POZ Community Forums
Main Forums => Living With HIV => Topic started by: WhySoUnfair on December 03, 2010, 04:32:39 pm
-
There is a survey on gay.com and I'm surprised to find out that 12% of gay men do not use condoms at all. (http://daily.gay.com/hot_topics/2010/12/30-years-of-aidswhere-do-you-stand.html)
32% I always use condoms and engage in safer sex.
31% I try to practice safer sex but sometimes slip up.
6% If I'm topping and the other guy wants to use condoms then I'll do it. Otherwise, I can go without.
3% I only care about condoms if I'm the bottom.
12% I don't use condoms.
13% I don't have sex.
Some comments really made me nervous. (e.g. some long-term survivors say they have seen many die, not because of AIDS, but because of other body organ failures due to zero immune systems caused by AIDS.) My Dr. told me I will have a normal life span but I really think maybe he's just trying to make me feel better.
So are you one of the 12%?
-
Why is this surprising? I'm sure some are HIV-negative men in a monogamous relationship, and many are HIV+ men sleeping with other HIV+ men.
-
Why is this surprising? I'm sure some are HIV-negative men in a monogamous relationship, and many are HIV+ men sleeping with other HIV+ men.
Not to mention the pretty complete collapse of HIV prevention outreach. Fueled in no small part by the notion that having HIV is currently not a problem. Hell, people get it to "get it over with" and take that one pill a day, no side effects, and never have to be afraid again.
-
Why is this surprising? I'm sure some are HIV-negative men in a monogamous relationship, and many are HIV+ men sleeping with other HIV+ men.
MP, a lot of ppl here got this virus from "monogamous" relationships...
-
12% don't use condoms. 5% don't know their status, 6% never tested, but yet a whopping 68% claim they're hiv negative. Wonder how many of that 68% should have actually voted for the "don't know" or "haven't tested" options instead? After all, how many come here thinking "it will never happen to me"? but yet find that it has?
-
12%? I don't buy it. It's got to be more than that. Especially among the youngin's. With all these websites and crap that are promoting BB sex. It's nuts. They should be taken down. I think if you just look at the rate of infection here in the US it doesn't make sense.
-
Not to mention the pretty complete collapse of HIV prevention outreach. Fueled in no small part by the notion that having HIV is currently not a problem. Hell, people get it to "get it over with" and take that one pill a day, no side effects, and never have to be afraid again.
That's a slightly passive aggressive statement.
-
Don't forget that 31% said they don't always use condoms and another 6% of tops said they only bother if a condom is insisted on. It only takes one slip-up.
And I'm quite sure that among straight men - and women - the percentage who never use condoms will be much, much higher.
That's a slightly passive aggressive statement.
Not really. I've seen and read quite a few interviews with gay men from the younger generation who think this way. No, I'm not saying they ALL think that way, but many do. I've also spoken personally with young men who think that hiv is no big deal because all you have to do is take a daily pill. Some have even thought that hiv was cured.
-
That's a slightly passive aggressive statement.
how so?
-
That's a slightly passive aggressive statement.
As an HIV counselor, I have encountered over a hundred of (mostly young) gay men who think that way. Like Ann said, some think HIV is - or is about to be - cured already. Mainly they see one pill a day and think it is not a big deal. I remember about ten years or so ago when people were comparing it to diabetes (as a manageable condition). Now it's not even considered THAT bad.
Please believe me, the mindset that HIV is "no big deal" did not originate in this forum. It is, within the gay community (particularly the young urban gay community) one of the leading causes of condom complacency, coupled of course with meth use.
-
Well, Miss P..
In an effort not to change the direction of this thread I rescind writing that. It makes no difference. It's better not to be reactionary here and ignore insinuations.
Oh well I tried...
I haven't read anywhere around here where someone says HIV is no big deal. How I got it was a big deal and certainly not from that asinine attitude.
If you are eluding to my sentiments about newbies starting meds well I think I deserve an apology from you jkinatl2 because one has nothing to do with the other. You are out of line.
-
Well, Miss P..
In an effort not to change the direction of this thread I rescind writing that. It makes no difference. It's better not to be reactionary here and ignore insinuations.
Oh well I tried...
Except, as far as I can tell, no "insinuation" was made -- making your post that I just quoted the very definition of web forum passive aggressiveness.
-
Except, as far as I can tell, no "insinuation" was made -- making your post that I just quoted the very definition of web forum passive aggressiveness.
jkinati2 just admitted he was directly eluding to a discussion today by putting "no big deal in" in quotes.
not nice is all I can say to you doll... sorry for you really.
How is that for passive?
-
simpleton..
thanks for the name calling
-
thanks for the constant condescension. You never make a real argument. All you do is come in with a snide remark. It is exhausting. You manage to bring most threads down to it's lowest common denominator.
-
Well, Miss P..
In an effort not to change the direction of this thread I rescind writing that. It makes no difference. It's better not to be reactionary here and ignore insinuations.
There were no insinuations. I choose not to play internet games on this forum. I actually respect it too much for that. I am engaged in an adult conversation about a very real phenomenon. I urge you to place me on "ignore" if you continue to assume that I am aiming commentary at you personally.
Please, let us not derail this very relevant discussion with personal attacks.
Point of fact, more and more think that HIV is not a big deal. Complacency is to be expected when the severity of the virus is minimized, the costs, both financially and physically of the meds is minimized, and the face of AIDS becomes an A & F model - which many of us are not.
The other stats are alarming as well. However, in my neck of the woods, the aforementioned complacency seems to reign supreme. Of course when well-off and well-insured people seroconvert, and access to meds and services is not even a blip in their existence, then this perpetuates that illusion.
Sadly, when these same people encounter stigma in the form of unemployment, they suddenly turn to the people they disdain, those with access to (and knowledge of) the social and medical safety nets that will allow their meds to continue uninterrupted.
To fight the disease, one must respect it's power. If HIV is really not a big deal anymore, why do we bother promoting condom use? Or disclosure?
I wish I knew a way to re-energize the HIV prevention efforts. But it appears that we have way oversold the notion of HIV as over.
I am grateful for POZ and the like for helping reduce the fear and stigma, especially among the newly infected. However, I believe that mindset, especially among people who lack social maturity, is directly responsible for many, many HIV infections.
-
As an HIV counselor, I have encountered over a hundred of (mostly young) gay men who think that way. Like Ann said, some think HIV is - or is about to be - cured already. Mainly they see one pill a day and think it is not a big deal. I remember about ten years or so ago when people were comparing it to diabetes (as a manageable condition). Now it's not even considered THAT bad.
Please believe me, the mindset that HIV is "no big deal" did not originate in this forum. It is, within the gay community (particularly the young urban gay community) one of the leading causes of condom complacency, coupled of course with meth use.
Smooth writing and I see you're not man enough to apologize. You are smart enough to know exactly what you were doing and when you quoted a statement you and I were openly discussing today. You had to go further with proving a point and you stooped to a low. Live with it.
-
Hope,
You've interpreted a couple of posts (it would seem incorrectly) to be a put down, then escalated it into name calling. Please back off, take a deep breath and leave it alone.
This is a warning.
David
-
Dave, I will gladly leave this forum.
jklnatl2 was directly using a quote. It's a low way to spin an important and substantive discussion today and make an insinuation. I suggest you go back and read this thread.
You obviously have a problem with me. So keep your warning. I will bow out of here gracefully.
Ciao..
-
I wish I knew a way to re-energize the HIV prevention efforts. But it appears that we have way oversold the notion of HIV as over.
it's probably the greatly reduced amounts of AIDS deaths that lead us down this road to HIV being seen as a chronic manageable disease (CMD). That and pharma's glossy advertising; because it certainly has not been education, prevention or caregiving agencies that have marketed HIV as over or as a CMD.
It's quite easy to turn people into activists when people are falling like flies around them. Now that people are living 20+ yrs, and a larger amount of people are living with fewer side effects because of the more recent meds, it's always going to be much harder to get anyone jazzed up about the HIV/AIDS problem in America. It definitely a catch-22 where the progress in better treatment of HIV has actually lessened the amount of concern about the problem.
As one person suggested to me a while back, it'll probably take people dying to get legislatures to pony up more money for ADAP. In the same way, it'll probably take an increase in AIDS deaths to get society "re-energized" to worry about an epidemic that they believe to be mostly over here in the States.
-
it's probably the greatly reduced amounts of AIDS deaths that lead us down this road to HIV being seen as a chronic manageable disease (CMD). That and pharma's glossy advertising; because it certainly has not been education, prevention or caregiving agencies that have marketed HIV as over or as a CMD.
It's quite easy to turn people into activists when people are falling like flies around them. Now that people are living 20+ yrs, and a larger amount of people are living with fewer side effects because of the more recent meds, it's always going to be much harder to get anyone jazzed up about the HIV/AIDS problem in America. It definitely a catch-22 where the progress in better treatment of HIV has actually lessened the amount of concern about the problem.
As one person suggested to me a while back, it'll probably take people dying to get legislatures to pony up more money for ADAP. In the same way, it'll probably take an increase in AIDS deaths to get society "re-energized" to worry about an epidemic that they believe to be mostly over here in the States.
It remains a sad state of affairs when the road to any sort of progress is paved with corpses. I wish I could see another way, but I do not.
Maybe when we elect enough politicians who also have HIV.... but then again, wealthy people are the first to cast aspersions on those rude enough to get HIV without adequate and perpetuating insurance. It really does challenge a person's faith in humankind.
-
pharma's glossy advertising
I've always blamed this a lot. When those much maligned attractive queers rock climbing ads first appeared in the late 90's, they specifically targeted places like the 8th Ave subway stop in Manhattan which is at the meeting point of Chelsea and the West Village, and has the highest volume of gay men passing through it day and night.
-
I've always blamed this a lot. When those much maligned attractive queers rock climbing ads first appeared in the late 90's, they specifically targeted places like the 8th Ave subway stop in Manhattan which is at the meeting point of Chelsea and the West Village, and has the highest volume of gay men passing through it day and night.
Remember the TALKING ad in POZ magazine? Dude couldn't come to the phone, 'cause he was out biking with his "brah's" or something. Way to stay classy.
But you sow, you reap. You advertise the meds like they were candy, and shocker! A whole group of people confuse HIV with, I dunno, bad breath. Still, if they make Isentress into a Gummi, I will take it.
-
but yet a whopping 68% claim they're hiv negative.
And of that 68% how many are on A4A, CL looking for BB sex with other HIV- men. I just "love" that mentality.
-
I am the first to admit that i was complacent.. I trusted the person i was with and i paid the consequence for my choice.. Being a walk in the park.. I dont know since i have not experienced what LTS are experiencing or have experienced and i dont know what the future will bring. But I can say that i stress everyday thinking about what would happen if i did not have medical insurance then what? Were will i be what would i do.. I can definitely say that there is still a big stigma in my community in the Hispanic community and i can definitely say i am not jumping around shouting i am POZ.. I just deal with my choice as best as i can and make light of the seriousness in order to continue on with life by laughing and thanking god everyday that for the moment i am ok but who is to say what would happen in the future and that does frighten me greatly.. Miss P you are right a lot of the complacency has to do with the perception and the marketing of the meds.. For right now i am taking my pill a day doing the healthy things that i have always done and this time making the correct decisions... Perhaps they should advertise the cost associated with the disease personal, work, and social... So this newbie is well aware that the roller coaster is only starting... LTS thank you so much in providing us Newbies the support that you may or may not have had in the future and i am sure i will be relying on you guys in the future...
-
all prescription medication advertising (not just HIV meds) taints the well, and has turned America into a pill-popping everything-is-cured society. so it's hard to blame this attitude on just people being ignorant about HIV. Americans don't worry much about any illness - cause there's a med for that. ::) And that's just another part of the hill HIV prevention/education has to climb.
does england still not allow such advertising? do they have this same problem of HIV-malaise like in the States? if they have the same issue w/o advertising then we can't just blame the ads and have to look for yet another reason to explain why people don't care. ::)
-
No, the UK does not allow pharmaceutical advertising. Our hiv magazines do have pages of advertising by pharmaceutical companies, but they do not mention meds by name.
A typical (full page) ad (this one is from Abbot) has text on the background of a photo of an ordinary looking woman standing at a desk. The text reads:
YOU WANT TO KEEP QUIET ABOUT YOUR HIV
LETS TALK
BODY CHANGES
(then at the bottom in smaller print, along with the Abbott logo...)
Talk to your doctor if you are concerned about how hiv and hiv-related therapy may affect you physical and mental well-being.
I think the "there's a pill to fix it" mentality is much more prevalent in the States. I know it definitely was 20 years ago when I first moved to the UK. From what I've seen on this forum as well as the rest of the internet and also on television, that mentality has gotten stronger and even more entrenched in the States. It's started to gain a foothold here, but it's not nearly as bad as in the States.
I do blame the pharmaceutical companies at least in part. I also can't help but blame the doctors too. Very few doctors in the UK and Europe seem to want to push the meds as soon as a person is diagnosed like so many do in the States. Doctors over here are more likely to wait until the current guidelines are met and not just for one lab result either.
-
After all, how many come here thinking "it will never happen to me"? but yet find that it has?
guilty as charged :-[
-
12% of gay men do not use condoms at all.
and of course, since HIV is not a gay disease (regardless of what the AFA (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=35590.0) thinks), let's not forget that straight men regularly use condoms even less. I live in SC where 39% of all new infections are through heterosexual contact - which isn't surprising as over 80% (from a birmingham ala survey) of males admit to rarely/never using condoms. (here's an interesting article about why straight men don't use condoms (http://www.xyonline.net/content/lads-latex-why-young-heterosexual-men-don%E2%80%99t-use-condoms))
-
That was the great thing about growing up a cocksucker in the 80's -- I had reconciled myself to being a pozzie way before I was diagnosed.
-
and of course, since HIV is not a gay disease (regardless of what the AFA (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=35590.0) thinks), let's not forget that straight men regularly use condoms even less. I live in SC where 39% of all new infections are through heterosexual contact - which isn't surprising as over 80% (from a birmingham ala survey) of males admit to rarely/never using condoms. (here's an interesting article about why straight men don't use condoms (http://www.xyonline.net/content/lads-latex-why-young-heterosexual-men-don%E2%80%99t-use-condoms))
Masculinity is equated with sexual activity and knowledge, while femininity is equated with passivity and innocence
... I'm so glad I'm not a straight girl
-
Folks, I want the he said she said, you said I said stuff to stop right now.
The snarkiness is stultifying in here. It ends right now or I am going to hand out a few Time Outs.
Just use your IGNORE button if you don't want to hear or respond to someone.
This is not the only thread it's been rampant in today, so consider as if I had put the warning in the other thread as well.
-
???
So. Ive been HIV- all my adult life. "always" used condoms, and "always" slept with other HIV- guys. I made a couple slip ups, met a great guy, found myself in a monogomous relationship...and guess what? Not negative anymore. It wasnt the medication ad's that did it. I'm not sure why I wasnt "always" safe.
-
Most gay guys I know do oral sex unprotected and it is probably 70/30 for unprotected anal--70 being number who bareback and 30 who are very big on condoms. These are my anecdotal figures. I just had the discussion with 2 of my friends who hook-up and bareback. I told them their luck may just run out here soon. Both of them acted like I was their mom trying to tell them about smoking or drinking.
-
Most gay guys I know do oral sex unprotected and it is probably 70/30 for unprotected anal--70 being number who bareback and 30 who are very big on condoms. These are my anecdotal figures. I just had the discussion with 2 of my friends who hook-up and bareback. I told them their luck may just run out here soon. Both of them acted like I was their mom trying to tell them about smoking or drinking.
It's funny almost 95% on manhunt or gaydar claim they "always" have safe sex...
-
It's funny almost 95% on manhunt or gaydar claim they "always" have safe sex...
you know men. LOL They'll say or claim anything if it gets them into your pants. :D
-
The survey is crap.
-
The survey is crap.
Finally! I'm not the only one who was thinking it.
12% of gay men? Bullshit. 12% of the anonymous fuckwits who responded to that "survey" is more like it.
MtD
-
Finally! I'm not the only one who was thinking it.
12% of gay men? Bullshit. 12% of the anonymous fuckwits who responded to that "survey" is more like it.
MtD
So you think it's less than 12%?
-
So you think it's less than 12%?
Naughty, naughty! You shouldn't verbal Matty the Damned, little one. :)
I have made no assertion about the number of fairies who bareback. I'm merely questioning the validity of the source quoted in your OP. Entirely unrepresentative and unreliable. A useless instrument which can provide no data of any value.
In fact it's terribly difficult (for obvious reasons) to get any really useful data on these sorts of things.
MtD
-
Yea, the survey is *CRAP*...
Here's how it works:
- 100% of men will lie if lying gets them what they want at some point in time or another
- 12% of men admit to not using a condom
- ?% lie about using condoms to make the establishment happy
- large number of them say "Neg u b 2" and if you say you are neg they will hook up with you.....
- Many guys say "neg / safe sex only" but will negotiate for or to unsafe sex
- a larger percentage bareback in relationships - that are supposedly monogamous.
I spend enough time online that I've done an unofficial study of this. I've had more then a few people on grindr or a4a message me with "hey I'm poz too...." when their profiles says some variation of "neg ub2".....
I've seen less condom usage in the poz community.... I know one or two people who claim to use condoms.... and hundreds who swear against/at them.
I believe re-infection is a myth cooked up to control gay sexual activity. I have yet to see convincing scientific evidence of reinfection. The handful (7 to 10) of documented cases I have read about involved risk behavior profiles that were suicidal. Yes, if you go to the bathhouse in NYC, SF, etc 6 nights a week and get banged by 20 guys a night you are going to catch one of everything that is in circulation. Even the most dedicated slut has trouble keeping up with that sort of record.
Most of us are doing good to get laid with any regularity much less every night. Hell, anymore it's a good week if it happens. Getting laid is loosely defined as sexual relations with another man that result in one or more orgasms.... which can include oral, anal, and masturbation. Your definition and mileage may vary.
So, my point on reinfection... is that evidence aside... it would be pretty darn common if it were a real risk.
-
Exactly, hotpuppy, exactly.
I am always amazed when I see soft science labeled as hard science. and 100% of the inhabitants of my apartment like my cooking.
I was personally astonished how often I got laid after I tested. I actually went through a pretty promiscuous phase in the late 90s and early 00s. And never in my extensive personal research did I encounter a positive guy who used condoms. and damn few negative guys were really on board with them either.
In my small circle of friends, I have a best friend who usually, but not nearly always wears them, and three friends who have had HIV scares, one very recently. These are people who saw me in the hospital when I had PCP, who saw me lose weight until it was scary, who know I do HIV counseling and risk assessment here and elsewhere. They basically get served with a big old plate of AIDS whenever we hang out.
I roll my eyes when I hear people here and elsewhere talking about rare routes of possible transmission being the culprit behind new infections. Most straight people use condoms to avoid pregnancy, period. Most gay men use condoms when they are insisted upon, or in the rare instances where they are actually HIV aware and consistent with the use.
But people simply do not use condoms for anal or vaginal sex for the most part, and THIS is what causes the spread of HIV.
Twelve percent my ass.
-
Couldn't the attitude "HIV is no big deal" be seen as an indication that the some of the stigma is subsiding?
-
Couldn't the attitude "HIV is no big deal" be seen as an indication that the some of the stigma is subsiding?
Depends on what subset of the population we are referencing. Also, of course, the notion of new transmission based on the above assumption is worth examining.
Syphilis, the last Great Fun STD Pandemic, ended up being more or less No Big Deal when a cure was discovered. But that's the thing, a cure WAS discovered, and it was cheap and readily accessible.
-
I've been trying to find the study that came out I guess about 6 years ago. It found that 17% thought there was already a cure for HIV. The study focused on Washington D.C., so I'm not sure if all the 17% were from D.C. or whether that was a national study. I just remember thinking I couldn't believe that many believed there was already a cure. Maybe the study was skewed by people who were thinking HAART was a cure.
I've talked about this before here--- I often think I'm doing my friends a disservice by not telling them I'm poz. I'm specifically talking about my friends who have a different trick every night and often bareback. If they saw that HIV really does happen, maybe they would use condoms. I believe that is the problem with many people--especially people who don't live in an area hard-hit by HIV/AIDS. We don't see friends with HIV or people dying from AIDS. Well, I know we've all probably known several infected, but just didn't know it due to effective meds. It is a balance between thinking this is a private medical matter and coming forth to help prevent more infections. Right now, I'm not sure what to do. Sometimes I think even if they knew about me, they would think I'm doing pretty good and don't even need meds yet--so what's the big deal.
Even in the 80's when HIV was usually a certain death sentence, you still had many barebacking knowing there wasn't any or much treatment. I was just going through some old porn VHS tapes I have filmed around 1983-1990. All of them were barebacking. Even then, it seemed many weren't too worried about HIV. When I watch those, I often wonder how many were infected, how many are dead, and how many are LTS'ers. So, I'm not surprised that people today would think HIV is no big deal. I often believe many just don't think it will happen to them and not so much that they don't think it is no big deal. I believed that way.
-
Ted, maybe your friends have been poz for many years. you never know! HIV is still a big deal and I always believe even the cheapest bareback rider who has a penis brain will be scared of HIV.