After reading the article, I do agree with everything Roy Kilpatrick said.I feel quite sadened that John felt he had to move to London,buti hope he manages to get a happier. cheers Jacqui
One has to ask why the public woild refer to Percy as a ‘paedophile’- this is not a common phrase or use of terminology by the general public at large associated with HIV or indeed Guy persons. My initial question was why in John Percy’s case did member of the public feel this to be the chosen phrase of the day as it would appear from reading the article this appeared a common verbal abusive word directed at Percy.Then I ask if someone sits on a busy Edinburgh street begging, like John did holding onto a banner which stated I am HIV positive, I am guy but I am not a drug user or alcoholic – is this not citing anger or at best attracting attention to yourself. If a gang of people out and about looking for a target happen to be on the street at that time also and spotted Percy with the banner asking for money you can be sure they would hurl abusive comments, spit or shout at hime. I don’t condon this behaviour it is unacceptable but why oh why did John decide to attract attention to himself when he knew all this. He is an educated person, he should be with all the support, services, help and information he has been given over the years. Surely, Percy would have realised that one day some kind of reaction to his actions would hit his kerb.When John moved to Scotland from London he did receive a lot of support and services (financial and other) from many HIV organisations not only in Edinburgh but in Glasgow (Body Positive, HIV Carers). He moved to Edinburgh having exhausted services in Glasgow I believe. I too am disappointed John felt the need to move back to London rather than stay here in Scotland and try and support and help change the Stigma and Discrimination issues to which he refers to. He could have supported all the other HIV persons and organisations. So my final question has to be WHO IS SUPPORTING WHO NOW?