Make credence recognised that on Wed, 4 Apr 2007 14:45:33 +0100,
(David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)) has scripted:

Deeply Filled Mortician
wrote:

Make credence recognised that on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 10:28:27 -0700,
Hatunen has scripted:


AIDS is certainly a lifestyle disease, but that lifestyle is
unprotected promiscuity, not homesexuality per se.

Definitely not so.

It is in fact quite rare for a male to catch aids from a woman from
sex. And so in purely heterosexual circles it's also rare, no matter
how much shagging around is done.

As such, it's by and large a disease that affects homosexual men, plus
hard drugs users, but that's well known.

No, it's not, but you're so full of **** on this one it reaches a new
low, even for you.

Go on, let it all out!

For a start, there is no such thing as "purely
heterosexual circles" so you can get rid of that myth.

No such thing? Not in your social circle I suspect.

Your second
sentence is in fact true, but "quite rare" depends a lot on the part of
the world you're talking about, and the kind of unprotected heterosexual
sex involved.

As for who it affects, well you think you know, but in fact, 60% of
people infected with HIV live in sub-saharan Africa, and of them, most
are women- 13 women for every 10 men. Most people living with HIV are
women. This gap is growing alarmingly in fact. In young people (aged
15-24) in sub-saharan Africa around 3 times as many women are infected
than men. So, I'll let the reader decide how true your 'by and large'
statement was above. I find you appallingly ignorant, and I've had quite
enough of this kind of thing.

You misread what I wrote David.

I said it's rare for a WOMAN to catch aids from a MAN, not vice versa
as you seem to have read.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--