Monkeypox outbreak: Thailand witnesses spike in cases within the LGBTQ+ community

[BangkokReady]

11 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

I think the terms heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual are pretty clear. If someone identifies as any one of these then I think we understand them. There might be a problem with bisexual as it refers to both sides of attraction so I guess it might be on a scale, but I can't really speak for bisexual men or women.

You would understand if a man said he was heterosexual but has sex with other men?  That seems pretty unclear to me.

[herfiehandbag]

14 hours ago, hotchilli said:

A horrifying spike?

A source of pride perhaps?

[Baht Simpson]

14 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

You would understand if a man said he was heterosexual but has sex with other men?  That seems pretty unclear to me.

Yes, it would be clear what they were doing. As to why they think that they're not bisexual or homosexual, only they can answer that. 

[BangkokReady]

47 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

Yes, it would be clear what they were doing. As to why they think that they're not bisexual or homosexual, only they can answer that. 

So ignore the self-identification and focus on the behaviour?

[proton]

1 hour ago, tandor said:

..anyone can catch it..temporary blindness (infected hand touching, face/mouth lesions; transmitted by family members

so why the spike in the LGBT 'community' then what's different about them which is making then catch it more? If that's not a homophobic, bigoted or hateful question,

[Baht Simpson]

35 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

So ignore the self-identification and focus on the behaviour?

It’s not something I would ever worry about. If you insist you’re heterosexual I’ll take you at your word and I would extend that to everyone. 

[BangkokReady]

2 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

It’s not something I would ever worry about. If you insist you’re heterosexual I’ll take you at your word and I would extend that to everyone. 

But you copied it from a linked source and suggested it affected a claim made by another user?  You must think it relevant in some way.

[Baht Simpson]

14 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

But you copied it from a linked source and suggested it affected a claim made by another user?  You must think it relevant in some way.

Lol. I posted that just to highlight a difference in percentages. I don’t lose sleep over it. You’re overthinking this, BR.

[Pique Dard]

18 hours ago, Jingthing said:

No. It's perfectly OK to call out risk groups by health officials. You're projecting "delicacy" that doesn't exist. 

wrong! a friend of mine was called "homphobe" just for saying "risk groups". i don't project anything, just being factual

[redwood1]

Look just stay away from gay monkeys and you will be fine...

[tandor]

7 hours ago, proton said:

so why the spike in the LGBT 'community' then what's different about them which is making then catch it more? If that's not a homophobic, bigoted or hateful question,

humans lie and don't take enough care.

 

For further information go to YouTube Podcast Series: This Week in Virology hosted by Professor Racianello and Dr. Griffin. Type in M-Pox and you will understand more of the history of this virus and its spread.

[BangkokReady]

17 hours ago, Baht Simpson said:

Lol. I posted that just to highlight a difference in percentages. I don’t lose sleep over it. You’re overthinking this, BR.

You posted, I posted, we're both making similar effort to discuss the matter.  No worries here.

 

The point is, that when it comes to men having sex with other men, if they claim to be heterosexual, it doesn't really affect the percentages that much, as they're having sex with other men.

 

Even with bisexuals, if the stats suggest that gay men (or men who have sex with men) get it more often that other people, it's likely to be the sex with men that leads to more cases in bisexual men.

 

The self-identification doesn't really change the fact that the virus(?) is occurring more in men who have sex with men, than with other people.