This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.
Yeah same. I grew up in a very dangerous area, a lot of gang violence. Escaped by the skin of my teeth a few times. Fortunately, I was able to get out of there.
I've always gotten along with most biker gangs and mobs. It's the inner-city gangstas that don't like the fact that I'm tall, male, non-straight, and pale-skinned. Fortunately, I've mastered the skill of appearing angry and poor on public transit, so never had any problems there.
Some folks here think I'm paranoid of jumpy or whatever...but I've left many a sticky situation with both my skin and lack of a criminal record.
If you've been active in the scene for any length of time, you probably know what I mean.
Me and a couple of buddies rolled into a lakeside campground and there were about 50 bikes and at least that many Soul Brothers over several sites. Some were cool, others not, just like every other group.
Cool. Glad I'm on the same page. My brother in law is HIV + and I suspect he had a similar outlook as to Uriel; no way he didn't know the risk. He chose to ignore, rationalize or justify them and it didn't turn out well.
That's correct. I didn't mention it because Uriel is all over the place; suggesting that risk-compounding doesn't apply because he might blow someone one day, and bareback another...and because not everyone he barebacks has HIV. Neither of these things actually invalidates the core distribution, as Storm explained. He's nitpicking to willfully ignore the lesson.
In other words, his real risk of catching HIV over his lifetime is in the double-digits, not in the fractions of a percent as he used to believe. Unless, of course, he changes his behaviors to limit that risk (condoms, monogamy, testing of partners, etc).
I'm correct though, right? Inclusion of HIV- men into the pool of partners does not affect the chance of contraction in a single encounter with an HIV+ person, right? Or am I totally off base?
