Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chicup Lets stop beating around the bush here.
Sorry you have HSV-2, lower risk or not we wouldn't want to swing with you because its still a greater risk than not having it.
There was a period we thought we may have contracted HSV-2. It didn't make sense due to our lack of activity but the symptoms seemed to be there. If it was we decided we were done swinging, but tests turned out to be negative.
At best rather than playing semantic games with HSV transition rate, we would have only played with people who were HSV-2 positivity themselves. |
No problem. I completely understand and could see myself thinking the same way if the roles were reversed. I am not trying to convince you to play with me or anyone. Frankly, I'd rather play with couples who are seropositive, too. It would save a lot of talking.
However, the problem appears to be that the stigma associated with the disease actively prevents those who have it from being able to associate with others who have it. Very few who have the disease are willing to openly acknowledge this fact (even to others with the disease) for fear of being "outed." Consider Swing Lifestyle. Over twenty percent of the population is infected. Yet, no where near that percentage of profiles disclose the condition. Is it because swingers are disproportionately healthier than the rest of society? Or is there something else at work here?
Clearly, the stigma prevents those who might otherwise be willing to associate with one another from doing so. Go figure. I have learned so, so much in the last month...
I only wish to make these points....
First, if you are an active swinger (have played with more than seven other people/couples), statistically chances are that you have played with at least one person who is seropositive for the virus.
Second, by stigmatizing the disease, you all but ensure that no one will openly admit to being seropositive. No one wants to admit to being seropositive for fear that the community within which they play will learn of their condition and they will be shunned. Like Good Times, they will define themselves as not infected ("disease free") so long as they do not have an outbreak or symptoms of viral shedding. Provided that they have accurately judged their condition, they will be practically correct since they will not be contagious.
Please don't misunderstand me. In hindsight, I understand why it is that the stigma is unlikely to lift. And, as I said, I certainly see and understand your view.
Still, if you become infected, it will most likely be the result of play with someone who does not know they are/were infected and not because of play with someone who knows they have it. It is the ones that don't know they have it (or refuse to seek treatment) who are truly dangerous. They are the ones who are not on suppressive therapy, who have not been educated on the symptoms to watch for with the onset of an outbreak/shedding, and who do not pay close attention to issues of condom etiquette (like changing condoms with every play partner). If you believe the CDC (which I understand some people don't), one in four women and one in five men are infected and most don't even realize it.
If you are going to play, you will inevitably play with someone who has herpes. Once everyone accepts this basic proposition, it will be easy to lift the stigma. It is absolutely and undeniably true that you are better off playing with someone who knows they have it over someone who has it but thinks they are clean. But, I understand that there are those of you who are active swingers and still believe that you have never played with someone who is seropositve.
