Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Gay and bisexual HIV infections rise 70% in ten years

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Disgusting. There is simply no excuse for it. There has been SO much work done around educating people on the risks of unprotected sex. I cannot believe that even 1% of the gay/bisexual population do not know about HIV/AIDS and how to prevent it. This is pure ignorance, the “oh it’ll never happen to me” mentality. Either that or some people just get so horny they ignore it.

    I’m so sick of things like this tarnishing the gay population. We’re not all sluts who can’t keep our genitalia on a leash. I wish all the Grindr/Gaydar/Saunas/Bath houses/Cottaging crap would just stop because that is where it’s coming from. Go on a date. Get to know someone before sleeping with them. USE A CONDOM. It’s not prudish to suggest that, it’s logical, sensible, and prevents you from dying of a horrible disease.

    1. Oh get off you high horse. How much has the gay population increased over the same period then present the answer as a percentage of the gay population. It makes more sense but probally a boring headline you judgemental prick.

      and another point is that the HIV ads funded by big pharma present HIV as a managable illness. Healthy looking people living like their in a ikea commercial. Pharma is about making money the more conversions the more money they make. Pharma are happy to risk the lives of babies pushing formula over breast milk. You think they give a fcuk about us?

      and finally go and get laid or something you’re too uptight

      1. Well you can throw whatever insults you like lol, it doesn’t change the fact that I’m right. If people stick a condom on and stop sleeping with 60/70+ people over a 2 or 3 year period (or more), then HIV/AIDS infection rates will decrease.

        And you’re a fine one to be calling me a “judgemental prick.” From my reasoning that HIV infections will decrease with an increased use of protection and reducing slutty behaviour, you deduce I’m uptight, on a high horse and don’t get laid? Wow.

        1. Ok
          How many gay people in the uk in 2001 and what % were HIV we know there were 1810 people diagnosed but what was the total number of gay men at that time. Do the same calculation today and you will get the true increase in numbers as a % of the gay/bi population,

          Not this half assed calculation of 70% increase it means nothing in real terms unless the population of gay and bi me remained exactly the same over the last 10 years its possible but unlikely.

          1. To clarify, what you’re essentially saying is that there has been no increase in actual infection, just an increase in the number of people diagnosed who already existed?

            I don’t quite see how this negates the idea that there would be a direct correlation between increased use of protection, a decrease in the extreme promiscuity that seems to be so ingrained in the gay community and a decrease in HIV infections.

          2. What I’m saying is I dont know and neither do the people who did the calculation

            70% increase in diagnoses in 10 years but for that number to have any relevence surely the population of gay and bi men should also be taken into account?

          3. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 2:35pm

            Has the problem being those that know their HIV status or those that don’t and refuse to get tested but continue to bareback?

            Something has seriously failed if with all the info people still don’t get the message.

            There is still that it won’t happen to me attitude which I’m afraid won’t change anything.

            I think we have to look deeper. It’s clear giving the information isn’t working, so what will?

          4. Can you evidence how you’re right in this rather bold assumption Chris?

            I would hasten to add that many poeple diagnosed with HIV were quite possibly in a steady one-to-one relationship and picked it up from their partners who knowingly or unknowingly infected them.

          5. Paddyswurds 23 Mar 2011, 9:59pm

            James…you moron Since when was there a dramatic increase in the gay population. Stats say the gay population is between & and 10% of the male populationnad that has been the case for centuries. There may be more gay people out on the “scene” but the population doesn’t increase substantially As older gays die or drop off the scene they are raplaced by youngsters growing up As i said there may be more “out” because laws and rights make it safer and so on. When was the last time you saw Healt Service ad about aids. not since the eighties. So less of the hateful vitriol and more thought from you would help.

          6. Paddyswurds 23 Mar 2011, 10:01pm

            *7 and 10%…*

          7. @ Paddyswurds

            I think you missed James’ point. He’s trying to say that the GLBT population will have increased in the last 10 years relative to the overall population.

          8. Paddyswurds 23 Mar 2011, 10:53pm

            @ demograph…which, while thwre has been an increase hasn’t been near the figures to make his argument valid is what I meant. The gay population stays largly static in relation to the population..ie; 7 to 10% is the figure world wide according to demographics experts.

          9. @ Paddyswurds I see. Fair enough.

          10. Paddy
            “The gay population stays largly static in relation to the population..ie;”

            “Since when was there a dramatic increase in the gay population. Stats say the gay population is between & and 10% of the male population nad that has been the case for centuries”

            So you know this as a fact or are you just making stuff up to prove you’re point?

            i couldn’t think as slowly as you if i tried

    2. I absolutely agree with Chris. Like it or not, for whatever reason, there is still a casually promiscuous streak running through this community and, like it or not, it puts people at risk. Part of the problem is that whenever someone speaks out for a bit of restraint, responsibility and being safe they get accused of being uptight. It’s not uptight, it’s bloody common sense.

      It’s the attitude of our own community that has to change and people need to stop getting defensive when someone calls them out on their risky behaviour. It’s risky for the individual and it puts people in danger, there can be no question of that. If you’re going to do it, expect to be criticised for it.

      Also it wouldn’t hurt us in a wider sense to show the world we are capable of taking responsibility for ourselves and that we have a sense of basic decency.

      1. 10/10. My sentiments exactly.

      2. Most gay men are not “casually promiscuous ” some are and if you read my post the formula for the calculation is rubbish and you’re ready to believe the worst without questioning it. You’re ready to hate us daily mail style

      3. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 2:43pm

        I agree with you sven.

        I have to say part of the problem we have is the same in the health service as a whole. That one size fits all, ie everyone must be the same. However we all know that how one person reacts to something may be totally different to the next person. Maybe it is that that needs addressing.

        Indeed you hit the nail there with your comment about how some get accused with being uptight when being approached. Your right but equality what is right is it is clear that some people don’t respond to certain techniques so I think we have to look at a whole range of how we can educate people in diiferent ways.

        In effect same subject, same details, same results but we have to find as many different ways of putting it so different people in society get it rather than get uptight by it.

      4. Your first and foremost mistake is to label these people a “community”. They don’t give a rat’s arse about each other, otherwise they would take more care and not go around infecting all and sundry.

        1. Jock S. Trap 24 Mar 2011, 9:22am

          No thats just you that doesn’t give ‘a rats arse’. Most in the LGBT community have Very different experiences to you.

      5. Staircase2 23 Mar 2011, 7:07pm

        Promiscuity has nothing to do with it – risky behaviour is what its about

        the problem here – as always – is that people are tying two things up together and calling it BOGOF.

        1) is about HIV infection rates
        2) the other is the moral indignation that people might have sex with more than one person

        the two ARENT linked

        Its all about sexual activity – not the amount of partners someone has.

        A) someone you have sex with has to be HIV positive
        B) you have to engage in some risky behaviour with them
        C) you have to be unlucky enough to then have HIV enter your system
        D) you then have to be unlucky enough for that infection to take hold and spread

        You can have sex with a zillion HIV negative men – with or without a condom and NEVER become HIV infected. The issue is a one of ‘risk’ and we measure that by use of risk statistic

        Promiscuity is NOT the issue here and it would be helpful if people stopped putting their own moral agenda on top of the issue of HIV infection. It serves noone

        1. I would wager there is a link between people who act promiscuously and those that indulge in risky sexual activities. And OBVIOUSLY you won’t catch HIV by sleeping with HIV-neg men, the point is you don’t know beforehand in many cases. The more pertinent question is – can you sleep with a zillion men (not knowing their HIV status) and NOT contract HIV? You can’t guarantee it because it’s a risk. The act of promiscuity is in itself risky behaviour.

          You seem to interpret my comments as judgemental, and I’m not being so. My closest friends are incredibly promiscuous and I’m forever worried about them. I’m just stating how I see it. You’re behaving in the exact defensive way sven outlined above. Let’s all go around sleeping with each other, not care about the consequences, and if people dare challenge that idea or think it’s a dangerous way to live we’ll label them “self haters”.

          1. Like it or not, Zimbabwe managed to get new HIV infections down 13% within 10 years – just by reducing the number of sexual partners per man. No money for medications available, no money for tests on a broad scale available, no money for condoms available – but reducing promiscuity did work.

          2. Jock S. Trap 24 Mar 2011, 1:50pm

            I think the trouble with a lot of Gay men is there too much on assuming. I’ve heard boths sides…

            If he doesn’t use a condom he’s HIV-

            If he doesn’t use a condon he’s HIV+

            Why the assuming, ask already, lets bring some honesty into sex.

          3. I assume everyone is HIV+ I’ve seen too many people die

    3. It’s not a bold assumption at all. In fact, in your example, the person contracted HIV because their one to one partner was being both promiscuous and not using contraception. Which leads back to me making the “bold assumptions” that I make. Less promiscuity + use of contraception = less HIV infections. It really is a no brainer.

      1. Oh P.S. that was a response to Mendirin above. Silly threaded comments :)

  2. Is maybe this the time to start looking at investing the money, currently spent on free condom schemes, outreach and other 3rd sector health promotion services, in something different??

    1. Condoms are proven to be the most effective prevention method against STDs. So until we find a cure/vaccine for all of them, they remain the best investment.

      We certainly shouldn’t be funneling our money into campaigns to promote abstinence. They may be clean, but who wants frustrated people around them?

      1. I agree. We need free condoms.

        We need to find different strategies and not just scaremonger and chastise. It doesn’t work, and all the funding in the world won’t change the results.

        Community and outreach work tend to also be popular and good investments. Training and education in groups or on a one-to-one basis also go someway to help also.

        1. Can’t you just, you know, buy your own condoms? It’s something that people can do all by themselves. Or do you never go into shops and buy anything? I’m sure Sainsbury’s would deliver it online if you asked them! Family planning clinic anyone?

          Too much waffle and complicated action plans. Here’s the answer: put a condom on every time you have sex.

          Are people really that lazy/thick? Rhetorical question!

      2. Staircase2 23 Mar 2011, 7:10pm

        the notion of ‘clean’ is a really contentious one.

        I find it a horrible term – it implies that someone with an infection is therefore ‘dirty’
        which is of course bollocks

        In my experience the word ‘clean’ is used by uptight (often religious) closet cases because THEY feel dirty – its not a useful term.

        after all – define ‘clean’

        1. I meant clean as opposed to “riddled”. An awkward phrasing which could invite stigma, I agree.

          1. Riddled eh?

  3. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 11:50am

    Education needs to be in schools. Stronger and harder. The young think it is just an older persons disease. What they think are facts is shocking.

    Stopping Grindr/Gaydar/Saunas/Bath houses etc prehaps you’d like to take us back to before 1967 when we were illegal too.

    Most people choose their own paths in life, we can’t demand we are treated equality then say some of those freedoms should be removed. That would be like sayin it’s fine for B&B owner to throw out Gay people or that it’s fine for Children to be given to religious homophobes.

    Stop stereotyping certain sections of society. They need no help. There will be some people who will find any excuse to tarnish the gay population. They don’t need help in that. If it wasn’t this it’d be something else. If you go one supporting that then you are not better than they are.

    Also some of us got HIV against our will so please don’t tar all with the same brush.

    1. No, I’m sorry, I don’t know anyone who thinks HIV/AIDS only effects older people – and I’m quite young, as are my friends. Bottom line is, the vast majority of infections are spread through unprotected sex. Lack of education? I came out when I was 18 and i wasn’t able to avoid the message as I grew up. It is purely ignorance. It is all this slutty behaviour that leads to this type of statistic, because they simply don’t want to wear condoms. That is a fact. How is that even a semblance of a suggestion to make homosexuality illegal?

      I’m not some self hating prude, but I see this behaviour first hand on a regular basis. Any hook up I’ve ever had has not wanted to use a condom, despite their profiles saying they practice safe sex. I’ve sent them packing. I have friends who are literally addicted to this Grindr app, and who don’t practice safe sex because they know they’re free from infection and don’t like the lack of sensation – but they’re more than able to find a willing partner.

    2. P.S. I realise some people got infected “unwillingly” but that’s an incredibly small number of cases, and I don’t mean to offend.

      1. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 12:16pm

        Chris (no offence taken m8y btw) :)

        About 4 years ago when I was a lot ‘larger’ I met a few friends who had a young crowd, young teens/20s. I have always been open about my HIV and I was gobsmacked. One actually said to me They didn’t believe me because I was fat! another 2 said they thought it only effected older men.

        I have made it a mission and have heard many excuses why it is impossible for the younger generation to get it. Basically denial. Government have to take some responsibilty for lack of proper education.

        A strong education system needs to be in place. It’s all very well trying to teach against a rising tide of young unwanted pregnancies and abortions but STD Have to be taught too.

        1. In which case we have very different experiences.

          By the way, I’m not denying education/campaigning plays a huge role in all of this. Perhaps there is room for improvement. Perhaps I just read into it more as I was coming out and growing up than others do. I stand by the fact though that ultimately the blame lies with those that have random unprotected sex, and if denial IS the issue when it’s not going to matter how much you cram the message down someone’s throat, they’ll still deny it. There seems to be a lot more effort put into the idea that being a slut is perfectly okay, with the “being safe” message as an aside. A bit like when they advertise mega-cheap alcohol on TV and put in the small print “oh but drink responsibly”. I would agree that mentality needs to change. But it won’t change purely through people being told, they need to heed the warnings and take responsibility for their lives themselves. It is the latter which I feel is the more prevalent cause for this increase.

          1. I find it amazing that the attitude is so nonchalent. Everyone “knows” the risks, but the “it probably won’t happen” and “it can be controlled anyway” attitude is frighteningly prevalent. The change has to come from within, somehow. I don’t think you can really say the information isn’t there; you have only to grow up with your eyes open these days to see it everywhere. It’s that people ignore it that’s the problem.

          2. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 2:55pm

            I agree but part of the problem is you can have a group like THT who go to clubs put up posters, have info leaflets and people to talk to but how many people take note. Mores to the point how many people see them and stay clear, not wanting the thought ruining their night?

            Whatever we do to get this message across it needs to be bolder, bigger something people can’t help but see and never forget. Trouble with THT stands is people can just walk away.

            Your alcohol add idea is a good one so more along those lines as well as posters that grip. A lot of people seem to think they can tell who have HIV and who hasn’t but in most part that is so untrue, so you could for example have two muscle hunks, or two nerds or two builders, you get the picture with the slogan “So who has HIV?”… just an idea

          3. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 2:55pm

            We need different ways to get the same message out there so that people don’t get uptight.

            Of course it’s important that these groups have the right finance to, which could put things on hold for a bit.

      2. Staircase2 23 Mar 2011, 7:14pm

        you are offending though

        I would expect that MOST HIV infections occur unwillingly

        where did you get the idea that people WANT to become HIV positive?

        its very unhelpful to be putting forward the idea that HIV infection is a blame issue
        It doesnt help those with HIV and it doesnt help stop the spread of HIV

        enough with the morality already

        1. I did pick up on the semantic error in the use of the words ‘willing’ and ‘unwilling’, but as it was a personal response to Jock S Strap and his use of the word ‘unwilling’ I didn’t bother to clarify what I was saying, as I knew he would understand what I meant.

          For the record I don’t think anyone who has HIV has contracted it ‘willingly’.

        2. Jock S. Trap 24 Mar 2011, 9:26am

          Actually Staircase I very sadly have been approached about 5 times in the last 6-7 years by people wanting to get HIV. They misguidedly think its a easy ride.

          Hypocrites then blast me with names when I angily bite their sad little ignorant heads off.

    3. “Stopping Grindr/Gaydar/Saunas/Bath houses etc prehaps you’d like to take us back to before 1967 when we were illegal too.”

      Well that may not be a pleasant return, but I tell you something, there would be a damn sight more people alive if it were.

      1. Staircase2 23 Mar 2011, 7:19pm

        not true

        1967 HIV was not an issue in this country in any kind of sizable numbers – post 80s UK HIV is now a large problem.

        anyway you clearly have a rosey eyed view of how much sex gay men were having in 1967 – read Joe Orton’s Diaries. Im sure what we now term ‘risky’ sex was much more prevalent back then – how else could HIV have got a foot hold in the first place?

      2. Jock S. Trap 24 Mar 2011, 9:27am

        Actually all that would do is push the problem underground and we would have an epidemic on our hands. Better to know than to hide like too many homophobic countries.

  4. Absolutely disgraceful. With all the information out there, you’d think the level of infection would be dropping. NICE isn’t even talking about promiscuous straights having sex with more than one partner. Why not? I’m convinced that had HIV first started in the straight community, there would be NO stigma and NO denigration of their sexual orientation or promiscuity either.

  5. I really don’t understand why! Every person with a bit of a brain knows that condoms are a MUST!!!

  6. Absolutely shocked by the comments that LU writes. Why does he/she spend so much time and effort on this site?? Go and spend your time doing something else, you’re simply coming across as a despicable person.
    Some people are gay get over it.
    Go and get some help, and stop being so unhappy.

  7. LU’s comments have been deleted!

    Superb. There’s no place in humanity for someone who supports murder, rape and euthanasia of innocent gay people.

    Bye, bye LU, I’ll miss your lunacy and stupidity. Sniff.

    1. now I look like a nutter with randon insults all over the place

      1. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 2:58pm

        Oh James! you not a bad nutter!!

        ;)

      2. Cheers!

      3. Staircase2 23 Mar 2011, 7:19pm

        things that make yer go ‘hmmmmm’……..

        1. c and c music factory

      4. James! “Now I look like a nutter with random insults all over the place”

        Sounds about right.

    2. Thank you Pinknews for deleting these offensive comments.

    3. Yep LU has finally been flushed. Bye bye LU…

      1. Jock S. Trap 24 Mar 2011, 1:51pm

        I hope someone didn’t forget to put bleach down afterwards those kind of germs linger.

  8. LU’s comments have been deleted!

    Superb. There’s no place in humanity for someone who supports murder, sexual assault and euthanasia of innocent gay people.

    Bye, bye LU, I’ll miss your lunacy and stupidity. Sniff.

  9. L.U.s comments have been deleted!

    Superb. There’s no place in humanity for someone who supports murder, sexual assault and euthanasia of innocent gay people.

    Bye, bye LU, I’ll miss your lunacy and stupidity. Sniff.

  10. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 3:05pm

    I do have to add that I do think one of the biggest problems is HIV rightly or wrong being pigeon holed into groups. I think for as long as it is pigeon holed and not treated as something all should be concerned about it will remain something not to take seriously to too many people.

    Give people the information on the disease but don’t section it. All that does it make more people think they won’t get it.

  11. I think that saying everyone who uses Grindr/Gaydar/Saunas etc. Are sluts is a bit harsh. No matter what you think not everyone who uses or have used these are! You will find people everywhere in the whole general population who don’t like to use condoms. I’m not saying it is right, I personally think it isn’t.
    I think harder hitting education is going to be the way forward, you can’t MAKE people wear condoms, which at the moment is the strongest protection we have available. the other thing I would like to question is, if they believe that a large group are undiagnosed, then could this increase be because those people have started to be come ill and have since been diagnosed, hence the increase in diagnosed cases but a possible decrease in undiagnosed cases.

    I too do not like the sigma that is aways aimed at the Gay section of the population when, nearly anything, about HIV or Aids hits the papers, but surely as a community we should all be trying to inform the section at risk

    1. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 4:59pm

      I agree. Not only that but aren’t we generalising when we assume all who use Grindr/Gaydar/Sauna have risky sex?

      That’s just wrong. It aids the stereotypes. Plenty of people use those sites/places and have safer sex.

      1. This is true, but I think it’s fair to say that gay men have far more sexual partners the straights. The average straight man has 15-20 partners in a lifetime – I know some gay men that have that many in a month.

        I’m not saying they don’t practice safer sex, but it is just that: safer, not safe. There is always a risk entailed, and if you have more sexual partners, you also stand a higher chance of infection.

        1. You really post some truly ugly comments. you really do hate us don’t you and I don’t beleive you’re gay

        2. Jock S. Trap 24 Mar 2011, 1:59pm

          Spanner

          You clearly don’t see towns late at night are the clubs. Many straight men have just as many partners, thats a bit of misinformation.

          As for the numbers in general comment, don’t you think they is why some Straight men have a problem with Gay men. It’s nothing to do with what we do it because if we want to we can whenever we want. Now ask any straight man going out on the town if they wouldn’t want exactly the same.

          Society itself has become much more permissive it doesn’t need labels attached.

          1. I agree, permissiveness has increased over recent years. ALL men would sleep around if they have the opportunity, but it is the women that prevent the straights from doing so.

            The fact a certain group of men have sex with other men is why it is that much higher. I certainly dont subscribe to the idea gay men may be attacked by straights simply out of jealousy. They would not equate to that anyway as we don’t have “real sex” and it’s ‘yucky’ and disgusting and all that.

            I base my statements on statistical evidence, not hearsay, conjecture and “what I saw down the pub last Saturday night”

      2. Quite right Jock. I use Grindr to keep in touch with my knitting circle.

        1. Jock S. Trap 25 Mar 2011, 12:31pm

          Whatever floats your boat big guy!

  12. without passing on judgement…it is alarming the number of “open reationships” on gay dating websites (very little dating)! this cannot be a good thing…
    we should promote equally both the safe sex message as wel as the importance of monogamous and faithful relationships amongst gay men!

  13. Would this be the same denialists that claim that str8 HIV case are overtaking gay ones, and that we have every right and justification to be able to donate blood?

    It’s pretty obvious that gay men are selfish and generally downright bloody irresponsible at caring for their own health and consideration for others, so why in hell should they be allowed to donate blood and risk infecting an even wider range of people?

  14. Not so harmless then ..

  15. While I don’t disagree with the sentiment expressed by some here that gay men must take more responsibility to halt the spread of infection, I’m a little disappointed by the amount of finger pointing and lack of insight here.

    The fact is, HIV prevalence amongst MSM (men who have sex with men) is not entirely the result of behaviour so much as epidemiology. Even if MSM were to take more stringent measures to prevent HIV transmission, we would still be at greater risk than the wider population for the simple reason that we are a small group who select sexual partners from mostly within our group. The fact that heterosexuals have a much greater selection of sexual partners to choose from means that HIV transmission is, in effect, diluted by their numbers.

  16. This effect has been studied and documented in African American MSM who are a very high risk group because they face the added disadvantage of being undesirable sexual partners to non African Americans. This means they are forced to select partners from a very limited pool within their own group, amplifying the transmission risk. There is also the additional factor that transmission is likely to be limited in the heterosexual population by sex segregation. In other words, in an exclusively heterosexual population transmission of infection should largely be male to female or female to male. There is no such barrier to transmission in MSM.

    Taken as a whole with other various factors it’s not difficult to see why HIV is such a problem amongst gay men. We can only hope for better education and that people will always take sensible precautions in future.

  17. I cannot believe the inverted homophobia that has taken place on this comments board. Are we at a stage in the gay community that we judge others who have contracted HIV because they have many partners, or do we grade the illness to how it was caught? You have only had one partner so you have our sympathies, more than ten and we turn our back!
    I am 42 and have never ever drank alcohol, so does that give me the right to judge those that do, and all those people that have liver disease, I can look down on, and refuse to help. Every one of us will indulge in something that can cause us harm, from walking down the street to bungee jumping. The question here is education, and then support for those that have HIV. If we stand and condemn our own , what right do we to have spout off on here, when others condemn us I.e the religious sector. Most peoples behaviour has a reason behind it, loneliness , fear, retribution, low self respect. We dont know, but aspects of peoples lives that could cause them to take a risk. Perhaps all of us should take this into account before such hate is spewed out.

    1. Nobody is judging anybody. How, where or who you got it from is not important.
      However, there are levels of risk, and it goes without saying that more promiscuous people carry a higher chance of catching it, simply by the law of averages. That said, one could catch it the very first time you have sex if one is ignorant of the precautions.

  18. Lol,ok,children,let’s all play nicely,lol.Flinging insults around doesn’t really help,now does it?! Naughty step,anyone,hahaha! Look,it’s simple,you take it up the whizz-way without protection,you’re gonna run an increased risk,SIMPLES! We’ve been getting up to grief since man 1st walked upright,& it aint gonna stop just coz of some statistics.Some folk just don’t wanna read leaflets handed out in a gay venue by some well-meaning out-reach worker.In the effort to ‘destigmatise’ HIV/AIDS we’ve almost pushed it out of the public domain.We can hardly start bleating on now about the rise in infection.Taking responsibility for your own sexual practices would be a good start.Oh,& YES,before anyone has a pop at me,I am hiv+.

  19. Unfortunately LU you’re the type of person/idiot that takes information like this and then, as I said before, tarnishes the entire gay population with the same brush. And actually, I would imagine if there was a way to break down the demographic of new infections you would find it’s not the type of people adopting children, who live sensible lives and are in committed relationships. It’s the little scene queens in the cities who need only tap a few buttons on their iPhone (oh yay and now their Android phones) and within 10 minutes they’re undoing buttons on someone’s trousers.

    Still I’d rather know them than you, you sound so awful and it’s SO pitiful you have SO much time dedicated to commenting on a gay community website, a community which you seem to detest….internet trolls are so 90s.

  20. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 11:53am

    LU

    I want to say something but need to put is delicately so you’ll understand… Now how do I put it… Oh yeah

    Cuckoo Cuckoo.

  21. Its not gay v straight you know

  22. Im sure we’de all love that LU, so off you pop to Dignitas flower!!

  23. LU you walking abortion-gone-wrong, what’s the deal? Have you been stood on the outside all your life looking in at everyone else living and operating as normal human beings? Are you some twisted sister Christian? Do please tell.

  24. A gay population of millions! Rubbish!

    The Health Protection Agency monitor a pool of less than 600,000 men who have sex with men at any time within the previous five years.

    Other reliable government suveys show only 1 in 100 men are gay.

    In a population of some 60 million – thats 600,000 gays.
    .

  25. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 11:58am

    I think a collection would be very popular for that cause Drew.

  26. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 12:03pm

    I think even the government have wised up to the fact that there are more of the LGBT community than the deniers would like to believe.

    Your Health Protection Agency monitoring arguement is weak at best, arrogant too.

    Pathetic

  27. Oh please I had aroung 600,000

  28. Wow. Voodoo, your comment is so ridiculous, where do you begin…. oh, yes, thats right, school.

  29. You mean the reliable UK Government survey that indicates its nearer 6%?

    Can’t count or can’t read, which is it?

    Shocking the low education level of these religious nuts….

  30. “Other reliable government surveys show only 1 in 100 men are gay.”
    Please verify these apparent ‘findings’. Which government? The Ugandan one?

    General statistics demonstrate between 4-10%

  31. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 12:04pm

    I don’t have AIDS, LU. I have HIV. An educated perosn who know the difference.

    My medication of the last 3 years is paid for but cheers for sharing.

  32. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 12:05pm

    correction

    An educated person would know the difference.

  33. Unsheathed member? How romantic. You’ve done this before haven’t you LU?!

  34. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 12:09pm

    Yes LU, it’s called rape.

  35. LU is skinner

    unsheathed member LOL I can just see hie lips pursing and his little dick twitching

  36. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 12:10pm

    No doubt you have plenty of nasty comments about that subject too.

  37. Jock S. Trap 23 Mar 2011, 12:24pm

    curious thing LU.

    Am I right in thinking that you believe (bizarrely) that being Gay in a mental condition brought on via abuse.

    No matter how much that belief is so wrong and harmful I have to ask…

    Being that you seem to treat the LGBT so nastily can we assume that a victim of child abuse will be totally disgusting to you and rather than wanting that child to grow up as happy as possible you’d rather it stayed unhappy to the possible point of suicide, particularly if he/she didn’t grow the way you wanted? But who are you to dictate how anyone grows?

    Is you moto really “If the bastards down, keep em down”?

    Ya nasty!

  38. Yeah, almost as much as you LU, with your sick obsession with “members”…. so who exactly is gay again?

  39. Looks like you hit a raw nerve there James, with the cock obsessed LU! LOL, I love it.

  40. .

    Millions?

    Prove please?

    .

  41. No, you first.

  42. I’ve got your number voodoo straigh bloke hangs around with men always looking out for gay guys then say the gays keep looking at me. Total cliché

  43. Staircase2 23 Mar 2011, 7:21pm

    by ‘little scene queens’ and ‘in the cities’ I assume youre not from round these here parts then? lol

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all