Let me tell you three stories.
First story. One of my best friends, a middle-age man with whom I worked on AIDS issues in the 1980s, sent me an e-mail several months ago saying that he had recently tested positive for HIV. He acknowledged that he was extremely embarrassed to be confessing this fact: The message we had all promoted then-as now-was to have only "safe sex" and to use "a condom every time." "I must have neglected to use a condom," he said simply.
Second story. I was at my local grocery store during the late summer when I ran into a casual friend I've known from the bars, a man somewhere in his late 40s, I'd guess, and we stopped to chat. He said he recently found out that he was HIV-positive, which he confessed surprised him. "I thought I was safe because I was exclusively a top," he said. "But apparently not." I gathered that he was already taking an antiviral combination, which suggested that his T-cell count was low, so he may have been infected some time ago.
Third story. A good friend, an older man, told me that early this fall he had his first HIV test in several years and was surprised to learn that he was HIV-positive. Not only that but his T-cell count had sunk to the 100-150 range, clearly qualifying for an AIDS diagnosis. "I did what I considered 'safe sex' and assumed I was uninfected. I never had any symptoms that I recognized as being HIV-related," he told me. "But then I noticed that I was getting tired easily and wanted to take naps throughout the day. I thought that was just a function of getting older, but evidently not."
These men are all Americans, fellow Chicagoans. And, most of all, friends. World AIDS Day will be observed on December 1. Do I care about AIDS among people I do not know and will never see or meet? Only marginally. What I do care about is gay men in the U.S., in my city, in my neighborhood. In short, I care about my friends, present and potential. Anyone who cares as much about total strangers in foreign lands as he does his friends and people in his own community has a strange idea about the value of personal relationships.
I lived through the first wave of AIDS, 1981-1996. I lost a lot of friends during that time. Suddenly it feels as if I am beginning to live through a second wave of AIDS infections-not necessarily resulting in deaths this time, at least in the medium term, but decisively altering people's lives.
When people's T-cell levels decline to a certain point, they have to begin an anti-viral drug regimen that involves taking one to four drugs every day at the same time every day. If they travel, they have to pack their drugs and make sure nothing interferes with their drug regimen. They have to do this for the rest of their lives. And some of the drugs have inconvenient side effects, from nausea or wooziness to diarrhea to unpleasant dreams. But taking the drugs is better than not taking them.
It seems vitally important to remind people that AIDS is still a threatening presence in the gay community. I have read estimates that 20 percent of those infected do not know it. I have seen no statistical support for that estimate and I am sure the number is far higher-40 percent? 50 percent? Recall that the Centers for Disease Control acknowledged not many months ago that for years it had underestimated the number of people annually infected with HIV by more than 40 percent.
Every year, every day, young gay men come out and begin engaging in sex. They may think they are invulnerable, they may be heedless, or they may never see a safe-sex message or have had the term "safe sex" spelled out for them. When I have visited bathhouses or back-room bars, I have seen people of all ages and ethnicities engaging in unprotected sex. Clearly safe-sex messages have lost their impact or are not reaching them in a persuasive fashion.
Many people seem to care more about AIDS abroad than in the U.S. President Bush has sponsored billions of dollars in funding to prevent AIDS in third-world countries, but said little abut AIDS in the U.S. Some evangelical churches are involved in helping to combat AIDS abroad, but show no interest in AIDS in the U.S. It seems clear that they are interested in helping heterosexuals abroad, but want nothing to do with homosexuals in the U.S.
So it continues to be up to us.
28 Comments for “World AIDS Day: A Dissent”
posted by David Skidmore on
Any mention of AIDS and the demand of ‘individual responsibility’ will come up. Fair enough – to a point. But I think Paul Varnell’s third example illustrates how people try to be responsible but are also fallible. There is a lot of hypocritical moralising as well from HIV- straights AND gays who think sero-conversion could never happen to them and somehow AIDS is the wages of sin (perhaps they are channelling Jerry Falwell).
AIDS is not a moral problem but a health problem and should be treated as such. This is still an important message after nearly 30 years of America’s first infections.
posted by gary on
I don’t know amymore! Just sick of everyone blaming everybody and everything for the spread of HIV except those responsible….. that being “us”
I am sick of looking at the local gay papers and seeing advertisement for the next local AID”s run/walk/benefit/dance/hop/skip/jump and then going to Craig’s List and reading all the BB/breed me/raw hole/dump your load in me types of posting.
I sort of gave up when the last “Fireball AID’s Benefit”(or whatever it was called) turned into nothing but a drug infested orgy… go figure!?
posted by Attmay on
Nowhere in the article did the author, an atheist, mention the “Wages of Sin.” What about the Wages of Carelessness?
Nobody reasonable believes that HIV cannot happen to them. But we try to minimize the risk as much as possible. We all know how to do so, but some people just stopped caring. These people do not care about their health. How is that moral? Bringing up the religious right shibboleth is disingenuous.
I am sick of looking at the local gay papers and seeing advertisement for the next local AID”s run/walk/benefit/dance/hop/skip/jump and then going to Craig’s List and reading all the BB/breed me/raw hole/dump your load in me types of posting. I sort of gave up when the last “Fireball AID’s Benefit”(or whatever it was called) turned into nothing but a drug infested orgy… go figure!?
If that’s not hypocrisy, I don’t know what is.
Prior to AIDS gay men were still getting infected with STDs, but they were treatable and some were curable, so it seemed like no big deal. But the belief that pleasure takes precedence over all other concerns is what led us to this problem in the first place.
The question is not so much “whose fault is it” but “what can I do, personally, to stop it?” Well, condoms cost $10.99 a dozen. Antiretroviral drugs cost thousands a year. And then there’s always the worthwhile search for long-term monogamous relationships.
posted by Ashpenaz on
I want a World Fat Day. It is amazing how many gays think that being fat is a person’s own fault. Fat people could change if they wanted to. Though science shows that being fat is largely genetic, gays think it is due to a fat person’s lack of discipline or character. Gays are also angry about having to share health insurance with fat people since fat people are unhealthy and raise the premiums.
I’m not sure why gay people expect sensitivity to AIDS when they are so cruel and dismissive of fat people. And old people. And poor people. And unattractive people. All of whom gays say create their own problems. If we decided to make a quilt for all those who died because they couldn’t help being fat, poor, old, or unattractive, how many gays would show up?
posted by David Skidmore on
Part of the problem with AIDS today is that it is seen by some gays as manageable – like diabetes. First of all, diabetes is no picnic. Secondly, taking drugs to manage HIV is not exactly an outdoor repast either.
Also, younger gay men do not have the same consciousness of AIDs as those who were around in the 1980s. Some of these gays are outright ignorant of the disease partly due to declining publicity of the problem.
But far and away the biggest problem is plain old risk behaviour – “HIV will never happen to me”. The same attitude with people who speed or do DUIs or jay walk. They think they will not suffer consequences. That mind set is very hard to (ahem) root out.
posted by Throbert McGee on
Let us not forget the fact that for the past two decades (at least), the “safe sex” norm in gay porn videos has been:
ALWAYS USE CONDOMS FOR FUCKING*
*but, whisper-whisper: we’ll try to make the condoms as invisible and unobtrusive as possible, and we’ll use clever editing to make it look ALMOST as if the actors aren’t really using rubbers unless you look really closely, because everyone knows that barebacking is sexier
In other words, while the gradual mainstreaming of actual bareback-fucking videos is bad enough, the fact is that “responsible mainstream” porn studios have been serving up a constant stream of simulated barebacking throughout most of the entire run of the AIDS epidemic.
And how many times have activists staged “die-ins” in front of porn studios?
(Answer: There actually have been a few protests against bareback studios, but pathetically few, and the protesters were often dismissed as “judgmental” and “unhelpful” and other blah-de-blah by John Q. Gaypublic.)
posted by Throbert McGee on
The question is not so much “whose fault is it” but “what can I do, personally, to stop it?” Well, condoms cost $10.99 a dozen. Antiretroviral drugs cost thousands a year.
Cost whom?
Here’s a fun tip: If you’re ever on a gay blog or message board where people are talking about how super-sexy barebacking is, try interjecting:
“Hmmm, I’ll bet barebacking wouldn’t seem quite so sexy if you knew you were going to have to pay for your anti-viral medications 100% out-of-pocket…”
I can almost guarantee that you’ll be called a hateful greedy RethugliKKKan for your troubles — but at least it’ll shut up the BB glamorizing for a little while.
posted by Attmay on
Since when did being judgmental become so horrible? That ability is the main thing separating us from feces-throwing chimps.
the fact is that “responsible mainstream” porn studios have been serving up a constant stream of simulated barebacking throughout most of the entire run of the AIDS epidemic
How do you simulate barebacking?
Granted, in a fully monogamous partnership between two HIV negative individuals, the argument is moot. But outside of that is where the problems lie.
This is another reason why the state has an interest in promoting homosexual monogamy.
Cost whom?
I take it insurance doesn’t pay for it.
First of all, diabetes is no picnic.
Agreed. My mother has type two diabetes. While she hasn’t had any major problems yet, I still fear for her eyesight, her legs, and her lifespan. She’s 52, and her parents died in their mid-60s.
posted by Ashpenaz on
“Diabetes comes from being fat, and being fat is the person’s own fault. People choose to be fat, so if they get horrible diseases, it’s their problem. As it says in The Secret, just looking at fat people makes you unhealthy, so I shouldn’t have to be around them. I don’t want to pay extra for health insurance for fat people–they should have to pay for their drugs 100% out-of-pocket. Or just die and let the world belong to attractive people.”
This is the kind of opinion frequently heard when young, fabulous gays get tired of wondering whatever happened to Scissor Sisters. Perhaps the elitist insensitivity of the fierce young things leads to less than sympathetic attitudes towards AIDS by those of us old, overweight, unattractive people.
posted by TS on
Gay men are less likely to have children and more likely to be well educated, thus on average have spare time and money. We should be generous, charitable, and civically engaged to whatever extent we can. We should participate in efforts to stop the spread of AIDS and advance the scientific progress of treatment among members of our community and people we know well and among disadvantaged populations in other countries. We have lots of time and money. It would be a minimal drain on our quality of life, a boost to our credibility and a rewarding experience individually for us to contribute generously to AIDS prevention and treatment, as well as other worthy causes. This is not and should not be discussed as an either-or issue.
posted by Ashpenaz on
But only if the diseases are glamorous and the victims attractive–if they’re fat, old, poor, or unattractive, then let them die and decrease the surplus population.
posted by Throbert McGee on
How do you simulate barebacking?
Like so:
CLOSEUP of the Top guiding his condomless hard-on towards the Bottom’s quivering luv-hole.
WIDE-ANGLE as the Top essentially “pantomimes” sticking his dick into the Bottom’s ass, selling it to the viewer with a grunt and a hip thrust, although the camera is strategically placed so that we can’t actually see the moment of penetration.
CLOSEUP of the Bottom’s ass fully penetrated by the Top’s cock — on which a condom has suddenly appeared, as if by elfin magic!
posted by Mark F. on
The AIDS prevention message for gay men is pretty simple:
If you are going to have anal sex (and perhaps you ought to consider other options), use a condom. How often does this have to be repeated?
posted by Attmay on
Have you seen some of the safe sex PSAs? They look like porn. The reason they don’t work is that they treat safe sex as an end in itself. It isn’t; it’s a means to an end, the end being not having decades shaved off your life.
posted by Throbert McGee on
The AIDS prevention message for gay men is pretty simple:
If you are going to have anal sex (and perhaps you ought to consider other options), use a condom. How often does this have to be repeated?
The “perhaps you should consider other options besides anal sex” part has, to the best of my knowledge, NEVER been a significant part of mainstream AIDS-prevention in the U.S. — not through almost three decades of an epidemic that, among gay/bi men, has spread almost exclusively via anal intercourse, and very seldom by any other sexual route (i.e., if you don’t count gay/bi men who are also injection-drug abusers).
posted by Throbert McGee on
Way back in 1985, Netherlands health officials launched an AIDS-prevention educational campaign aimed specifically at gay/bi men and offering a simple, two-sentence message:
The surest way to avoid infection by AIDS is to abstain completely from anal intercourse. If you are not willing to abstain from anal intercourse, the next best approach is to use a condom during every act of anal sex.
(This 1985 Dutch campaign is described by Gabriel Rotello in Sexual Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men, but I’m paraphrasing from memory because I don’t have a copy of Rotello’s book.
I also once Googled up a good description of the study in Davidson C. Umeh’s Confronting the AIDS Epidemic, but the “look inside the book” feature at Amazon doesn’t seem to be working right now. Umeh talks briefly about why the Dutch educational campaign was ended by the early ’90s: in hindsight, it seems to have been struck down by PC thinking, because some gay male activists decided that the anti-anal message was “homophobic.” (Despite the fact that the Dutch campaign implicitly gave the green light to OTHER activities widely enjoyed by gay men, such as oral sex, mutual j/o, etc.)
Admittedly, at the time it was something of a gamble to implicitly endorse unprotected oral sex, but looking back we now have almost three decades of evidence from male homosexual and heterosexual studies in multiple countries to confirm that the assumption of the Dutch authorities was correct: HIV transmission via condomless fellatio is an extreme rarity.
posted by Mark F. on
Throbert:
I’ve tried anal sex, and have generally found it to be uncomfortable and not very pleasurable–especially with condoms. I can have a great time without it. So I don’t worry much about AIDS.
posted by TS on
The consensus on and the ongoing revisions of our theory of how AIDS spreads is very important for providing effective public education.
I think the most effective strategy in Western communities of some wealth is to continue to take heed of the conclusions of experts. If you have a friend who expresses a contrarian opposition to the established theory on the spread of AIDS or persists in unsafe sex habits despite the latter, you should have a talk with that friend if you care about him (or her). The scientific evidence is very extensive. Believers of conspiracy theories about the government/the pharmaceutical industry etc. should imagine that all it takes is one person with a strong sense of ethics and humanitarian concern for his or her fellow human beings to derail a conspiracy. Being a young life scientist in training, I know several scientists who study AIDS. They are decent human beings and I would be insulted if you suggest that they are in a conspiracy to deliberately mislead the population. They are all engaged in that research because they have personal connections to the AIDS epidemic, they hope that their skills might prove essential for making a breakthrough, or both reasons. It may be an awkward or frustrating talk, but everybody needs to understand that not only is this virus a very real and active threat with severe consequences, but the mode by which it is spread also puts every sexually active person, especially a gay man, in a position of moral responsibility to protect their partners from it.
As for the world’s poor communities ravaged by AIDS, the way forward is much more complicated. Interpersonal or public educational methods may backfire due to demographical dynamics. Tireless efforts must continue to refine them. The only long term solution to that problem will probably end up being an effective and relatively inexpensive treatment.
My heart goes out to everyone, everywhere in the world, afflicted by any disease or harmful circumstance. Even those who had a hand in their own suffering deserve mercy and assistance. There are enough resources in this world for everyone to live in reasonable comfort several times over (provided population growth can be stemmed).
posted by apostle Shada Mishe on
THE CURE for HIV/AIDS…….AMBUSH
THE IDEA that AMBUSH cures AIDS
is being proven by the more than 400 individuals who have taken a dose of 60 ml three times daily for 21 days. The result is that AMBUSH ‘KILLS’ the virus by causing the protein envelope to rupture and the viral particles are discarded by the white blood cells. AMBUSH is able to ‘KILL’ the virus that are ‘hiding’ in the lymph system by its ‘natural radioactive’ properties. This process allows the body to ‘return to normal health’ with a corresponding immunity to that or those strains of the virus.
What is AMBUSH ?
AMBUSH is a radioactive isotope of uranium that is found in the ‘palm’ plant of which there are more than 3000 species. When ingested, AMBUSH causes the body temperature in the trunk area to rise to about 102 degrees when the individual is sleeping. The preparation takes four hours per batch, which is then given to the individuals for consumption 60 ml three times daily for 21 days. AMBUSH is a herbal preparation in this form but it contains an active ingredient which is a ‘NEW’ crystalline substance, a drug from the ‘palm plant’ similarly to ASPIRIN originating from the willow tree bark
RESULTS:
After 21 days on AMBUSH, ALL the individuals experienced a decrease in viral load to undetectable, an increase in cd4, increase in RBC, an improvement in general health such as more color to the face, decrease in Buffalo hump, an increase in gluteal muscles, a decrease to having no joint pains whereby individuals can bend to touch their toes, and walk up steps are but a few examples. There is also a dramatic increase in their sexual appetite beginning after the first week of therapy
DISCUSSION:
In any plant concoction such as percolated ‘tea’, there are 30-40,000 compounds, whi ch would take the scientific community twenty years to isolate one particular ingredient if they knew what they were looking for. The LORD GOD has given me seven steps to isolate the active ingredient, which is soft and metallic in nature and has a carbon- uranium-sulfur-(classified)-phentolamine configuration or structure. This is similar to Federick Kekule and the discovery of the benzene ring where he dreamt the structure.
As an antiviral and ‘natural radioactivity’ producing agent, AMBUSH is also effective against leukemia, lupus and HPV. Here I am saying that I have ‘GIVEN’ AMBUSH in the same ‘strength’ and dosage to patients with leukemia, lupus and HPV. A 35 year old male with HIV found it difficult to impossible to urinate was put on ‘green tea’ and water while the doctors contemplated prostrate surgery. One of the doctors gave him my number , I sent him a supply of AMBUSH an d he has not been given any more ARV’s, since taking AMBUSH 18 months ago, is in ‘good’ health and has expressed a willingness to be examined by HIV investigators like many others who have taken AMBUSH.
I have sent this ‘IDEA’ to most HIV research agencies, scientist of the field, universities, hospitals, clinics, politicians and news agencies to which it is REJECTED because the name of THE LORD GOD is mentioned. He has steered me scientifically through the processes such as which plant and how to produce the active ingredient. What are the odds of a Florida Pharmacist picking a plant would contain the CURE for HIV/AIDS ?
I have never charged any of the people for their supply of AMBUSH but a life saving has been spent on the project with NO renumeration from any sources because AMBUSH falls outside the walls of modern medicine and research.
PROPOSAL:
My proposal is that I PROVE that AMBUSH CURES HIV/AIDS by giving it to a number of END-STAGE or DRUG-RESISTANT people and the scientific community watches their recovery. This proposal addresses the problem in that I have already outlaid the results to be obtained.
This IDEA is unconventional in that the scientific community has rejected AMBUSH because I say it is GOD given. Secondly if I wrote it according to certain standards, then it might be peer reviewed. However, THE LORD GOD has also shown me that there are five enzyme systems associated with the virus, reverse transcriptase, protease, fusion and two more of which causes the virus to be AIRBOURNE. This means that without DIVINE intervention mankind and ALL warm- blooded mammals will be extinct in a number of years.
The PROOF of what I am saying is found in scientific papers wherein it is found that when the protease cuts the viral strands, it cuts it at DIFFERENT lengths EVERY time, to which it should always be a valine at the end but is a different amino acid every time. This is why it is IMPOSSIBLE to produce a VACCINE.
Since this is NOT a hypothesis but there are about 400 individuals who have taken AMBUSH, here lies a vast area in which to check, recheck and confirm that AMBUSH CURES AIDS. Let it be mentioned that during the HIV reproductive cycle, reverse transcriptase converts viral RNA into DNA compatible to human genetic materials. Thus the human DNA has been ‘hijacked’ and since each person has a DIFFERENT DNA, then the new viral copy is unique to that person which shows that each individual has a DIFFERENT STRAIN of the virus. Consider two HIV positive people swapping viral strains and increasing its complexity with multiple partners.
It can also be proposed that they be revisited as proof that the strain or strains that they had were ‘killed’ at the time of taking AMBUSH considering that a person can catch as many different strains as there are people who are infected by HIV.
I am also willing to work with the scientific community in identifying those individuals who took AMBUSH and wish to be identified with this process notwithstanding that some are stigmatized while others are jubilant,
Once AMBUSH is verified as being able to accomplish that which is aforementioned then the next stage might be the natural and artificial synthesis of the substance.
Finally, if this is accepted or not, believed or not, THE LORD GOD always wins and this is the heavenly truth to which AMBUSH was divinely given to mankind for the CURE of HIV/AIDS and it will be here forever. Apostle Shada Mishe.
apostleshadamishe@gmail.com
Here is a video taped presentation that I gave at t he Martin Luther King library in Washington
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8V53D1w__Po
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPwuwlVBOV0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZejptOwMTzQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqcTgIAhrhc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7HPKcT_iwY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9iQfgiYAnw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3RzRS6tJDM
posted by Bobby on
“I want a World Fat Day. It is amazing how many gays think that being fat is a person’s own fault. Fat people could change if they wanted to.”
—Genetics play a part, that’s true. But gays who live at the gym do see their bodies improve, Schwartznegger wasn’t born with a perfect body, he went from skinny to bodybuilder over a long period of time.
“Gays are also angry about having to share health insurance with fat people since fat people are unhealthy and raise the premiums.”
—I don’t think most gays have a clue about that. The insurance industry is an unfair business that uses statistics to punish individuals. For example, we know that single men pay higher premiums for car insurance. Why? Becuase Geico thinks that single people are unhappy and more likely to be reckless when driving.
“I’m not sure why gay people expect sensitivity to AIDS when they are so cruel and dismissive of fat people. And old people. And poor people. And unattractive people.”
—That logic doesn’t work in the real world. Just because you’re nice to other people doesn’t mean other people will be nice to you.
The gay community offers many avenues to find what you’re looking for. However, the rules of supply and demand still apply. 65% of americans are “overweight.” 45% aren’t overweight, but even among that 45%, most of them are seeking someone that looks better than they do. And if you’re lucky enough to find a guy that likes fat men, then he might reject you because there’s another fat guy that weights more than you. Which is why most fat people try to lose weight, so they can become average and not have to deal with all that competition.
posted by Ashpenaz on
If you made the comments you made about being fat and applied them to having AIDS, you’d have a big, angry mob out to get you. It’s OK to suggest to fat people that there are steps they can take, though all studies have shown that diets have minimal effect and almost always rebound and exercise doesn’t change body type. But it’s not OK to suggest that perhaps, just perhaps, personal responsibility plays the teeny-tiniest role in the spread of AIDS and that society really doesn’t owe sympathy, support, or insurance to those who knowingly perform risky acts.
It’s OK to say to fat people, “Shape up” and refuse them insurance because of their weight, but it’s not OK to say to gays “Stop having anal sex with multiple partners.”
I’m also tired of portraying AIDS victims as glamorous and attractive. They are like the vampires in the Twilight novels–brooding, handsome, romantic. Except the vampires know when to quit.
posted by Ashpenaz on
That last paragraph sounded harsh, even for me. To clarify–I am against the PORTRAYAL of AIDS victims as glamorous and attractive because it makes them SEEM like the vampires in the Twilight novels. I know that AIDS itself is a tragedy, which is why we need to discuss the reality rather than create ads which make AIDS seem a romantic way to die, as if you were bitten by a handsome, brooding vampire.
posted by Bobby on
Asphenaz, I agree with you. If you get AIDS in this day and age, it’s your own damn fault unless you where drugged or raped.
I also hate the anti-fat discrimination, it was that kind of discrimination that made me a paranoid and got me to join a private gym and workout with a personal trainer for the past 2 years. Ironically, I do have hair loss, I just hope that doesn’t become the next evil group to demonize, I would look stupid with a wig.
However, you where not completely wrong about AIDS victims in your “harsh” paragraph. AIDS drug advertising does portray them as glamorous and attractive. Also, people with HIV/AIDS get legally prescribed steroids, which helps them develop really sexy muscles.
And I completely understand, because if I had AIDS, I would want muscles to cheer me up, I would want cute guys in advertising to make me feel like this isn’t the end. The question is what do these images do the uninformed? To those foolish young people that actually look for “gift-givers” and hope to catch HIV/AIDS.
posted by Ashpenaz on
It’s interesting that you felt a certain amount of shame for being fat, so you joined a gym. Yet, men who have unprotected sex with multiple partners don’t feel shame or any need to modify their behavior.
posted by Bobby on
I felt shame because every newspaper and TV show condemns fat people and rarely if ever offers a pro-fat voice. I felt shame because 90% of models in advertising are thin, not to mention television and movie actors. Society made me feel shame.
However, promiscuous men don’t feel shame for two reasons. 1. They reside in circles outside of mainstream society where the rules are different. 2. Being promiscuous is accepted in the gay world.
Also, promiscuity is less visible than fatness. Go to any church and you wont know how’s commiting adultery, who’s sleeping around, who’s doing what. But when you’re fat, everyone sees it, you can’t hide it.
posted by Ashpenaz on
Boy, Bobby, can we clear a room! This is what happens at real parties I go to.
Here’s an interesting thought experiment. What would happen if, on the next World AIDS Day, we come up with a slogan like this: “It is WRONG to have unprotected sex with multiple partners.” What if we used this special day to communicate this idea: “Men who have unprotected sex with multiple partners are bad, selfish people and we will work to exclude them from our group?”
Could that happen? Does the gay community have any sort of a moral compass left that would condemn some forms of homosexual behavior as simply wrong? Even sinful?
posted by Bobby on
Hey Ashpenaz, you’re right. We’d be demonized as bible-thumping wannabe-breeders. We’d be boed off stage.
But let’s give credit where credit is due. Most AIDS organizations and even liberal gay newspapers do condemn barebacking. Larry Kramer and Michelangelo Signorile are very upset at how many people of this generation don’t give a damn about catching HIV. And unlike the 1980s, NAMBLA is no longer allowed to march in parades.
And excluding people who only care about promiscuity doesn’t really affect them. Promiscous gays aren’t interested in same-sex marriage or gay rights or anything as long as the cops don’t raid their bars or arrest them for having sex in pubic parks.
Still, if you want to meet good gays, try this organization.
http://www.soulforce.org/
They’re not my cup of tea, but you like religion, so you might enjoy them.
posted by Ashpenaz on
My other blog is GayChristian http://www.gaychristian.net/
There are lots of interesting discussions there, and the moderator does a great job.