Precisely, setzer777. In addition to that assumption, would you really want to have sex with someone who wanted to continue after your disclosure? It's kind of a non-starter, at least to me an I suspect anyone who has a reasonable aversion to STIs.
Nevermind that the fact that by trying
to have sex while knowingly infected with a high-risk but temporary STI, you're one of the "dirty" people we're all afraid to offend.
Being sexually responsible doesn't mean getting rid of all of the risks of sex: responsible doesn't mean living in a bubble, it means learning about and making good choices about risk.
"I don't care" and "I didn't get tested" don't sound like good choices about risk. The mere act of having sex introduces risk, of course I understand that. But you're in an increased risk lifestyle by being polyamorous, and so I propose that you should carry the burder of increased risk-reduction by virtue of increased testing. I don't get tested for STIs because I am in a monogamous and long-term relationship, and while that still, as you say, represents a risk
because it depends on someone else (whom I trust, but nevertheless, that is statistically insignificant if not irrelevant), it represents a small risk, especially when the aquisition of the STI would mean much less in terms of devastating news, compared to the infidelity or breach of trust in the relationship/family unit.
I'm worried about effective uses of resources in our society as a whole
What (severely) limited-supply resources does an HPV test use up that makes this statement any more than just utter bullshit? Not to mention, if you happened to have been polyamorous at the time, and it spread, there's arguably a larger number of people who will end up having to be tested or will elect to be tested. I can't believe I'm typing this, but: You're not doing society any favours by ignoring whether or not you're spreading disease. Does that makes sense to you?
I can make the same ridiculous argument about not washing my hands after taking a dump, because I'm careful not to put my fingers in my mouth, and I don't want to "waste resources". No, I fucking wash my hands.
but unless you can point to people who have actually been tested for everything and ask other people if they are "clean," I don't believe you when you say that's what most people mean.
I'll concede that I'm wrong to purport that my definition of "are you clean" is what everyone means (have you had every single test run on you since your last partner), but lets be realistic: Anyone who is asking you "Are you clean?" wants to know, with as much certainty as possible, do you have any
STI, at all
- to the best of your knowledge. Not just "the bad ones". Not "not-HPV because that goes away after 2 years but I don't even know that yet I don't understand why having it would mean I'd have to stop having sex despite the fact I've repeatedly stated that it's transmission is not easily preventable" ... and to say it again, I can't forsee any real situtation where you'd be all like "hey, I have this thing that you'll probably get", and anyone else would be like "alright! just what I've always wanted, this is totally worth it instead of going home and rubbing one out." -- unless you both have it.. but then there's gotta be some kind of matchmaking service for that so that you don't have to do the whole Q&A bit.
So, as someone who is fucking several people, who are themselves possibly fucking several people, and therefore by extension fucking lots of people, who doesn't seem to see a "sex-stopping" problem with having a hard-to-prevent STI... no, you're not a sexually responsible person. You're not an outright malicious bastard, but you're not doing all you could do
to help prevent the transmission of infections, under the guise of some retarded "resource saving" mantra.