Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Poly Relationships Corner

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 11-29-2013, 09:04 AM
Natja's Avatar
Natja Natja is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 822
Default

Just an FYI, I know three people who got herpes through sex.

I have a degree in a biological science and no, there is no reason to fail to disclose because viruses are 'hard to catch'.

The OP and husband did the right thing for them people are free to take the risk if they choose with informed consent.

But to be honest, the sex simply is not worth the risk, however minuscule to me any more, allowing someone else that level of power over my health, for sex?

It's just not worth it, no one in the world is that hot.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-29-2013, 09:27 AM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

As I said, I think I would disclose. However, when people discriminate against others because of false beliefs about anything, I can understand why that would make them extremely reluctant to do so. And most people contract herpes, HSV2 anyway, "through sex", it just is quite hard to get it "through sex" in the absence of an outbreak. I didn't say non disclosure is right but it's quite inevitable when the average persons knowledge of STDs is so painfully limited. If people had a factual and realistic understanding of STDs and there wasn't all this stigma perpetrated by the ignorant but loud, we would maximize the chances of people disclosing and I think people who need to disclose would do so with some reassurance that others were making informed choices, and not ill informed choices based on fiction.

The fact is, the scientific fact is, herpes transmission with condoms and in the absence of a breakout is tiny. I'm more concerned about people giving me flu because science tells me I'm much more likely to catch that and suffer morbidity than I am herpes.

Last edited by london; 11-29-2013 at 09:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-29-2013, 12:43 PM
scarletzinnia scarletzinnia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 87
Default

My husband was well aware that the risk of him catching genital herpes was low if his potential lover was not having an outbreak. But it was still a risk he was not interested in taking, for himself, for me, and because one of the five people in his sexual network would have been very seriously impacted by catching it. So it wasn't worth it to him. It might have been worth it for someone who didn't give a crap about others in their sexual network potentially suffering, or someone who was completely single, no other partners, or someone who was really, really desperate for sex, but that was not the case for my husband at all.

I also would like to point out that the word "discrimination" does not apply to sexual situations at all. That implies an ethical obligation to be fair, as is the case with jobs or education or housing. But there is no obligation when it comes to sex. No one is EVER obligated to fuck anyone else, ever, everyone is free to make whatever decisions are right for them and their own body. If my husband had decided not to sleep with his friend because he noticed she had a really fat ass all of a sudden, that would have been fine. Sad for her, and you could have certainly called him a shallow guy for doing that, but it would have been a decision he, and anyone, is free to make. It's about desire, not obligation.

Last edited by scarletzinnia; 11-29-2013 at 12:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-29-2013, 03:07 PM
WhatHappened WhatHappened is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
It's very difficult to catch herpes. ... After all, its a virus that the vast majority of people will end up with like genital warts.
If it's so incredibly difficult to catch, how is it that 'the vast majority of people' end up with it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarletzinnia View Post
I also would like to point out that the word "discrimination" does not apply to sexual situations at all. That implies an ethical obligation to be fair, as is the case with jobs or education or housing. But there is no obligation when it comes to sex. No one is EVER obligated to fuck anyone else, ever, everyone is free to make whatever decisions are right for them and their own body.
Well said. It's rather sad when someone is attacked, called names, and accused of being ignorant and 'discriminatory' for NOT having sex with someone else. Such attitudes reflect poorly on the whole poly community.

Regardless of what anyone else thinks, it should have been your husband's decision whether he wanted to take that risk or not.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-29-2013, 04:20 PM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

Because so many people have cold sores. Because many people carry the virus without having an outbreak. Because testing positive for hsv doesn't mean you suffer with herpes.

If I have attacked anyone for adding to the stigma of herpes, I am glad. It has nothing to do with anyone being entitled to sex, and everything to do with ostracising people with lifelong STDs.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-29-2013, 04:55 PM
scarletzinnia scarletzinnia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 87
Default

But since what actually happened here is that my husband told his friend that he didn't want to proceed with a sexual relationship but still wanted to stay close friends with her, and SHE refused to speak to HIM for months afterwards, as I posted about earlier, what exactly is your point, London, if you really don't believe my husband was obligated to fuck her because she wanted to?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-29-2013, 05:04 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,281
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarletzinnia View Post
What bothers me now is that he cannot seem to to see that his "friend" had any negative motivations towards me and our relationship... He may no longer talk to her, but he doesn't have a problem at all with her ethics, he thinks she just got upset but basically meant well.
What is your desired outcome here? You want him to hate her guts? To say mean things about her?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarletzinnia View Post
I am trying to let go of all this, but I just can't. I feel I need him to recognize what he was dealing with, and he just refuses. This makes me feel very unsafe.
It's important to understand that people don't respond to challenges the same. He seemed to identify that this girl was bad news and eventually cut her off. He gave her another shot, but cut her off again when it was evident that she hadn't changed to an acceptable degree. The fact that he doesn't despise her would simply suggest that he is perhaps more emotionally mature than you are.

I say, stop resenting his attitude about it and start admiring his ability to make safe decisions without being emotionally overwhelmed. Seems to me he is doing just fine.
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-29-2013, 05:18 PM
scarletzinnia scarletzinnia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 87
Default

Good questions, Marcus. No, I am not looking for my husband to "despise" this person. Let me be a bit more clear.

She told him, completely unprovoked by any interaction we ever had with her, or that he told her about, that I was abusive, controlling, and that he deserved better. He does not understand that was an attack on me and my character. He does not see that she was trying to cause trouble in our marriage at all. He does not see that she was likely angry at him too, for sexually rejecting her. He wants to see her as some well-meaning person who was just "upset."

I am very sensitive to this because someone he dated briefly in the distant past threatened me with bodily harm, and he reacted the same way. "She didn't mean it, she's a terrific person, she was just upset."

I want a zero-tolerance policy on people who seek to cause discord and extreme drama, and I want him to condemn that sort of behavior so we don't end up with yet another person like that in our lives. I do not need him to condemn the person, but I do need him to condemn the behavior. He refuses, because he doesn't want to recognize that the behavior existed, even if he did stop talking to her.

Last edited by scarletzinnia; 11-29-2013 at 05:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-29-2013, 05:33 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,281
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarletzinnia View Post
Good questions, Marcus. No, I am not looking for my husband to "despise" this person. Let me be a bit more clear.

She told him, completely unprovoked by any interaction we ever had with her, or that he told her about, that I was abusive, controlling, and that he deserved better. He does not understand that was an attack on me and my character. He does not see that she was trying to cause trouble in our marriage at all. He does not see that she was likely angry at him too, for sexually rejecting her. He wants to see her as some well-meaning person who was just "upset."
Not to put too fine a point on it, but she's entitled to her opinion, and he's entitled to responding to her opinion however he chooses.

If hearing about the details about his relationships is distressing to you then I suggest you let him know that you don't want to hear those kinds of details anymore. "Honey, if one of your girls thinks I'm a nasty old bag, please feel free to not pass that information on"

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarletzinnia View Post
I am very sensitive to this because someone he dated in the distant past threatened me with bodily harm, and he reacted the same way. "She didn't mean it, she was just upset."
I recommend keeping the conversations distinct so that you don't have an emotional snowball kind of reaction. Lumping a threat of violence together with someone saying they don't like you is just going to muddy the waters.

If someone doesn't like you, that's a non-issue.
If someone threatens to attack you... call the police.
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-29-2013, 07:49 PM
WhatHappened WhatHappened is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
Not to put too fine a point on it, but she's entitled to her opinion, and he's entitled to responding to her opinion however he chooses.
And yet, most people like to feel that the person who is supposed to love them more than anyone in the world has their back and would be affected by hearing the one they supposedly love run down. She's certainly entitled to her feelings about his response.

London, whatever the reason, it simply doesn't add up to claim BOTH that the vast majority of people have a disease AND that it is extremely hard to catch. Not having sex with a person is not the same as 'ostracizing' them.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:11 PM.