Nadja Benaissa was released from jail today. Nadja is the German popstar arrested for allegedly having unprotected sex with 3 men despite knowing she was HIV+. Nadja had spent the past two weeks in jail, but yesterday a judge in Darmstadt released the singer from jail and the arrest warrant was "postponed." Apparently the prosecutors are having a tough time moving this case forward. Maybe the people who said they had sex with her to the police don't want to say they had sex with her while at trial. The prosecutors say it is kind of like bail and that no one should think they are dropping the case. Uh huh.
It would be pretty tough to say she had sex with someone if they don't have a witness or a videotape or something. Yesterday was also the first time that Nadja had been allowed to see her daughter since she had been arrested. I didn't know that she had a daughter. It kind of makes me not like Nadja even more. I mean would she want some guy who was HIV+ to have sex with her daughter and not tell the daughter he was positive? So why would Nadja allegedly do that to the guys with whom she had sex?
Wasn't there a case a long time ago where a guy had HIV and was having sex with women knowing that he was infected. I believe he was charged with attempted murder.
ReplyDeleteunfortunately, this ill shit goes on more than we would like to think. free love equals dead love today.
ReplyDeletei don't know what think! because the guy can say no to sex without condom! but it's a case about responsability and confidence between partners!
ReplyDeleteWhat pomme said. Those guys took their lives into their own hands. Or dicks, as the case may be.
ReplyDeleteThis does happen more than we think. I live in a small city of 45,000 and we had a guy charged and convicted of 3 attempted murder charges because he was HIV+. And it was found out later he was travelling a lot into the big city and hooking up there too.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand it - either denial or rage directed to other people. Either way, lock 'em up. No other way to keep people safe.
where is the responsibilty on the guys to wear condoms?
ReplyDeleteSorry it's 2009, you should assume and ACT like everyone has it if you want to be protected.
Don't leave it up to someone else.
Protect yourself!
AND FEWER AND FEWER PEOPLE ARE GETTING TESTED.....NO BLOOD TESTS FOR MARRIAGE LICENSES ..JUST MAKES NO SENSE...
ReplyDeleteActually when Ohio or Illinois...not sure which had blood test requirement for marriage licenses....many people just when to Michigan or other neighboring states instead of actually getting a blood test to get a marriage license.
ReplyDeleteI just learned that in my public health class.
Plus, these men weren't raped...they always had the option to put on condoms themselves, ask her if she had STDs, and they could have said no to sex if she had insisted on no condoms.
Like someone earlier said...be responsible for yourself b/c in the end if you do get sick you have no one but yourself to rely on.
YES, YOU'RE ALL RIGHT...IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT OURSELVES...IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE.
ReplyDeleteYes the men should have stepped up and worn a condom but she should also have told then she tested positive.
ReplyDeleteResponsibility is a two way street.
They should have kept it covered and she at the very least should have told them to keep it covered.
It would be pretty tough to say she had sex with someone if they don't have a witness or a videotape or something.Well, if you think about the numerous times a man has been charged with attempted murder or sexual assault or whatnot for the same reasons without video evidence or a witness, it would seem that this wouldn't be necessary. And how much grimier would that be??? If she had taped it, knowing she was giving someone HIV.................. geez.
ReplyDeleteUm, so you're kissing someone and they tell you they are HIV+. Do you still have sex with them? No, I don't think so.
ReplyDeleteNadja has every right to keep her status a secret, because she is guaranteed to face discrimination against her on the basis of her status. (And not just refusal of sex).
However, they BOTH have a JOINT responsibility to play safe. If they didn't play safe, it's BOTH of their responsibility - not just his, not just hers.
i agree 100% she should have disclosed that, but the responsibility is your own, because most people don't even know they have it out there.
ReplyDeletethe only way to be sure you don't get it is to assume everyone is HIV+ when it comes to intercourse.
my main gay taught me that. it's smart.
it doesn't mean don't go get some, just be safe about it. everytime.
ps totally diff scenario if she was sleeping with men in relationships and not telling. then she's a ho bag.
ReplyDeleteJust because the men were careless and foolishly optimistic does not excuse her actions. She has a moral and legal responsibility to tell any sexual partners she plans to have unprotected sex with that she has HIV.
ReplyDelete