Because some sexually-transmitted illnesses can't accurately be considered "diseases", but they can accurately be considered "infections". Like saying that not all rectangles are squares. I know that the acronym is minimally less catchy, but I don't believe that this particular aspect is an attempt to encourage degeneracy. We were already calling them STIs when I was in high school, nearly 20 years ago.
Because some sexually-transmitted illnesses can't accurately be considered "diseases", but they can accurately be considered "infections". Like saying that not all rectangles are squares. I know that the acronym is minimally less catchy, but I don't believe that this particular aspect is an attempt to encourage degeneracy. We were already calling them STIs when I was in high school, nearly 20 years ago.
Things were pretty pozzed 20 years ago.
This still seems to me like a strange hill to die on, fighting against a more accurate term.
I'd sooner see the weasels who decided it was "more accurate" covered in honey and left in a fire ant colony than accept their premise.
Are infections not also things to cure? Things widely considered to be harmful and to be avoided?
The term doesn't make it sound "acceptable" to catch. Not any more so than catching a "disease".
I still don't see the issue with this.