undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdefrost1y ago0 comments

Re-reading comments in the light of feedback is always interesting, we often project and appear to say what we don't actually intend - I'm prone to that more and more now that I'm getting older.

I'm still not sold on the notion that limiting public infomation reduces the incidence of gay sex in a society; the Victorians famously did that and ended up with Polari, rent boys, Green Carnations, and generally no end of coded communication.

It made the puritans feel better but did little good otherwise.

0 comments

ETH_start1y ago

I'm not sold on the idea either. But it's plausible enough to consider as a possibility in my opinion. Even with all sorts of work-arounds and coded language, the overall volume of male-to-male sexual contact and STI infection might decline with such censorship.

Regardless, censorship is not the path to a healthy society and should be rejected on principle.

defrostOP1y ago

Looking at the data for my country, Australia, the greatest volume of STI infection by far is from Chlamydia, Gonorrhoea, and Syphilis which are in no way confined to male-to-male transmission.

If a society is looking to decrease STI infection rates I don't see why they'd limit focus to LGBT material and expect any kind of useful result.

When AIDs first appeared Australia made public health announcements addressing all forms of sex as AIDs wasn't limit to male-to-male sexual transmission either, that was merely the demographic pool that STI first appeared in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSmaWEK_rD4

ETH_start1y ago

I agree that the focus shouldn't be solely on LGBT material, but there’s a strong public health case for giving disproportionate attention (not censorship) to MSM activity. The data consistently shows higher rates of STIs like HIV, syphilis, gonorrhea, etc in MSM populations. Targeting resources toward high-risk groups increases public health policy efficacy.

But as you point out, STIs aren’t confined to any one group, so focusing exclusively on MSM activity would be a mistake.

With respect to HIV, its prevalence among MSM is 20 to 30 times higher than in the general population.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

ETH_start1y ago

Regardless, censorship is not the path to a healthy society and should be rejected on principle.

defrostOP1y ago

Looking at the data for my country, Australia, the greatest volume of STI infection by far is from Chlamydia, Gonorrhoea, and Syphilis which are in no way confined to male-to-male transmission.

If a society is looking to decrease STI infection rates I don't see why they'd limit focus to LGBT material and expect any kind of useful result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSmaWEK_rD4

ETH_start1y ago

But as you point out, STIs aren’t confined to any one group, so focusing exclusively on MSM activity would be a mistake.

With respect to HIV, its prevalence among MSM is 20 to 30 times higher than in the general population.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse