To all those thinking that you can't be prosecuted for transmitting an STI in the UK, well actually, YOU CAN BE, but HOW AND WHEN is complicated:
What follows below, is a good summary of the ' How and When' mentioned above:
In the UK, there is no blanket legal requirement to disclose an STI to Read more… sexual partners. However, if you knowingly have an infection (particularly HIV, hepatitis, or herpes) and transmit it without disclosing it, you can be prosecuted for recklessly or intentionally transmitting a serious infection under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The Core Rule: Reckless or Intentional TransmissionFor almost all STIs, simple non-disclosure prior to sex does not constitute a criminal offence, nor does it negate consent. However, the actual transmission of an STI is legally treated as inflicting "grievous bodily harm" (GBH) and is seen as a criminal offence. You can face legal action (under Section 20 or Section 18 of the OAPA 1861) if all of the following apply:You knew you were infected at the time of the sexual activity.You intended to transmit the infection, or you knew there was a risk of transmission and unreasonably went ahead with it anyway.You actively transmitted the infection to the other person. Specific Guidance by ConditionHIV: You are not legally obligated to disclose your HIV status. However, the majority of STI-related prosecutions in the UK happen around HIV because it is classified as a severe, life-altering condition. If you have an undetectable viral load or practice safe sex (e.g., using condoms), it is considered incredibly unlikely that you would be successfully prosecuted for reckless transmission.Other STIs (Chlamydia, Gonorrhoea, Syphilis, Herpes, etc.): The law does not mandate disclosure. However, if you transmit a chronic, serious STI, there is a legal risk of prosecution for reckless transmission.

To the OP, I'd just like to say thank you for being so upfront and honest about your situation, it's a breath of fresh air in this place, and I wish more people were like you.
You see, I do not have any STDs, and I don't play with anyone until after we've both had the usual checks and show each Read more… other our results. And, it's always at this stage, when I state we should get tested, etc, etc, that some start to get nervous, sheepish, or dismissive. This is when I get to find out, without them telling me, that something is up, and it's because they were reluctant to divulge this from the get-go, I rapidly lose interest and will disappear.
Now, had they been upfront and honest like yourself, then it would have been my choice whether I played with them or not. And I value that.
But, they weren't. They were sneaky and only revealed something was up because they couldn't hide / get away with it anymore, so, as a result of their actions, I felt as though I could not trust them, and that they had little regard for my well-being. So just imagine what I could have caught had I not been so insistent on getting tested before playing!
I really value honesty in potential partners / playmates, so had they been honest - before they had to be - about themselves with such a condition, my estimations of them would have been raised. To the point that I would have asked them questions and researched for myself, to find out if it was possible to indulge without me catching anything, and if it was possible, I'd give it a go.
I've a sneaky feeling that now, you'll probably get more guys interested in you, because you come across as a honest person and, one they'll feel like they can trust with their well-being.

Simply type into Google, the following very simple phrase: Is Clare's Law successful in the West Midlands.
The answer will be YES. And, it will give the stats (a dirty word for some), the volumes, and the reasons why.
You see, up in my neck of the woods, we encourage our women folk not to be punch Read more… bags AND CRUCIALLY, not to let perpetrators get away with stuff. So it's no surprise that CLARE'S LAW works well up here!
Maybe, you should contact your equivalents up here and take some lessons... that is, if you really want to make things better for your clientèle.
It is a well known fact that just making a noise with no actual attempt to bring about change, clearly doesn't work.
No doubt there'll be no forthcoming apology or conceding to THESE DOCUMENTED FACTS, just more 'whataboutery', and more high jacking.
---------------------------------------------------
Because I know some people do not want others to see those facts and figures, I've taken the liberty of posting some of them here... You're welcome.
==================
The following is what you'll see when you do that Google search:
Clare’s Law (Domestic *** Disclosure Scheme) is considered highly active and successful in the West Midlands, with thousands of households using it to check partners' violent histories. Data indicates a major rise in disclosures, helping to protect people at risk.
Key Success Factors and Data (2025–2026):
High Usage: In 2025, West Midlands Police reported over 5,500 applications. In 2024, there was a 39% increase in warnings issued.
"Right to Know" and "Right to Ask": Police, in early 2026, were processing thousands of requests to proactively disclose information or answer enquiries from concerned citizens.
Preventative Impact: The law is credited with helping individuals identify abusive partners who lied about their past, allowing victims to take action to secure their safety.

I've supported quite a few in my time, because it was a part of my job role.
Hence, my display of pretty extensive knowledge on the subject, and CLARE'S LAW in particular. A diligent person would have picked up on this and realised that I had more than just a "passing interest".
The women I worked Read more… with in the female refuge / safe space arena, are NOT man-haters, and as a result, were able to form many useful connections and networks. This resulted in some very innovative and well received awareness, targeted and educational campaaigns about VAWG, SA and DV.
If they saw this thread, they would be horrified at the high jacking and wasted opportunity to get men to talk freely about the topic of VAWG and how they could counteract it. In fact, they would see it as very, very counterproductive.
You see, their approach is to bring people INTO the conversation, NOT to alienate them out, which is probably part of the reason why they're so successful when others, clearly aren't.

The 'decent men out there,' have been speaking up and challenging those that aren't for a while now... It's just that some women have simply chosen not to recognise their efforts.
The mother of the woman who the DVDS is named after, CLARE'S LAW, didn’t just sit around moaning that it's 'all mens' Read more… fault', and that 'men should do better'. She didn't sit around and say 'it's not our job'. Instead, she made sure that the deeath of her daughter at the hands of a man who had convictions for SA and DV, would not be in vane.
HENCE, why SHE pushed to ensure that an exception in the law was made whereby women and others, would have the right to be told if their partner or ex partner had a history of SA and/or DV.
As a result, very many women HAVE BEEN SAVED from becoming veectims of a SA and DV, BECAUSE they used CLARE'S LAW.
We've even had a lady on this very thread, testify how it saved her from becoming a potential next veectim.
It's all too easy to criticize when there is no intention to try and improve upon a situation, or, contribute in a positive way to the effort.
Just think, if this topic hadn't been derailed, there could've been some good suggestions that could have gone on to be genuinely good workable and viable ideas. Instead, here we are.
For 'decent men', when we can't directly protect those we care about, we do the next best thing, we give and we share tools and information that they can use to protect themselves. One of them, being Clare's Law. It's not perfect, but it's more effective than just wishing for change.

@TheZenCommander again, you are incorrect. This was the original question.

LOL, you have consistently strongly implied that Clare's Law is not very effective... your statements are still there for ALL to read.
Trying to back peddle now is not going to cut any ice with anyone.
Obviously, I don't mind conversations like these, because it means that more and more people, Read more… will look up Clare's Law just to see what all the fuss is about. And of the people who will look it up, will be those who will find it useful either for themselves, or, for some people they know.
LOL, despite your best attempts, you have inadvertently helped to spread the word about Clare's Law, so I thank you.
And, you really should do your research before commenting and making yourself look, erm... the way you're looking now...
You see, the VAWG you talk about, and your other statement that women and g1rls voices are not being listened to... Clare's law is a direct response to that.
The clue is in the name... CLARE'S LAW, not Fred's law or David's law, but CLARE'S!!!
Clare's Law was spear-headed by her mom, after her daughter, Clare, was unalived by her (Clare's) partner who had convictions for SA and DV.
Clare's mom argued that had her daaaughter known about them, she would have left him. Other women who had also been veectims of SA and DV, came forward with the same complaint that they should have been told about such histories. You know why?.. BECAUSE AT THAT TIME, the police and other law enfourcement agencies were not allowed to divulge such information. Clare's mom, along with other campaainers, fought long and hard to get this exception to the law made.
So, what was it you were saying about women and g1rls voices not being heard????????

What an utterly asinine response to such a serious question.
It is obvious that wisdom and intelligence have been chasing you for some time... but you have always been faster.
First off, in order for someone to be convicted of DV, in 97% of cases, the perpetrator has had to be REPORTED first.The Read more… exceptions to this rule are extremely rare... in case you haven't figured it out, they're the 3%
To make it clearer for you, in the very vast majority of DV situations, NO REPORT = NO CONVICTIONS.

Secondly, in light of the fact that maybe English isn't your first language, "NOWADAYS" is an adverb meaning at the present time or in these days, usually comparing the current situation to a past era. So, despite me clearly stating 'NOWADAYS,' you still decided to mention, Jimmy Saville, to highlight a somewhat ridiculous point. He was formally exposed as a prolific sexual predator in October 2012, nearly a year after his death in October 2011. Clare's Law, officially known as the Domestic Vi@lence Disclosure Scheme (DVDS), was introduced in all police fources in England and Wales in March 2014.... partially as a result of his exposure, because before this, there was no such mechanism to record such offending / perpetrators, especially those as prolific as that monster.
Thirdly, " This isn't a both sides problem. And it's not our job to fix it." Yet another completely asinine comment to make considering that the majority of SA victims are women. So you're saying that you recognise there's a problem but you want no part in addressing it, despite the fact that (repeating my point here) women are the main veectims... from abooosers, be they men or women. Yes, there are stats to prove that DV rates are higher in Lesbian intimate relationships than they are in heterosexual intimate relationships, which is still wrong, full stop.
For someone who claims to be 'sapiosexual', your comments are more in line with someone of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Perpetrators of SA and DV can sleep easier in their beds now, knowing that there'll always be someone advocating for veectims not to say or REPORT anything, thereby reducing their chances of being caught. Because, Law Enfourcement agencies and Authorities, rely on REPORTS and EVIDENCE, and if none is forthcoming, how the hell do you expect them to 'do their jobs in these situations'???
The systems, processes and laws that are currently in place, may not be perfect, but at least they're a start, which is much better than what you propose - which is to do, say and report nothing.
In fact, here's a challenge for you, instead of pew pewing the instruments that are currently available, why don't YOU propose a better, practical, workable way of reducing SAs and DVs... We'll wait.

Hopefully, this will partially restore your faith in us men.
Way back, as you Americans would say, I told people on this site about a UK law that would help address the 'rampant culture of domestic vi@lence (DV), it's called:
Clare's Law, often known officially as a Domestic Vi@lence Disclosure Read more… Scheme or similar, designates several ways for police officers to disclose a person's history of abusive behaviour to those who may be at risk from such behaviour. It is intended to reduce intimate partner vi@lence.
It basically works by former veectims of DV reporting their abooosers to the police, who will then, after dealing with said abooosers, put them on a register. So, if a new person (or anyone looking out for that person) suspects their partner or ex-partner of being an aboooser, they or an agency /anyone looking out for that person, can contact the police who will tell the enquirer if that partner /ex-partner has a history of abooosive behaviour or not. If they have, the idea is that once the enquirer knows, they'll hopefully have enough common sense to either stay away from or leave said aboooser, thereby avoiding being the aboooser's next veectim.
Ironically, when I made people aware of this Uk law on this site, and encouraged people to report said abooosers if they found themselves in such a DV situation, there were some women here who were actually advocating for other women not to do so.... despite the fact it was pointed out to them that the next veectim of such an aboooser could be their friend, seester, daaughter, mother, or other female relative or associate!!!
If you scroll through the comments section on my profile, you can see who they are.... and they were the same ones who claimed to be looking out for other women in the Kinkyverse here!!
It was the same sort of thing from said self-professed female guardians of other women, who argued with me, when I was one of the very few men on this site to tell women about the feature, in the message filter, that could reduce the amount of dic pics they were getting. It was as if the 'guardians' didn't want other women to know, because they liked complaining about getting said dick pics, but didn't actually want anything done about them. So, although the 'guardians' already knew about this feature, they didn't want it to be common knowledge.... they probably ***ed it would reduce their influence over the other women here.
Bottom line is, nowadays, there are quite a few tools, laws, processes and other instruments available to women, I've mentioned just two above, and, quite a few guys happy to encourage women to report wrong-doing and to use those instruments... but if they won't, there's little more we can' do.
I strongly agree that we should be educating boys as well as girls in this respect, but that will only take effect for the next generation, when what we need are remedies to deal with the low-lifes today.... and that's where more women need to play their part... now.

He talks about subs and slaves nowadays being disrespectful and rude to him. What does he expect when he has the above opinion of them?
For his Information - Thinking that a potential sub or slave, is just a 'b*tch with mental baggage', is extremely unlikely to win them over to you... in fact, it's Read more… a major RED FLAG to anyone even remotely interested in you, hence why you're struggling to get one. And before you deny it, we can see on your profile that of the approx. 10,000 messages you've sent out, you've had less than 6000 replies back, which speaks volumes.
There's a word for guys who are angry that they' can't get a woman, oh yeah - In Sells (I know the correct spelling).
Typical of the mindset of the majority of 'old guard' missing the 'good ole days,' he likes to 'express his opinions', no matter how abhorrent. But, because he often cannot back up his arguments, he hates being challenged or scrutinised about them. Hence, why to him/them (majority), anyone who challenges or scrutinises their opinions, is 'woke far left'. So, please consider me, WOKE far left... and proud.
The majority of the 'old guard' held the above similar dinosaur views and opinions as the second guy mentioned, and could not be reasoned with. This is why, THANKFULLY, the 'good ole days are gone.'
The only thing that's constant in life, is change, so you either adapt or dye. (I know the correct spelling, but the filter is getting tedious).

You asked for HONEST advice and I gave it. If you didn't like how it was delivered then you shouldn't have asked for an honest reply. There was no raging or baiting.
Yep, I'm sooooo misogynistic 🙄 that I'm the one who told those here in the UK about 'Clare's Law ' - Google it.
I'm soooooo Read more… misogynistic, that I was one of the few guys on this platform to tell women about the message filter they could use to reduce the amount of dick picks they were getting. Yet the women who were supposed to be looking out for the ***hood here, even though they knew about it, wouldn't tell the other women... Maybe it was because, they liked to complain about getting them, and didn't like anything or anyone that could reduce that, and with it their complaints. But, I digress.
YOU stated on your profile that 'you're a grown ass adult and you make your own choices, and that you didn't care what others think of them'.
Soooo, why are you asking this question then if you're going to make your own choices anyway? Why are you suddenly concerned about what we think?
My advice was 'helpful' and 'honest'. You just didn't like it because it confirmed what you already knew and what you should do.

@Cindershella
‐---------------‐--------------------------------------------
Above, is another quote from your posting. So according to this, by your own admission, the first two Doms were good ones because, they managed her expectations by telling her clearly from the outset that they were not Read more… going to 'love' her. And yet, knowing this, SHE agreed and STILL CHOSE to be with them.
So I'm baffled how in your eyes, they're still the bad guys when they were being honest... and she chose to stay???
-----------------------
You said that there's different ways of being honest, at least I have been, YOU clearly haven't. All you have done is fluffed up her pillow and given her a false illusion that the problems are with those guys and not her. When the problem really is with her.... SHE PICKED THEM, and by her own admission, TWICE.
If you refuse to re-evaluate your actions, your choices, your decisions when they're not working out, then how is that taking accountability?
Like I've said before, YOU, the subs have the real power in the Kinky verse. YOU literally get to choose the guys, because we vastly outnumber you. YOU choose who gets close to you, and YOU choose who gets in. So if YOU keep making poor decisions, it's up to YOU to own that fact and do something about it.
Clearly for some, accountability, is a dirty word.

What you did was stew pea'd without a contract or some other form of protection.

You got lucky that she/they didn't change their mind about what you did. Because in most countries, had she changed her mind and reported you for reeeeep, you'd be in prison now experiencing for real what she Read more… experienced as fantasy.