Disclosure and sex

[Ideologue]

So I wanted to start a discussion what characteristics one should be required/expected to disclose before engaging in consensual sex.

Propensity to get fat later.

[Ideologue]

Gender, communicable diseases, and whether you're over the age of consent.

Age and diseases, yes.  I've wondered if anyone has ever tried to sue a minor for fraud after being accused or convicted of statutory rape when they were misled as to the age of the putative victim.

I'm less convinced about biological gender.  Caveat emptor.

[Martinus]

To be honest, I am not really convinced by any of these.

Sex (btw, I think people mean "sex" when they talk about "gender" here - otherwise it makes no sense) is the easiest - as Ide points out, caveat emptor. If you are attracted to that person, there's no real rational argument why the fact that they had a sex change (or are just pretending to be of a different sex) should be more important than the fact they are wearing a wig or had their breast enlarged. And since consent can be withdrawn at any time, again I don't see any interest worth protecting here by requiring such a disclosure. So yeah, no reason there (and kinda disappointed Sheilbh fell in with the trans-panic crowd).

Age is also an easy one, but for different reasons - a minor cannot validly consent to having sex, so expecting/requiring an age disclosure from a minor is likewise baseless.

The communicable disease one is the most difficult one, imo, but there's a lot of problems here to arrive at a consistent policy. There are lots of diseases one can get from having a sexual encounter (or other form of contact) with another person, and many of them are, ultimately, more dangerous than HIV, so should all of these be disclosed or do you draw a line somewhere? And what about situations where disease transmission is unlikely (e.g. protected sex with a HIV-infected person, or oral sex with someone suffering from Hep C)? Not to mention in many cases (e.g. HIV), a treated person is much less likely to infect another person than an untreated, unaware person - so why should we effectively penalize the former for knowing about his or her disease (by requiring a disclosure), while we are not requiring frequent checks from people to find out if they are diseased in the first place (i.e. there seems to be a duty of care inconsistency somewhere here plus it also creates a disincentive for a person who thinks he or she might be diseased to get themselves checked - since until they know, they are not bound to disclose anything, right?) Not to mention, a reasonable person should take into account that the other person may be diseased, at least in chance encounters, and use protection, rather than rely on a disclosure. So ultimately for me this is also a case of caveat emptor.

[CountDeMoney]

That's why you shouldn't have sex with anyone until you love them, and they love you.

[Martinus]

That's why you shouldn't have sex with anyone until you love them, and they love you.

[Ideologue]

Age is also an easy one, but for different reasons - a minor cannot validly consent to having sex, so expecting/requiring an age disclosure from a minor is likewise baseless.

I don't see how those follow at all.

[Drakken]

None is more dangerous than HIV, Mart. Advances in treatment hasn't made it less lethal, they just lenghtened life expectation with somewhat normal lifestyle (the important word here being somewhat) and a little less pill-guzzling.

[Ideologue]

Not lethal for about 10% of Europeans.  Man, white people have it all.

[dps]

Not that Marti would care about this one, but for casual heterosexual sex, birth control usage.

[Ideologue]

Not that Marti would care about this one, but for casual heterosexual sex, birth control usage.

Oh, that's a good one.

But only if you plan on being reckless anyway, I suppose.

[Martinus]

None is more dangerous than HIV, Mart. Advances in treatment hasn't made it less lethal, they just lenghtened life expectation with somewhat normal lifestyle (the important word here being somewhat) and a little less pill-guzzling.

Hepatitis C is much more dangerous and easier to get.

[Martinus]

Yeah, Marty might as well come clean.  He should tell his partners he has herpes and what ever else he picked up in the meantime.

Meh, as much of a homohore as he is, I think Marti is rather conservative in his approach to the wilderness of homosex.  After all, he doesn't even do anal.

I'm a hypochondriac. I'd die of fright if I engaged in unsafe sex.

[Martinus]

Not that Marti would care about this one, but for casual heterosexual sex, birth control usage.

It's similar to the disease one. If you trust a person enough to rely on his or her word, no formal disclosure is necessary. If you don't, you should use protection because you should not rely on his or her word alone.

Not to mention (correct me if I'm wrong as this is not my forte), does not a woman always know if the man is using protection? Because I see no reason why what she does with her body should be of a concern to him, so I see no reason why she should disclose to him she is on a pill - if he does not want to have a child, he should use a condom. Period.

[Martinus]

Great, another I-wanna-discuss-something-homoey-in-my-life-but-I'll-disguise-it-as-a-topic-even-though-everybody-knows-what-an-attention-whore-I-am Martinus thread.

Yes Marti, he should tell you if he's positive if you've asked him, even if he doesn't want to, before you fuck him.

OK?

See, you misread my intentions completely. I'm a firm believer in personal responsibility - if you decide to have sex with someone, then barring some extraordinary circumstances (e.g. that person has a weird disease that will kill you within 10 seconds from the moment you touch his or her skin) one should be prepared to face the music and protect oneself from such consequences as one does not wish to suffer. It seems this board is full of communists, however, who believe people should be protected from themselves.

[Martinus]

Btw, it's not for the first time, that I get the impression heterosexual people are much more careless and risk-taking in their sexual encounters.