by Liam Scheff
If HIV is a hoax (if HIV tests do not test for any particular thing – and they don’t, and you can look that up), and “infection” is based on this non-test – then HIV tests don’t have any clinical meaning.
We’re also told that you can “have” “HIV” and not know it. But, have you ever had an STD and not known it?? A sexually-transmitted yeast infection, herpetic infection, or any other sore or pimple in your groin – and “not known it?” (How did they sell us this garbage?)
And that’s their line – the tests don’t test for anything, and you’ll never know, unless you trust the test. It’s a very religious run-around.
But, we assign them great value. Why?
I think it’s because of what they represent in terms of human myth, and ancient law. It used to be that when two people co-joined in sex, it was understood that they were communing their ‘souls.’ In the modern, secular age, the idea of a ‘soul,’ is treated as so much mystical nonsense, so that when two people are entirely intimate with each other, we don’t talk about it as an ‘exchange of soul energy’ or ‘divinity,’ but as ‘recreational sex,’ or, ‘a good time.’
I think this leaves us, culturally, feeling abused, washed out, empty, and wanting…needing. I think the larger mythical mind of the species grabbed onto the idea of this thing that can’t be tested for – but must exist. This thing that is communicated, “infected” from person to person in love-making… something which is now permanently part of you. Something ‘wily, indecipherable.’ Something nearly spiritual – but not.
It’s the communing of souls in a negative aspect – because we don’t allow that that’s what sex is (two souls sharing at a deeply energetic level with each other), we need a ‘scientific’ or reductionist myth to sit in place – in the very footprints – of the old one.
We don’t value sex; we don’t value intimacy. We don’t, as a culture, value the ‘energetic,’ or the soul. We give ourselves away too easily. We feel abused, and used, even by our own actions. We seek to be comforted through ‘confession’ (HIV testing) that we’re not permanently damaged.
Instead of understanding the truth: Every interaction at that level of intimacy is significant, and leaves us in a position of having inherited from one person a quantity of their being; just as we gave a quantity of ours to them. We’ve exchanged soul material. And we are open – extremely open. And extremely vulnerable. We are wanting to commune, gently, lovingly – but we’ve jumped in too quickly, with someone who is not a match for us; or, we’ve seen it as ‘sport,’ and pulled away from intimacy, wounding ourselves in the process.
Is it any wonder that the people who routinely go in for ‘testing’ are people who don’t value intimacy and sex? People with holes in their psyches? The “worried well,” anxious about, well, a great many things, and projecting all anxiety onto one point – that of sexual misconduct?
Is it any wonder that people who are encouraged to go in for testing are people who are seen as overly-sexual, aberrant from the ‘norm,’ who perhaps don’t value intimacy (or aren’t permitted culturally to form long-lasting paired relationships); or who don’t see it as that deeper exchange, but more as ‘sport?’
Again, the myth of “HIV” is that there is some bacteria or ‘retrovirus’ that you can’t see, you don’t know is there, and leaves no mark, does not cause any inflammation on your sexual organs. (Do we really think that real STDs don’t bother your genitals?! How have we bought this incredible lie of the non-STD “STD?”) Because it’s a myth – a metaphor. We need something to remind us that sex is not free, nor should be embarked upon lightly.
- - - - - -
I explore the technical and historical origins of the AIDS definition and the totally, heinously bogus “HIV tests” in Chapter Six of my book, “Official Stories.”
And will be on Audiobook and Kindle in late 2012