You're making an argument where there is none, my friend.
What's the significance of my supposedly "back-peddling"? I simply felt I should close by pointing out the opening statement of my original post, which was that I ENJOYED THE MOVIE for what it was (speaking as someone who favors 80's coming-of-age dramas/comedies, like "Fast Times at Ridgemont High").
Yes, by "STDs" I meant ANY sexually transmitted disease, although AIDS wasn't foremost on my mind.
AIDS was around way before the '80s, it just wasn't well-publicised until the mid to late '80s.
Yes, the very link I supplied offered that information. But the CONTEXT of our dialogue was the growing AIDS epidemic in America in the 80s
RE: "As for your claim about it being more of a homosexual problem, during that time, that's very ignorant as it wasn't - it was a problem for everyone"
True, it was a danger for anyone who had multiple sex partners
. I was obviously speaking in generalities and, at the time in the 80s, it was spread mostly amongst male homosexuals for obvious reasons, which is why it was called "the gay plague." You're welcome to deny the documented facts and rewrite history if you want.
For the record, I had a friend who died of AIDS and visited him in hospice a couple of times. He said he (supposedly) acquired the disease via his girlfriend who was shooting up or something. I say "supposedly" because -- who knows? -- he might've been hiding the truth.
Lastly, what validation do I need for my legitimate criticism of the movie's fantasy depiction of prostitution? Fact: Prostitution has negative repercussions, both for the prostitute and, less so, the client, especially the longer they participate in that lifestyle. Disagree all you want.