US spending billions on your disease

[Bitchslapper]

Yes Queersetti, the Australian FEMALE flight attendant I refered to is the same person as the French-Canadian MALE flight attendant she refered to.

It's not the same information and the point I was making was that it's not a "gay disease" because the flight attendant was a woman, but if the flight attendant was a guy, then that wouldn't work since he was really a she, would it? Ok, so maybe that's not who it's attributed to most commonly, maybe that was an incorrect statement, but she is still one of the "suspects".

In any case, are you and Etoile claiming that it IS a gay disease? If not, then why dispute my information?

 

[Bitchslapper]

No, it isn't. Not in the slightest. As has already been discussed in this thread, French-Canadian flight attendant Gaetan Dugas is the most likely candidate for the Patient Zero role. He is blamed for introducing HIV to the United States from Europe. (Whether or not that is true will never been known; scientists are still debating the issue, as I posted about earlier in this thread.)

If you were to claim that she isn't the most likely candidate, maybe I'd agree with you, but you say "not in the slightest" as though I pulled this from my ass.

In any case, what's the point of disputing me? Are you saying that it wouldn't exist if gays did not exist? Or do you just feel some inexplicable compulsion to argue with me no matter what I say (especially when one would think that you'd agree with my sentiment)?

 

[Queersetti]

Yes Queersetti, the Australian FEMALE flight attendant I refered to is the same person as the French-Canadian MALE flight attendant she refered to.

It's not the same information and the point I was making was that it's not a "gay disease" because the flight attendant was a woman, but if the flight attendant was a guy, then that wouldn't work since he was really a she, would it? Ok, so maybe that's not who it's attributed to most commonly, maybe that was an incorrect statement, but she is still one of the "suspects".

In any case, are you and Etoile claiming that it IS a gay disease? If not, then why dispute my information?

Can you cite any evidence to back up your claim that AIDS was introduced to the US by a female flight attendant? After all, since it is "commonly attributed", you should have no problem doing so.

 

[Bitchslapper]

LOL, you are starting to be amusing, man. In one thread you say "Well, go look it up yourself" and in this one, you say I should cite some evidence. Well, aside from the fact that's hilarious, it's also unfair. If I am expected to name my sources, than shouldn't Etoile be expected to do the same?

In any case, my source is Xaviera Hollander's column "Call Me Madam" in Penthouse magazine (among others). What's yours?

And you have yet to answer my question. Why is that?

 

[Queersetti]

LOL, you are starting to be amusing, man. In one thread you say "Well, go look it up yourself" and in this one, you say I should cite some evidence. Well, aside from the fact that's hilarious, it's also unfair. If I am expected to name my sources, than shouldn't Etoile be expected to do the same?

In any case, my source is Xaviera Hollander's column "Call Me Madam" in Penthouse magazine (among others). What's yours?

And you have yet to answer my question. Why is that?

Etoile cited and posted links to 3 sources, none of which were ex-prostitutes writing sex advice columns in men's magazines.

If you are wondering why I didn't answer your inane insinuation that Etoile and I were claiming AIDS was a "gay disease", I chose to ignore it as it was obviously meant only to be antagonistic. You know full well that neither of us were saying that.

 

[Bitchslapper]

No it was not antagonistic, it was a serious question, because I see no other reason to dispute my information.

No, it is not a "men's magazine," but even if it were, so what? Would you trust it more if it were Cosmo? Have you ever even read what she writes? So far it's all besed on scientific fact, easily confirmed by any medical text book or doctor.

At least it wasn't the Internet. That's not exactly the most reliable source in the world (and I've noticed you have failed to identify your sources).

 

[Queersetti]

No it was not antagonistic, it was a serious question, because I see no other reason to dispute my information.

No, it is not a "men's magazine," but even if it were, so what? Would you trust it more if it were Cosmo? Have you ever even read what she writes? So far it's all besed on scientific fact, easily confirmed by any medical text book or doctor.

At least it wasn't the Internet. That's not exactly the most reliable source in the world (and I've noticed you have failed to identify your sources).

We disputed your information because we believe it to be incorrect.

Penthouse is not a men's magazine?

If your claim is so "easily confirmed by any medical text book or doctor", then by all means, confirm it for us. It is not incumbent on me to provide refutation of your claim. Do you seriously think I am going to go try to find an article somewhere listing the names of all the people who didn't introduce AIDS into the US?

 

[Bitchslapper]

We disputed your information because we believe it to be incorrect.

Penthouse is not a men's magazine?

If your claim is so "easily confirmed by any medical text book or doctor", then by all means, confirm it for us. It is not incumbent on me to provide refutation of your claim. Do you seriously think I am going to go try to find an article somewhere listing the names of all the people who didn't introduce AIDS into the US?

If you believe it is incorrect, then that is your problem and if you care enough to mention it, then it shouldn't trouble you to go look it up, just as it would not trouble me to go look up some words in a dictionary. So which is it, does a person saying it have to prove the disputed fact or does the person that disputed it have to prove it? Because you've said both are true. It is not incumbent upon me to provide factual basis for every single thing I say, opinion or otherwise. You are being hypocritical and antagonistic. One moment you claim it is not your responsibility to cite your sources. In another moment, you challenge me to do the same. Which is it? You can't have your cake and eat it too. If it is your opinion that both the "disputer" and the disputed have the responsibility to back up thier claims, then I would agree, but you have not said that.

No, Penthouse is not exclusively for men last I checked. They sell it to anyone. And plenty of women enjoy reading it. In any case, that is the source I cited. Do you have any good reason to deem it unreliable or at the very least, more unreliable than your traditional source (the Internet)?

 

[Pookie]

... No, Penthouse is not exclusively for men last I checked. They sell it to anyone. And plenty of women enjoy reading it. In any case, that is the source I cited. Do you have any good reason to deem it unreliable or at the very least, more unreliable than your traditional source (the Internet)?

Posted on Fri, Feb. 13, 2004 - The Miami Herald

Boca financier buys Penthouse magazine
A Boca Raton investor is leading the charge to remake ailing Penthouse into a softer, young men's magazine, akin to Maxim and FHM.

BY CHRISTINA HOAG

Boca Raton financier Marc Bell, a former Internet wunderkind turned real estate investor, has found a new pet project: publishing Penthouse magazine.

His plan is to soft-pedal the now bankrupt Penthouse's notoriously X-rated content and relaunch it as a young men's magazine akin to Maxim and FHM.

''We want to realign the magazine and take it to the center,'' he said. ``It's got very hard-core and lost a lot of readership because of that.''

Bell, who heads private equity firm Marc Bell Capital Partners, is leading an investment group that has amassed 89 percent of the magazine's approximately $45 million in bonds.

The group plans to invest up to $50 million to turn around the magazine, whose parent company, General Media of New York, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last August when it could not meet its bond payments.

Last month, a judge approved Bell's reorganization plan for General Media, which also owns several Penthouse spin-off magazines and adult-entertainment businesses. They include subscription Internet sites, video and DVD production and distribution, and licensing of the Penthouse brand on products such as gentlemen's clubs.

''There's a lot of value there,'' Bell said.

Under Bell's plan, Penthouse's flamboyant but aging publisher, Robert C. Guccione, would continue as publisher emeritus for the next decade.

Guccione now lives largely as a recluse in an opulent Manhattan town house with a multimillion-dollar art collection. He owns almost all of General Media's parent company, Penthouse International, which did not file for bankruptcy protection but no longer controls the magazine.

Guccione, 71, founded Penthouse in 1965. To gain an edge over competitor Playboy, his strategy was to make the magazine's photos and content more hard-core, running increasingly explicit pictorials -- sometimes photographed by himself.

Circulation during the magazine's salad days hit 5.2 million copies, but in recent years with competition from the Internet, porn satellite and cable channels, and the saucy but softer young men's magazines, it has sputtered badly. Circulation is now about 460,000, Bell said.

Analysts said the investment group faces a huge challenge to whitewash a brand whose image is so entrenched in raunchy nudity.

'When I say `Playboy,' what do you think of, even if there's not one naked picture in it?'' said Samir Husni, a University of Mississippi magazine analyst. ``It's going to be an uphill battle to attract a new audience and not lose the existing one. But Penthouse as it is, completely pornographic since December 1998, is not salvageable.''

Playboy, whose circulation is still fairly robust at about 3.2 million, took the opposite track from Penthouse to carve out a niche against today's 24/7 porn availability. ''It's more erotic than pornographic,'' Husni said.

Advertisers may also have a tough time taking to a new Penthouse simply because of the perception, said Steve Cohen, editor in chief of Media Industry Newsletter.

''Penthouse has a very negative image for a lot of people,'' he said. ``Mainstream advertisers won't touch them.''

Another option is to focus on leveraging the Penthouse brand through other products, Husni said. ''Print is not the medium of choice for porn anymore,'' he added.

In 1989 at the age of 21, Bell founded Internet firm Globix, one of the first Silicon Valley high-tech companies. He now invests in real estate and specializes in buying distressed companies' debt and turning them around, he said.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/7941375.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

Q: "Etoile cited and posted links to 3 sources, none of which were ex-prostitutes writing sex advice columns in men's magazines."

BS: "No, it is not a "men's magazine," but even if it were, so what?"

Q: "Penthouse is not a men's magazine?"

BS: "No, Penthouse is not exclusively for men last I checked."


Even though Penthouse may not be "exclusively" (which you did not say initially) for men, it is a men's magazine ... and has been since its beginnings as a competitor with Playboy magazine. Admittedly, it's not against the law for chicks to buy it ... but it clearly has never been a magazine targeted for women.

It would be nice if you could post at least one source for your claim. It really helps to add credibility to your arguments. Otherwise, we have to take your word for it. And as we can see above, we can't always go by what you say.

 

[Etoile]

I'm not joining this particular argument, but since I was asked to cite my sources, I will.

In addition to the three links I mentioned earlier, the primary source of information regarding Gaetan Dugas is And The Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic, the extensively-researched 672-page (in paperback) book published by Randy Shilts in 1987. Although some points in Shilts's book are still in contention, it is widely regarded (see Amazon.com reviews for evidence) as being a masterpiece of exhaustive research.

On a more personal note - it's a damn good book, no matter what you believe about Patient Zero or anything else. I first read it in high school and I've loved the 1993 HBO movie version for many years (just got it on DVD!). I do recommend this book for anyone interested in the early discovery of AIDS in the United States and the subsequent AIDS crisis.

 

[Bitchslapper]

Q: "Etoile cited and posted links to 3 sources, none of which were ex-prostitutes writing sex advice columns in men's magazines."

BS: "No, it is not a "men's magazine," but even if it were, so what?"

Q: "Penthouse is not a men's magazine?"

BS: "No, Penthouse is not exclusively for men last I checked."


Even though Penthouse may not be "exclusively" (which you did not say initially) for men, it is a men's magazine ... and has been since its beginnings as a competitor with Playboy magazine. Admittedly, it's not against the law for chicks to buy it ... but it clearly has never been a magazine targeted for women.

It would be nice if you could post at least one source for your claim. It really helps to add credibility to your arguments. Otherwise, we have to take your word for it. And as we can see above, we can't always go by what you say.

I think I just did post a source. That is acknowledged in your quote and yet you ignore the fact later on. And no you can't necessarily go by waht I say, nor should you. Should I be expected to go by anyone else's word then, too?

 

[Bitchslapper]

Why the hell can't we delete our own posts? I tried posting something, but it wouldn't do anything, then I hit submit and it posted it twice.

 

[Queersetti]

If you believe it is incorrect, then that is your problem and if you care enough to mention it, then it shouldn't trouble you to go look it up, just as it would not trouble me to go look up some words in a dictionary. So which is it, does a person saying it have to prove the disputed fact or does the person that disputed it have to prove it? Because you've said both are true. It isd not incumbent upon me to provide factual basis for every single thing I say, opinion or otherwise. You are being hypocritical and antagonistic. One moment you claim it is not your responsibility to cite your sources. In another moment, you challenge me to do the same. Which is it? You can't have your cake and eat it too. If it is your opinion that both the "disputer" and the disputed have the responsibility to back up thier claims, then I would agree, but you have not said that.

No, Penthouse is not exclusively for men last I checked. They sell it to anyone. And plenty of women enjoy reading it. In any case, that is the source I cited. Do you have any good reason to deem it unreliable or at the very least, more unreliable than your traditional source (the Internet)?

This is absurd.

The citations you demanded I provide were for definitions of words that appear in any dictionary. The only reason there was any dispute about them was based on your own limited vocabulary.

On the other hand, you have made an extraordinary claim that flies in the face of all available information on the topic under discussion, and expect others to find sources negating your claim.

The fact that you believe the two situations to be comparable merely reveals your own intellectual limitations.

The source I cited which you hold in such scorn was not "the internet", it was the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Granted, in your world, that might not be as respected a source as Penthouse.

 

[Bitchslapper]

I see, so my source aren't as good as your sources? That's all you have left? What I said by no means "flies in the face" of what is being discussed, otherwise I would not have read about it.

I do agree it's absurd. However, I wish to discuss the issue itself, while you insist on arguing inconsequential details.

 

[Queersetti]

I see, so my source aren't as good as your sources? That's all you have left? What I said by no means "flies in the face" of what is being discussed, otherwise I would not have read about it.

I do agree it's absurd. However, I wish to discuss the issue itself, while you insist on arguing inconsequential details.

Yes, I think the large body of knowledge that has been cited on this thread by Etoile and others is a better source than Xavier Hollander.

Guilty as charged.

 

[Bitchslapper]

Yes, I think the large body of knowledge that has been cited on this thread by Etoile and others is a better source than Xavier Hollander.

Guilty as charged.

It's Xaviera Hollander, not Xavier. You don't even know her name and you expect me to believe you even know who I'm talking about? Have you even read her column?

 

[Pookie]

I think I just did post a source. That is acknowledged in your quote and yet you ignore the fact later on. And no you can't necessarily go by waht I say, nor should you. Should I be expected to go by anyone else's word then, too?

I meant post enough information identifying the source so we can go read it for ourselves to verify what you claim does exist. All you've provided is ... "Xaviera Hollander's column 'Call Me Madam' in Penthouse magazine". Ummm ... could you like ... narrow it down to an issue or something?

You shouldn't just go by what I say. That's why I do provide links to the sources I quote from, or base my claims on. It's courtesy, if nothing else. All I know about your source is that it's supposedly in some issue of Penthouse magazine. I don't plan to read every issue to find it.

Also, can you provide some background on Xaviera Hollander that would substantiate her as a reliable expert to be used for the basis of your claim? Does she claim to be an expert? How does she support her position? etc.

 

[Queersetti]

It's Xaviera Hollander, not Xavier. You don't even know her name and you expect me to believe you even know who I'm talking about? Have you even read her column?

Obviously, it was a typo, as I made it clear in previous posts that I knew exactly who you were talking about.

But, you weren't nitpicking, now, were you?

 

[Bitchslapper]

I refuse to take this any further. Like so many threads I become involved in, this has merely turned into an "everyone flame Bitchslapper" thread. If anyone would like to get back to actually discussing the topic, that would be great.

 

[Pookie]

I refuse to take this any further. Like so many threads I become involved in, this has merely turned into an "everyone flame Bitchslapper" thread. If anyone would like to get back to actually discussing the topic, that would be great.

I just asked you to be specific about your source, along with some specifics about the source. I wouldn't call that flaming, would you?

 

[Etoile]

Why the hell can't we delete our own posts? I tried posting something, but it wouldn't do anything, then I hit submit and it posted it twice.

I'm not sure why - it doesn't seem to be enabled in forum software. I've run into it myself, so it's not something mods can do either. Sorry about that. I guess the best thing to do is to just edit the post to say something like [deleted].

 

[DustyWolfe]

I'm not sure why - it doesn't seem to be enabled in forum software. I've run into it myself, so it's not something mods can do either. Sorry about that. I guess the best thing to do is to just edit the post to say something like [deleted].

*points up to the quote* that makes it near impossible to delete. Everyone quotes everyone

 

[Etoile]

*points up to the quote* that makes it near impossible to delete. Everyone quotes everyone

Heh, good point. But Bitchslapper is right about the "Delete" function not working the way one would expect.

 

[Batch]

We could be spending it on homeland security.

At this point in history it is a human disease. So that makes it mine, his, hers, theirs, ours, and most especially it makes is yours. Because it is here on this planet. And it continues to kill humans. It has no feelings about sexual orientation. It just does what it does.
I realize that acceptance and understanding and maturity are concepts you will never grasp. But you are still a child and thus have much to learn about how adults deal with grown-up issues.

 

[LarzMachine]

Let's be honest, the gay community spread the AIDS virus from its origin.

The casual way in which gay guys have unprotected sex with strangers in public toilets, is what brought this disease to us all.

Now us hetro's are the victims.

But if gay folk weren't so outrageously promiscuous, the disease would have been contained.

Really? I almost contracted AIDS in 1992 as the result of unprotected sex with my girlfriend of three years. She never slept with any girls, and picked it up herself while we were broken up and she decided to screw anything with a dick for a few months. Try again.