Honey Boo Boo | Lee Thompson | News

Honey Boo Boo's Uncle Poodle Says He is HIV-Positive, Pressed Charges Against Boyfriend

Lee Thompson (aka Honey Boo Boo's Uncle Poodle), reveals he is HIV-positive in an interview with Atlanta's gay magazine Fenuxe:

UnclepoodleDino: Lee, when did you find out about your HIV status?

Lee: I was adamant about getting my HIV status checked on a regular basis. On March 16, 2012, I tested negative. Then, in May of 2012 my test results came back positive. I knew it had been my boyfriend who infected me. I later learned he had been HIV positive and was not taking medication and had not bothered to tell me about it. I was advised that I should press charges and, hesitantly, I did. It was the right thing to do.

Dino: What happened to your ex?

Lee: He is serving a 5-year sentence. I would have been cool with his HIV status if he had been honest. I don’t have an issue with the disease. I would have known how to protect myself.

Dino: What is your message to folks having unsafe sex?

Lee: They are damn fools! They are playing Russian roulette; they are playing with their lives and that of their sexual partners.

The Tao Of Uncle Poodle: Honey Boo Boo's Kinsman Speaks Out [tlrd]
A Pro-Gay Message from Honey Boo Boo: VIDEO [tlrd]

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Some commenters seem to have trouble with the concept of informed consent. Of course we should all assume that any sex partner could be HIV positive, and take proper precautions. One of those precautions is talking about one another's HIV status. An honest conversation. Because if a person lies about their status, then has sex with the person they lied to, that's a sexual assault. Why? Because while the victim though they were consenting to one kind of sex (sex with someone who honestly believes they are HIV negative), they did *not* consent to the sex that actually took place (sex with someone definitely and knowingly HIV positive).

    I'm negative. I want to stay negative. I have no problem having safe sex with positive partners, or partners who don't know their status. I am willing to consent to taking that risk. I have also enjoyed having unprotected sex within committed relationships. But if a boyfriend that I trusted enough to have unprotected sex with deliberately lied about his status and continued to have unprotected sex with me, I would feel violated - raped, in fact - whether he infected me or not.

    Call it what you like: assault with a deadly weapon, sexual assault, rape, attempted murder... Damn right it should be prosecuted.

    Posted by: BABH | Jan 15, 2013 2:27:00 PM

  2. [Edit: should've written "safer" sex, not "safe." There is no such thing as "safe" sex, just different levels of risk. You can probably even get carpal tunnel from masturbating.]

    Posted by: BABH | Jan 15, 2013 2:46:44 PM

  3. You people saying he should not have taken legal action are delusional. Yes he should have protected himself, but thats not the point here. The point is his partner knowingly infected. I wonder what your comments would be if it was a women saying she go infected.

    Posted by: Billy | Jan 15, 2013 2:54:56 PM

  4. So I guess every single african american woman now living with HIV in America are really to blame because their lying closeted boyfriends/husbands/lovers were on the DL and lying to them about who they were sleeping with? Give me a break. This double standard that gays have in saying we only have ourselves to blame is absurd. If someone lies to you and you falsely put your trust in them (and in this case, with good reason because they were your partner), then I don't think you're entirely to blame for the outcome. I also don't think it's black or white. If some stranger on the internet tells you they are neg and you bareback, well, you're an idiot. But even in that case, I'd argue you're not entirely to blame, just perhaps more to blame than someone who is deceived by a partner.

    I'm sorry if I don't feel sorry for the lying boyfriend being in jail. It isn't like the careless Poodle isn't paying for his mistake.

    I think if you know you're positive and you know your partner or lover thinks you are not and relies on your telling them you are not and you infect them, jail is no question in my book. If you're positive and you go home with someone you don't know and they don't ask or don't seem to care at all, well then I think maybe you can safely assume they assume you are positive and don't care. It's just not black and white to me. There's a sliding scale of blame.

    Posted by: FancyPants | Jan 15, 2013 2:59:58 PM

  5. @KENDALL: Thanks for the research and busting the Southern stigma of bad ideas. The Northern states of Delaware, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Washington all prosecute individuals for criminal exposure of HIV.

    Unfortunately, DADT has left the military and moved to the bedroom.

    Posted by: Jon | Jan 15, 2013 3:04:32 PM

  6. If you don't ask me my status, I'm not going to volunteer it. And if you decide to have bareback sex with me, you're responsible for whatever happens. You negative guys might not like to hear that, but that's how most poz guys operate.

    Posted by: Asher | Jan 15, 2013 3:17:03 PM

  7. I agree that elements of this story are implausible. That would be remarkably quick prosecution and sentencing. Also--and I've never watched this show and don't plan to--were this entirely accurate, wouldn't it have come up sooner?

    Posted by: Paul R | Jan 15, 2013 3:20:26 PM

  8. Asher,

    I agree that people have to take full responsibilities for themselves. If they choose to not be safe, there are indeed -consequences.

    However, having said that - if you and "most poz guys" operate like that, I don't know how you sleep at night.

    Posted by: Justin | Jan 15, 2013 3:24:04 PM

  9. I wonder how you document consent. Scenario: Two guys bareback and later one turns poz. Party 1: I told you. Party 2: No you didn't. Party 1: Yes, I did. Party 2: No you didn't. (continue as needed)

    How do you prove consent was/wasn't given?

    Posted by: bareback rider | Jan 15, 2013 3:29:04 PM

  10. @Justin:

    I sleep just fine. I'm on meds, undetectable, and never lie about my status. But if you don't ask, I'll assume either you're positive, or you don't care about my status.

    I'd like to know how all the guys who treat HIV+ guys like pariahs, with their "DDF, neg4neg, CLEAN UB2" statuses on grindr and Adam4Adam sleep at night.

    By and large, most negative guys are complete assholes to positive guys, and no one should be surprised that poz guys are hesitant to disclose their status.

    There used to be a time when gay men supported one another, and negative guys had no problem being in a relationship with a poz guy. Those times have changed...for the worse.

    Posted by: Asher | Jan 15, 2013 3:35:35 PM

  11. A friend of mine recently had sex with a man who was HIV positive who did not disclose his status before sex. They used condoms and my friend is not infected fortunately. However, now that he found out, my friend of course reported the infected criminal to the police. At this point, the police have not yet arrested the infected criminal. Does anyone know a way to encourage the police to move on this? I has been three days since my friend reported this guy for having sex without reporting his status.

    Posted by: DB | Jan 15, 2013 3:36:45 PM

  12. "If you don't ask me my status, I'm not going to volunteer it."

    That's fine.

    "And if you decide to have bareback sex with me, you're responsible for whatever happens."

    That's criminally reckless. How can you possibly be OK with contributing to the spread of this plague, instead of its eradication?

    Posted by: BABH | Jan 15, 2013 3:38:44 PM

  13. @Asher,

    I'm sorry but partial responsibility lies on someone who is positive to disclose that - whether they are asked or not. Telling someone when only asked is not enough.

    I repeat - I don't how you sleep at night with that modus operandi.

    I'm sorry to hear that people treat hiv+ individuals with any disrespect.

    I am negative and dated a guy who is positive for 3 months last year. It ended amicably and had nothing to do with the status of either of us. In fact, we are good friends. He told me immediately on our first date which made me like and respect him that much more.

    I understand your comments and the reluctance from people to disclose hiv+ status. That does not make it ok to do so and have unsafe sex.

    Posted by: Justin | Jan 15, 2013 3:48:48 PM

  14. The article does not state how long they had been together and/or having sex so how can he prove it was his BF that gave it to him? The incubation period is a number of weeks before antibodies show up on a test. I doubt 'Poodle' can claim he was a 'virgin' before they met. Besides, he agreed to unsafe sex before getting that question out of the way so it's unfair to jail the boyfriend for his failure to protect himself. It takes two to tango and he is not crying "rape".

    Posted by: Jakrabt | Jan 15, 2013 3:51:25 PM

  15. As others have said there is much more to this story. I don't mean to be harsh, but alot of people like to rewrite history to make it seem like "oops that one time I had unprotected sex" I got infected. In reality, contracting HIV is not the easiest thing to do. Usually that "one time" was just the one time THAT time.
    And the poz on the thread who is knowingly putting others lives at risk is simply sick (and should be prosecuted). Sounds like he wants to do to others the same thing that was done to him. Sick.

    Posted by: Marty | Jan 15, 2013 3:56:43 PM

  16. @Justin- I get what Asher is saying'; the stigma of having HIV among negative guys is really hard to deal with. Us gay guys can be very mean to each other at times. Don't lull yourself into a false sense of security thinking that every guy with HIV is going to tell you. We are all responsible for protecting ourselves so you must assume every sex partner is positive until you see proof otherwise. Anything you do with anyone these days is an assumed risk. One thing about poz guys though- most are on meds, are undetectable and have a lower infectivity rate. Worry about the ones who think they are negative and don't get tested- those are the ones with viral loads in the danger zone.

    Posted by: Jakrabt | Jan 15, 2013 4:05:00 PM

  17. my buddy's mom makes $61 an hour on the internet. She has been unemployed for 9 months but last month her paycheck was $13125 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read more on this site....... BIT40.com

    Posted by: Julia Brown | Jan 15, 2013 4:06:42 PM

  18. A simple analogy to the HIV-infected person who does not disclose his status to a sexual partner is illustrative. If a person with a loaded gun points that gun at another person and pulls the trigger, who is more at fault? Is the person who shot the gun (i.e. the HIV-positive person) at fault? Or, is the person who was shot (the HIV-negative person) at fault for not wearing a bullet-proof vest?

    Posted by: DB | Jan 15, 2013 4:08:01 PM

  19. I agree with Asher 100%. Consent cannot be proven. It is heresay and there is no way to prove that you tested positive because of one person. If you do not disclose your status to me, I will not disclose to you. Your silence makes you complicit. Period. End of story.

    Posted by: TooBoot | Jan 15, 2013 4:09:10 PM

  20. If anyone wonders why there is a stigma against poz guys, just read the comments of poz men knowingly and willfully putting other lives at risk...for what?..sex. Their regard for life is so little that they will rationalize why they have no moral obligation to tell someone they have a disease that could kill them simply because they want one more sexual encounter. This is what we are up against.

    Posted by: Marty | Jan 15, 2013 4:16:35 PM

  21. Anyone who contracts HIV today, with all we know about using condoms, deserves what they get and is totally responsible for contracting the disease because you were stupid enough not to use protection. It is so much easier to blame someone else but it is ultimately your responsiblity. No one should have to disclose because everyone should be using condoms.

    Posted by: TooBoot | Jan 15, 2013 4:16:45 PM

  22. I don't think I could've pressed charges. I would have blamed myself for having unprotected anal sex.

    Ofcourse, I don't know what it feels like to be in a committed relationship. I suppose there is some trust involved in that situation.

    Hell, don't trust no damn body but yourself.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jan 15, 2013 4:22:13 PM

  23. Derrick From Philly : Ugh, that's so...unromantic, but I think you're so right.

    Posted by: Yupp | Jan 15, 2013 4:24:21 PM

  24. i guess some of us just have made that choice to always use condoms, always, even with our long-term partners.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jan 15, 2013 4:30:43 PM

  25. @TooBoot

    You're absolutely right that people should be using condoms and be responsible for their own well being.

    You're absolutely wrong that people "deserve what they get" and that "no one should have to disclose..."



    Posted by: Justin | Jan 15, 2013 4:39:04 PM

  26. « | 1 2 3 4 »

Post a comment


« «Rhode Island House Panel to Hear Testimony on Same-Sex Marriage Bill Today« «