HIV Hollywood rumours

[Bayum]

I guess I wanted to post this thread after Ewing people were angrier over Jeremy Corbyn and ISIS, than they were of human interest.

The Sun led with one of its usual sensationalist headlines over the weekend with disturbing news that an actor in Hollywood was HIV positive.

And what? Will they run a similar headline expressing shock at the fact that diabetes is linked with obesity!? Probably not.

I can agree in some aspects that because they're in the public eye, any news is news, but if Bob was to expose such news about 'Glenda', either through mentioning their name or even occupation, there would be hell to pay!

I would hold my hand up and affirm that I would be happier living with HIV than diabetes for instance. Drugs are better, people are now living longer, healthier lives whereas diabetes is still causing problems in all age ranges.

The use of the virus to create headlines seems to serve a wider purpose - panic. Not since the 80s has there been much discussion on the virus - and rightly so. Yes for some people who take part in at risk activities there may be some panic for them, but similarly the disease is well protected against with barrier methods and even drug therapies and sex education headlines would have been better all round.

 

[bb21]

You forgot that The Scum publish stories to sell papers, not depending on factors such as moral values or rights and wrongs. They will publish anything that has the potential to raise sales, hence Page 3, so this is hardly something to be shocked about.

I would consider them too dirty even if used to wrap dog poo in.

 

[Phil.]

You forgot that The Scum publish stories to sell papers, not depending on factors such as moral values or rights and wrongs. They will publish anything that has the potential to raise sales, hence Page 3, so this is hardly something to be shocked about.

I would consider them too dirty even if used to wrap dog poo in.

You forget that ALL "newspapers" run stories to sell copy. It's no good expecting truth and clarity from any of them. All you'll read is what the Editor wants you to read.

 

[DarloRich]

You forget that ALL "newspapers" run stories to sell copy. It's no good expecting truth and clarity from any of them. All you'll read is what the proprietor wants you to read.

edited ( ) for you

 

[Johnuk123]

You forgot that The Scum publish stories to sell papers, not depending on factors such as moral values or rights and wrongs. They will publish anything that has the potential to raise sales, hence Page 3, so this is hardly something to be shocked about.

I would consider them too dirty even if used to wrap dog poo in.

So all the other papers don't publish stories to sell papers then ? rather silly thing to infer I think.

 

[Mojo]

I would hold my hand up and affirm that I would be happier living with HIV than diabetes for instance. Drugs are better, people are now living longer, healthier lives whereas diabetes is still causing problems in all age ranges.

Thought I was going crazy when I saw this story pop up on The Economist this afternoon: http://new.spectator.co.uk/2014/04/why-id-rather-have-hiv-than-diabetes/

As a doctor, I’d rather have HIV than diabetes

 

[TheNewNo2]

I saw that on Twitter and thought "who gives a ****?"

 

[Bayum]

I saw that on Twitter and thought "who gives a ****?"

This is exactly it. Yes, HIV is a dangerous virus, but these days I do think we should have an attitude of - so what? Prevention should clearly be at the forefront and is at the forefront of most people's minds, but for those unfortunate few - they shouldn't be made to feel like people will start thinking negatively about them, they shouldn't be feeling like we're back in the 80s either. They certainly should not be pressured into revealing their status as Charlie Sheen has done this lunchtime.

Thought I was going crazy when I saw this story pop up on The Economist this afternoon: http://new.spectator.co.uk/2014/04/w...than-diabetes/

Looks like an article from 2014! Very coincidental!

 

[bb21]

So all the other papers don't publish stories to sell papers then ? rather silly thing to infer I think.

I did not infer anything.

The Scum is the one the OP mentioned so that is what I was discussing. If you want to talk about other papers I am not going to stop you.

For your benefit, they are all as bad as each other. The Indie is a bit better imo but I wouldn't trust everything they say either.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I'm struggling to feel any sympathy for the alleged actor, given how many people he had unprotected sex with knowing he had HIV. There shouldn't be stigma in having the illness but, equally, people who behave like that need punishing.

Life expectancy is now very high for people with HIV, but it's still an extremely nasty illness. A friend of mine has it and it's properly affected him, mentally as well as physically.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That said, forcing people to disclose this is shameful, esp ecially when the only motivation is profit.

And yes, all newspapers are as bad. The People outed an affair that the footballer Garry Flitcroft had, and not long afterwards his father ended up committing suicide.

 

[ComUtoR]

I'm struggling to feel any sympathy for Charlie Sheen the alleged actor, given how many people he had unprotected sex with knowing he had HIV.

I believe its a criminal offense.

I heard this morning that various starlets etc have been posting their negative results on social media. Considering that "Hollywood" is notoriously permissive it could be the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Bayum]

I'm struggling to feel any sympathy for the alleged actor, given how many people he had unprotected sex with knowing he had HIV. There shouldn't be stigma in having the illness but, equally, people who behave like that need punishing.

Life expectancy is now very high for people with HIV, but it's still an extremely nasty illness. A friend of mine has it and it's properly affected him, mentally as well as physically.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That said, forcing people to disclose this is shameful, esp ecially when the only motivation is profit.

And yes, all newspapers are as bad. The People outed an affair that the footballer Garry Flitcroft had, and not long afterwards his father ended up committing suicide.

Sorry, that was the bit that I didn't know about.

Perhaps you can tell me how it affected you personally having unprotected sex with Mr Sheen?

In his interview, he stated he had slept with two people, who knew about his status. Under care from the doctors, one would assume with the already very small chance of contracting HIV, the care he was recieving reduced this risk further.

I have no evidence to support this, you don't have any supporting evidence for the increased numbers you're talking about.

 

[ExRes]

Sorry, that was the bit that I didn't know about.

Perhaps you can tell me how it affected you personally having unprotected sex with Mr Sheen?

In his interview, he stated he had slept with two people, who knew about his status. Under care from the doctors, one would assume with the already very small chance of contracting HIV, the care he was recieving reduced this risk further.

I have no evidence to support this, you don't have any supporting evidence for the increased numbers you're talking about.

I understand that he claimed 'a prostitute took a photo of his medication and threatened to sell it to newspapers', I assume that would have been one of the two people he slept with in four years the other one being, of course, Arctic Troll :roll:

As for all the fuss about being 'outed' as HIV positive, I thought outing was mandatory nowadays if you go by the way that the lesbian and gay fraternity find it necessary to out their fellows, or is that different ?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

So Charlie Sheen has HIV... So what? He can still be a perfectly normal member of society

 

[Tetchytyke]

I don't know what he's said in the interview, but other media sources reckon there's at least four women, if not more, who have claimed that he slept with them without using protection or telling him about his HIV status.

There are two women- his ex-wife and a porn star- who have gone public with the allegations. Given he's bragged of sleeping with 5000 people, I'll bet they're not the only ones.

 

[Clip]

I guess I wanted to post this thread after Ewing people were angrier over Jeremy Corbyn and ISIS, than they were of human interest.

The Sun led with one of its usual sensationalist headlines over the weekend with disturbing news that an actor in Hollywood was HIV positive.

And what? Will they run a similar headline expressing shock at the fact that diabetes is linked with obesity!? Probably not.

I can agree in some aspects that because they're in the public eye, any news is news, but if Bob was to expose such news about 'Glenda', either through mentioning their name or even occupation, there would be hell to pay!

.

You seem to be under the impression that a news paper that sells its copy to those who like reading all the 'gossip' about celebs isn't going to run a story about it? And disclosing it had nowt to do with them as it first appeared in the US and the actor went on national telly today to confirm it.

And yes they have run many a story linking diabetes with obesity so that's a futile argument.

 

[Bayum]

You seem to be under the impression that a news paper that sells its copy to those who like reading all the 'gossip' about celebs isn't going to run a story about it? And disclosing it had nowt to do with them as it first appeared in the US and the actor went on national telly today to confirm it.

And yes they have run many a story linking diabetes with obesity so that's a futile argument.

The disclosure had lots to do with them - they had the choice between paying off someone and not running a story that would potentially lead to outing or whatever.

If this were in the UK and it was Joe Public, a doctor could be tried for breaking confidentiality in such a way that identifies or narrows down particular individuals. I think in some cases there's also questions to be asked and answered for if ex-friends were to announce someone's HIV status without their permission.

The amount of pressure placed upon this man from the breaking of the stories, before he had even given his live interview was tremendous. It is not the way someone's diabetes, HIV, cancer, whatever status to be discussed and thrust into the public eye.

 

[ExRes]

It's all very well having a go at the media, they usually deserve it, but in this case Sheen clearly states in his interview that he had to pay his own 'friends' blackmail payments to stop them from revealing his HIV status, this is a long way from being a media thing, this is simply that people can't wait to open their mouths about anyone and anything to anyone, I think that just about covers your 'Joe Public' example

 

[Poolsharks1]

You know what annoys me! If hes known for 4 years like he said it wasnt that long ago he was having his public meltdown with 2 or 3 woman hanging off his arm whilst he was out his face. Im sure he didn't tell these woman he had aids before sleeping with them. Protection or no protection im not sure many woman would take the risk.

 

[TheNewNo2]

So Charlie Sheen has HIV... So what? He can still be a perfectly normal member of society

No he can't, but not because of the HIV.

 

[theblackwatch]

You know what annoys me! If hes known for 4 years like he said it wasnt that long ago he was having his public meltdown with 2 or 3 woman hanging off his arm whilst he was out his face. Im sure he didn't tell these woman he had aids before sleeping with them. Protection or no protection im not sure many woman would take the risk.

He doesn't have AIDS, he is HIV positive - there is a major difference, and it's rather worrying that after so much publicity over many years some people clearly don't appear to know that.

 

[Bayum]

You know what annoys me! If hes known for 4 years like he said it wasnt that long ago he was having his public meltdown with 2 or 3 woman hanging off his arm whilst he was out his face. Im sure he didn't tell these woman he had aids before sleeping with them. Protection or no protection im not sure many woman would take the risk.

Though it's actually alot safer to have unprotected sex with someone who is HIV positive and on medication, than unprotected sex with someone who doesn't know their status.

Porn stars are more than likely to be aware of this due to the impact it would have on their careers. So I'm afraid this argument doesn't stand.

 

[ExRes]

Though it's actually alot safer to have unprotected sex with someone who is HIV positive and on medication, than unprotected sex with someone who doesn't know their status.

Porn stars are more than likely to be aware of this due to the impact it would have on their careers. So I'm afraid this argument doesn't stand.

Are you actually defending someone with HIV having unprotected sex, or protected come to that, with a partner they haven't admitted their medical status to ?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Though it's actually alot safer to have unprotected sex with someone who is HIV positive and on medication, than unprotected sex with someone who doesn't know their status.

Of course it is safer to have unprotected sex with someone with HIV or AIDS taking their meds compared to someone who isn't. But it's a lot safer again to not have unprotected sex with someone with HIV or AIDS in the first place.

If you know you have an STD- and it doesn't matter which one- and you knowingly have unprotected sex with someone without telling them about your STD then you are a vile human being. His ex-wife claims that he didn't tell her for years.

(And yes, you shouldn't be having unprotected sex with someone you don't know, but that's a different issue).

Perhaps you can tell me how it affected you personally having unprotected sex with Mr Sheen?

Oh, that's very mature. Grow up.

 

[miami]

I did not infer anything.

The Scum is the one the OP mentioned so that is what I was discussing. If you want to talk about other papers I am not going to stop you.

For your benefit, they are all as bad as each other. The Indie is a bit better imo but I wouldn't trust everything they say either.

No newspaper is perfect, but claiming that the telegraph is as bad as the sun, or claiming the FT and the morning star are as bad as each other is rather unfair on papers like the times and guardian that are a far higher caliber than the evil hate-inducing mail, or the tabloid trash of the mirror.

For UK papers, my personal "hierarchy" of quality is something like

FT
Times/Telegraph/Guardian/Independent
Express/Mirror/City AM
Sun/Metro
Morning Star/Daily Star/Daily Sport
Daily Mail

 

[Bayum]

Are you actually defending someone with HIV having unprotected sex, or protected come to that, with a partner they haven't admitted their medical status to ?

If I had to defend someone who had protected sex and they had HIV, yes, I would. If they have used barrier protection than the risk of transmission is minute. They're doing everything in their power to prevent transmission bar telling someone, then great.


The pint I was attempting to make was that this is one person. There are thousands in the UK taking these risks every day. Regardless of how the man was outed, it shouldn't be legal (whether it's right or not) for 'friends' or the media to run with stories like this. It creates a sensationalist attitude that causes exactly the kind of comments on this thread to read their ugly heads again.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I understand that he claimed 'a prostitute took a photo of his medication and threatened to sell it to newspapers', I assume that would have been one of the two people he slept with in four years the other one being, of course, Arctic Troll :roll:

As for all the fuss about being 'outed' as HIV positive, I thought outing was mandatory nowadays if you go by the way that the lesbian and gay fraternity find it necessary to out their fellows, or is that different ?

Worth pointing out that it wasn't a 'lady of the night'.

 

[ExRes]

If I had to defend someone who had protected sex and they had HIV, yes, I would. If they have used barrier protection than the risk of transmission is minute. They're doing everything in their power to prevent transmission bar telling someone, then great.

I simply can't believe your attitude, you are defending someone who is sexually abusing a person by withholding the fact they are HIV positive, that is simply disgusting, you think 'bar telling someone' is acceptable ?, disgusting, simply disgusting and, I hope, illegal
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Worth pointing out that it wasn't a 'lady of the night'.

So you are disputing the comment made by Sheen himself ?, you know more than he does ?

 

[ExRes]

I return to this thread after reading a newspaper report while catching up on the last few days, it is from the Daily Telegraph of Saturday 12th December, the article was on page 17 and I quote

"A fitness trainer was jailed for five years yesterday for knowingly infecting two unsuspecting young women with HIV after claiming he was allergic to latex and condoms "didn't fit". Simon James, 46, contracted the HIV virus in 1995 and was supposed to be taking medication to lower the risk of him passing it on. But he had unprotected sex with two girlfriends 15 years later without telling them about his illness. And even when his "hand was forced" to confess he was HIV positive, James pretended he was taking his medication, and that it made him non-infectious. But James, from Bradley Stoke, Bristol, passed the infection on to the two professional women, who now have to take medication for the rest of their lives. It is only the third time in legal history that a jury has reached a verdict of this kind - and the first time since 2004. Jailing him at Bristol Crown Court, Recorder Michael Parroy, QC, said "With what I see as your perfectly deliberate selfishness you have blighted the lives of these two women""