.As the Internet becomes more and more of a standard way to meet people in the gay world (and elsewhere), I have noticed a new trend, which I personally find very stigmatizing and disturbing.When you create an on-line profile for yourself in various gay

sites, you will be chugging along putting in check marks for questions like Eye colour? Hair colour? Height? Weight?, age? Location? etc...and then suddenly out of the blue you will be forced to check off HIV + or -? Maybe I'm just being overly sensitive, but I resent the idea that an intensely private health issue is suddenly being juxtaposed with "Are your eyes brown or blue?" as if it was this simple throw away question. They probably don't ask people to put down their annual income because it is seen as being "too personal", but they think that people should be expected to broadcast their HIV status to the entire universe in cyberspace.Don't get me wrong. If someone wants to ask me directly - I have no problem telling them. In fact, if I personally WANT to be totaly "out" about my HIV status I could just put it voluntarily in the text of my profile or even in the headline.But by forcing people to reveal

themselves it means the followinga) If you check off that you are HIV+, you cease to be a personal with any human characteristics - you are reduced to a pile of statistics with a + sign afterwards meaning you can get tossed into a reject pile when people want a quick way to seperate the wheat from the chaff. YOu have also now shared something about yourself with hundreds of thousands of people in cyberspace that you may never have discussed with some close friends or family. you can lie and say you are NEG - but who wants to do that since it would be unethicalc) you can leave it blank - in which case you might as well just check off POZ since that is the conclusion everyone will jump to if you don't answer the question.I think it should be up to individuals to decide who, what, where, when and how they want to "disclose" their status to people and that this is a slippery slope that will lead to

being asked about HIV status on job application forms etc...We should have a right to privacy.Messages in this topic (1)_________________________________________

Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check out

new cars at Autos.

[Guest guest]

I agree - personal health issues, including HIV, should be considered essentially personal and private. However, it your ad implies that you're seeking sex, your HIV status is obviously relevant (or at least, should be relevant) to the other party. Some sites offer alternatives to simple "yes" or "no" answers, such as "I will discuss this later" or "None of your business" (I frequently find that option next to the annual income question). On the other other side, I'm amazed at how many ads for "friends" or "penpals" require that the respondent be HIV negative. I've also seen a trend toward the claim of being "HIV positive but healthy" which seems to be an attempt to reassure that you won't be a burden if you become lifelong mates - so much for "in sickness and in health". By the way, can I examine your teeth? There is usually the option to leave some of the checkblocks unchecked. I think the checkblock concept

developed because many people feel intimidated when asked to compose their own paragraph describing themselves. Checkblocks allow them to chose descriptors even if they add nothing else. Like you, I prefer to reveal my HIV status (if I feel it's relevant) in my own words. And for those of us with facial lipoatrophy, adding a picture is often telling enough.Original message: Is anyone else offended by questions about HIV status on on-line pro Posted by: "Rhino88" rhino88@... Date: Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:37 am ((PDT))I realize this is not strictly speaking health related, but I want to get some feedback regardless.As the Internet becomes more and more of a standard way to meet people in the gay world (and elsewhere), I have noticed a new trend, which I personally find very stigmatizing and disturbing.When you create an on-line profile for yourself in various gay

sites, you will be chugging along putting in check marks for questions like Eye colour? Hair colour? Height? Weight?, age? Location? etc...and then suddenly out of the blue you will be forced to check off HIV + or -? Maybe I'm just being overly sensitive, but I resent the idea that an intensely private health issue is suddenly being juxtaposed with "Are your eyes brown or blue?" as if it was this simple throw away question. They probably don't ask people to put down their annual income because it is seen as being "too personal", but they think that people should be expected to broadcast their HIV status to the entire universe in cyberspace.Don't get me wrong. If someone wants to ask me directly - I have no problem telling them. In fact, if I personally WANT to be totaly "out" about my HIV status I could just put it voluntarily in the text of my profile or even in the headline.But by forcing people to reveal

themselves it means the followinga) If you check off that you are HIV+, you cease to be a personal with any human characteristics - you are reduced to a pile of statistics with a + sign afterwards meaning you can get tossed into a reject pile when people want a quick way to seperate the wheat from the chaff. YOu have also now shared something about yourself with hundreds of thousands of people in cyberspace that you may never have discussed with some close friends or family. you can lie and say you are NEG - but who wants to do that since it would be unethicalc) you can leave it blank - in which case you might as well just check off POZ since that is the conclusion everyone will jump to if you don't answer the question.I think it should be up to individuals to decide who, what, where, when and how they want to "disclose" their status to people and that this is a slippery slope that will lead to

being asked about HIV status on job application forms etc...We should have a right to privacy.Messages in this topic (1)_________________________________________

Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check out

new cars at Autos.

[Guest guest]

I just think that anyone who depends on an on line site to give

accurate information about a person's HIV status is hopelessly

stupid, and that is an unattractive quality.

You never know what that person on the other end really is. If they

say " ub2, " pass them by, they are idiots, and " ub2. "

As for your own " scarlet letter, " where you wear it, proudly on your

arm, or in discrete whispers, it is your own business how you do it,

as long as you are honest about it when the meat hits the sheets.

On some sites, putting HIV+ seems to be " hit repellant, " while on

others, it seems to get more attention.

There's no one right way.

JB

[Guest guest]

I just think that anyone who depends on an on line site to give

accurate information about a person's HIV status is hopelessly

stupid, and that is an unattractive quality.

You never know what that person on the other end really is. If they

say " ub2, " pass them by, they are idiots, and " ub2. "

As for your own " scarlet letter, " where you wear it, proudly on your

arm, or in discrete whispers, it is your own business how you do it,

as long as you are honest about it when the meat hits the sheets.

On some sites, putting HIV+ seems to be " hit repellant, " while on

others, it seems to get more attention.

There's no one right way.

JB