STD disclosure - still a no-brainer (as it was the last time around)
In addition to all of the usually-self-interested positions listed in this thread, comes the blatantly obvious weighing of what are appropriate legal risks related to things such as slander, vs. the emphatically obvious expectation that most anybody buying or selling in this business should be believed to have one or more STD's until proven otherwise.
When you get to the courts, slander is slander, and the sex trade is assumed to be filled with participants who are trading STD's like teenagers do.
The answer, to which the TERB moderators have firmly alluded, weighs heavily on the side of never uttering a word about the STD's carried by any particular person.
Those who think themselves more important than the common sense in that probably have more fears than mere STD's of which they should become aware.
In addition to all of the usually-self-interested positions listed in this thread, comes the blatantly obvious weighing of what are appropriate legal risks related to things such as slander, vs. the emphatically obvious expectation that most anybody buying or selling in this business should be believed to have one or more STD's until proven otherwise.
When you get to the courts, slander is slander, and the sex trade is assumed to be filled with participants who are trading STD's like teenagers do.
The answer, to which the TERB moderators have firmly alluded, weighs heavily on the side of never uttering a word about the STD's carried by any particular person.
Those who think themselves more important than the common sense in that probably have more fears than mere STD's of which they should become aware.
