maggiekb at March 13th, 2014 15:32 — #1
retchdog at March 13th, 2014 15:41 — #2
''The circumstances in this case were unique, a spokeswoman for the CDC tells Shots. The couple frequently had sexual contact without a barrier and exchanged blood through rough sex with toys." (emphasis added)
The exception that proves the rule?
daemonworks at March 13th, 2014 16:55 — #3
Of course it's possible if you're sharing any of the bodily fluids that are capable of transmitting the disease.
jons at March 13th, 2014 20:17 — #4
My sex life is very tame.
themudshark at March 14th, 2014 05:23 — #5
Well … this hardly seems surprising.
heng at March 14th, 2014 07:16 — #6
retchdog at March 14th, 2014 16:11 — #7
well, it seems that here we have the one and only fully-documented case of HIV transmission between women, and it turns out to also involve the exchange of blood which, of course, is the easiest way for anyone to transmit or receive HIV, and is a fairly easy risk factor for an HIV-positive woman (or her partner) to avoid.
the 'rule' is that it is incredibly unlikely for women to transmit HIV during 'normal' sex, which seems to hold.
i guess the judeo-christian god is exactly as good at designing plagues as he is at designing humans. or maybe He's just into lesbians? i don't know.
heng at March 14th, 2014 16:26 — #8
I'm still confused. Is this a correct use of exception that proves the rule, or the usual misapplication?
maggiekb at March 18th, 2014 15:36 — #9
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.