Comments on: GMFA lose contract for HIV prevention ads

By: Dai

Dai — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:45:00 +0000

Phil Eddie, I think you are being wrongly hard on GMFA. I have encountered plenty of sexy men who would not for a minute consider unsafe sex – thanks to the continual campaigns of recent years. GMFA is quite right to assert it is possible and healthy to enjoy good sex, provided it is practised safely. I fear there are some who are taking a rather puritanical attitude as a result of having been infected by the virus or simply because they are extremist or puritanical individuals: they want a crackdown so that there is NO SEX, and therefore no chance of transmission. Foolishness.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Eddie

Eddie — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:01:00 +0000

This is good news to me for sure. I was diagnosed HIV-positive 2 years ago at 24. I wasn't scared of catching HIV because the ads seemed to be suggesting that the virus was sexy and really no big deal. I know different now of course. HIV is a life sentence tied to nauseous drugs that I wouldn't wish on anyone, yet I am hearing of more and more deluded young men making the same mistake as I did. How dare these charities claim to speak for me, being HIV, with the feeble excuse that graphic campaigns that tell the truth about HIV would only hurt my feelings! That is a lie they are perpetuating. Believe me when I say I want for more than anything to see an HIV ad that depicts the grim reality of living, and dying, with this disease. And if it made just one young man think twice about unsafe sex, then it would achieve more than all the years of useless GMFA HIV campaigns combined.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Sister Mary Clarence

Sister Mary Clarence — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:45:00 +0000

Out of the frying pan into the fire – no doubt we'll see yet another campaign about PEP and very little else about not putting yourself at risk in the first place.

(Report comment to the moderator)