Bug Chaser? Crazy Bxxxxxd!

[WhySoUnfair]

Well, I'm pretty sure a lot of you might have seen this before, but I was so shocked when I first saw this on CNN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo_n0IPsC7g

Have you ever met any bug chasers? What would you do if you met them? I would tell them to wake up.

[GSOgymrat]

I've met one person who asked me to infect them with HIV. He was completely serious. Of course I said no.

I haven't researched this topic but I get the impression this is a gay male phenomenon. I'm not sure there are a lot of heterosexuals who are trying to become HIV+. In areas such as Africa where HIV is not perceived as a manageable condition I would imagine there is less bugchasing.

[mecch]

Yep Whyso, welcome to the weirder parts of HIV reality.

We've discussed them here.  They do exist. The question is - as much as hype about them a few years back?

There's one in Geneva the last few months whos begging every HIV+ person around to infect him. At this point, its a weird fetish cause you don't know whats real or not about someone like this's actual hiv status nor his psychological health.

Similarly you wonder about a certain type of repeat posters in Am I Infected. They seem to have love hate relationships with their own private symbolism of HIV.

Also you wonder if "bug chasers" go on to be "gift givers".  Gift givers supposedly infect the HIV as a benevolent act because the HIV- person WANTs to be infected.

Furthermore, gift givers should NOT be confused with the selfish and narcissist people who supposedly infect others on purpose - but NOT specfically to hurt others, just to protect their own sexual liberty.  

Or then their are the supposed fiends who do go running around purposefully infecting people with HIV on some kind of evil agenda or revenge.

Fun stuff, right?

[denb45]

I've met one person who asked me to infect them with HIV. He was completely serious. Of course I said no.

I haven't researched this topic but I get the impression this is a gay male phenomenon. I'm not sure there are a lot of heterosexuals who are trying to become HIV+. In areas such as Africa where HIV is not perceived as a manageable condition I would imagine there is less bugchasing.

Well, I've always believed in full disclosure about my HIV/AIDS status, and I do recall being ask this very same thing, as I politely DECLINED the offer, and told the person, you really don't want HIV/AIDS, take a Tip form someone who knows, and that would be (ME) ......HIV/AIDS is NO PARTY   

[Matty the Damned]

I've been solicited by bug chasers on several occasions in the past.

MtD

[Jeff G]

I have been hit on by bug chasers before . I wonder if there are other bug chasers ... Like someone that's gets a boner for the flu .

[red_Dragon888]

I've been solicited by bug chasers on several occasions in the past.

MDT

and?

Just joking.  I think I have been too but when they solicit me under the guise of just a sex thing and want to have unprotected sex and say "not to worry, I'm already Poz," it makes me wonder are they crazy?  They just don't know the pain that comes with it or maybe they idolize it from some strange juxtaposition as a want to become part of a larger community.

But mecch is right.  It is old news and nothing new.

[pozniceguy]

there are several here in Dallas area  post on Craigslist  looking for "donors"  one guy calls himself  "hollywoodmarine"   a real head case.... regular posting....   have no idea if anyone takes him up on it..

[Inchlingblue]

Isn't anyone who has unprotected sex with strangers a bug chaser (especially if they are part of a risk group such as gay men)?  

A gay man with an active sex life, especially one who has anal sex, without using condoms will become infected sooner or later. If the person is only a top and doesn't have sex that often it'll probably take longer but it will eventually happen. And if the person is a bottom or versatile it will happen even sooner. I think there are people who fall into these categories and they might not identify as "bug chasers," per se but that's what they are in fact doing is chasing this bug.

"A bug chaser by any other name . . . "

And as far as actual bug chasers who identify as such, I can't imagine they can be chasing for that long. It's not that difficult of a chase if you really want it. Some of them are probably already poz and get a kick out of pretending they aren't so they can be all transgressive (ooooh!) and add some frisson to what would otherwise be just another fuck.

I know a guy who had "survivor's guilt" because he had lost a twin brother and his mother had died of cancer. He went to a bareback party with gift givers and bug chasers and he got HIV, boom, in one shot. It wasn't that hard, he wasn't a bug chaser for long. This was in the early 90s when there wasn't that much in the way of treatment. He told me about it, I was HIV-negative at the time, and I was just dumbfounded. Not judgmental or anything but I just didn't get it at all.

[Miss Philicia]

Isn't anyone who has unprotected sex with strangers a bug chaser (especially if they are part of a risk group such as gay men)? 

A gay man with an active sex life, especially one who has anal sex, without using condoms will become infected sooner or later. If the person is only a top and doesn't have sex that often it'll probably take longer but it will eventually happen. And if the person is a bottom or versatile it will happen even sooner. I think there are people who fall into these categories and they might not identify as "bug chasers," per se but that's what they are in fact doing is chasing this bug.

"A bug chaser by any other name . . . "

You could make the same argument for gay men in monogamous relationships that dispense with condoms, seeing as how such a high percentage of these relationships are never actually monogamous.

But as for your argument, there's some difference with a single gay man that has a couple condom slip ups when drunk, but used them 99% of the time and someone actively seeking out infection with ads in craigslist.  Only a simpleton wouldn't get that.  But yes, if you're only using them 5% of the time you're still bug chasing whether you label yourself as one or not.

[Inchlingblue]

You could make the same argument for gay men in monogamous relationships that dispense with condoms, seeing as how such a high percentage of these relationships are never actually monogamous.

That's an interesting point. That's actually how I became infected. I'm 47 and have been sexually active since my 20s but always always always used condoms, even in three previous monogamous relationships we still used condoms.

I then fall in love with someone and decided, after seriously considering the situation, that it would be OK to not use condoms for the first time ever in my life. We were not monogamous but I stupidly assumed that he was using condoms with others (I was!). He always bought good quality condoms and lube and always had them on hand and he is also in his 40s so I figured he knew better.

Little did I know that he did not always use condoms outside of the relationship. I found out when reading a text message someone sent him saying how hot it was that his cum was oozing out of their ass as they were sending the text. Isn't that a lovely image!@ When I read that my stomach just turned. I tried to rationalize it by thinking, "well, he was the top, after all, so the chances are not as bad that he has HIV."

It's ironic that, as mentioned above, even in three previous monogamous relationships I still used condoms and then in this one, that was not monogamous, I thought it was OK not to. Those three exes of mine remain negative to this day.

Anyway, does that make me a bug chaser subconsciously? I dunno.

[darkerpozz]

I know this doesn't make sense to us but I met a guy who complained that since I got HIV and disability my life without work, free meds and lots of social outlets that it didn't seem so bad. I explained that the side effects and baggage are worse than he thinks but he wants a part of the "club"

[mecch]

 I think I have been too but when they solicit me under the guise of just a sex thing and want to have unprotected sex and say "not to worry, I'm already Poz,"

If they say they are already poz then they are not bug chasers...

[mecch]

Bug chasers are conciously looking to get infected.  It is not the same weird trip as some HIV- guy who fucks around without a condom but doesn't particularly fantasize or get excited about getting HIV.

[ds4146]

You could make the same argument for gay men in monogamous relationships that dispense with condoms, seeing as how such a high percentage of these relationships are never actually monogamous.

Do you have data to support this?

[Inchlingblue]

Bug chasers are conciously looking to get infected.  It is not the same weird trip as some HIV- guy who fucks around without a condom but doesn't particularly fantasize or get excited about getting HIV.

I think a lot of so-called bug chasers are already HIV-positive and they just get a kick out of the bug chaser thing as a sexual fantasy (such as the bug chaser who told darkerpozz that he is poz).   

All it takes to become poz is one shot of HIV in the butt, meaning it's not like it's something a person has to go around chasing for very long, it's easy to find. There can't be that many people out there continually chasing HIV without luck, lol.

[Matty the Damned]

Do you have data to support this?

Actually I think there is some stuff on monogamy rates in same sex male relationships. I should have a look and see if I can find any.

MtD

[mecch]

I think a lot of so-called bug chasers are already HIV-positive and they just get a kick out of the bug chaser thing as a sexual fantasy (such as the bug chaser who told darkerpozz that he is poz).   

All it takes to become poz is one shot of HIV in the butt, meaning it's not like it's something a person has to go around chasing for very long, it's easy to find. There can't be that many people out there continually chasing HIV without luck, lol.

Yes and no. I know guys who bareback rather often and have not seroconverted.

[jkinatl2]

All it takes to become poz is one shot of HIV in the butt, meaning it's not like it's something a person has to go around chasing for very long, it's easy to find. There can't be that many people out there continually chasing HIV without luck, lol.

I dunno, some folks get pretty lucky. Ann's BF was one of those people. And the research into the CCR5 genetics postulates some inherent resistance to HIV infection in certain populations.

[Miss Philicia]

Anyway, does that make me a bug chaser subconsciously? I dunno.

No, it just makes you not particularly smart I guess since it wasn't even intended to be monogamous.

[Miss Philicia]

Actually I think there is some stuff on monogamy rates in same sex male relationships. I should have a look and see if I can find any.

MtD

Like it's worth a hill of beans when it's dependent on people telling the truth.

[Matty the Damned]

Like it's worth a hill of beans when it's dependent on people telling the truth.

Well obviously. But having stats and shit to wave around makes us look smarter. And that's what really fucking counts.

MtD

[tednlou2]

Short piece from the documentary, "The Gift".  I saw this I guess back in 2004.  I just couldn't understand why someone would purposely try and get infected.  This is a 2 min clip.  I'm sure if you look, you can probably find the whole documentary on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrmccJkfApg&feature=related

[mecch]

The clip confirms my feeling that the bugchasing meme is quite dated. It seems so early 2000's to me.

The "cowboy" and "rebel" attitude, during the "frontier days" of the second wave of HAART success -- "I'm poz, I'm fine, I'm cool, I'm hot, Fuck me or Fuck off" -- really challenged a lot of people's ideas of how things should be, or once were.

Bug-chasing and gift-giving seems like a ghetto thing that made perverse sense several years ago.  You could see how since living POZ and well was so much in the news, some sad creatures might think that would help them belong to something glamorous or some sort of community.

But in 2010, it just seems perverse.  Seems to me in this day and age gay ghetto memes are waning.  

I know lots of guys proud to play safe and pround to stay negative and its personal, not some badge of membership in a community.  Similarly, today, if you want to be a barebacker or no limits "hardeur" - you go to Zurich or Berlin or Paris and pig out and its not an issue if you are poz, neg, unknown or whatever because its not some damn insider/exclusive or supportive community.  It doesn't seem to have much transgressive glamour.  You do your thing then you put on your clothes and go back to your mundane life.

The bio hazard tattoo seems dated, as well.  

"Aubrey Buffing. He's on the short list for the Nobel Prize. He has AIDS. You'll love him!"  - Bonfire of the Vanities

[Matty the Damned]

I never understood the biohazard tattoo thing either.

MtD

[GSOgymrat]

The bio hazard tattoo seems dated, as well.  

I wonder if the people who got bio hazard tattoo didn't expect to live to see it go out of fashion.

[leatherman]

I wonder if the people who got bio hazard tattoo didn't expect to live to see it go out of fashion.

tattoos are kinda permanent, you know 
as my Mom is so fond of telling me, I'll still have mine (including the biohaz) in 50 yrs when I'm 98

[mecch]

So you got the biohazard tattoo.  Want to share why?

[leatherman]

So you got the biohazard tattoo.  Want to share why?

because in 2001, I was still very "hiv-y"
and was coming up on my first decade of living with AIDS
(which was oh so much better than being dead from AIDS)
so being marked as a biohaz was nicely ironic truthful


plus it reminded me of the signs on the hospital door when I had PCP

[Inchlingblue]

No, it just makes you not particularly smart I guess since it wasn't even intended to be monogamous.

The way I saw it, it wasn't about monogamy but rather about using condoms or not. I could care less if he was fucking around as long as he was using a condom. But you're right, not very smart I guess.

[WhySoUnfair]

I know this doesn't make sense to us but I met a guy who complained that since I got HIV and disability my life without work, free meds and lots of social outlets that it didn't seem so bad. I explained that the side effects and baggage are worse than he thinks but he wants a part of the "club"

I remember in "Queer as Folk", Ben's student asked Ben to infect him with HIV -- he wanted the "gift" but not the social benefits. Back then I thought he was committing suicide.

[WhySoUnfair]

Yes and no. I know guys who bareback rather often and have not seroconverted.

Well, some guys who bareback so much, I would rather say they are "risk takers" -- guess what? A lot of them are actually convinced that HIV is not that contagious (my psycho therapist also told me that) according to the CDC "per 10,000 exposures" table:
Exposure Route Risk per 10,000 exposures to an infected source --
Receptive Anal 50
Insertive Anal 6.5
Receptive Oral 1
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5402a1.htm

Some btms will think it's ok to have unprotected sex 199 times cos one can only get infected after 200 times. For the tops, it's about 1,500 times.

CDC might be scientifically correct, but a lot of young gay men would prefer to take the risk for temp pleasure. I always think all the local LGBT orgs should have educated young ppl more about the risk -- there is nothing called 0.01%, it's either 0% or 100%! 

[mecch]

because in 2001, I was still very "hiv-y"
and was coming up on my first decade of living with AIDS
(which was oh so much better than being dead from AIDS)
so being marked as a biohaz was nicely ironic truthful

Yes i appreciate the irony and the rebel gesture! I think it it was great for the historic moment.

[mecch]

Some btms will think it's ok to have unprotected sex 199 times cos one can only get infected after 200 times.

A lot of young gay men would prefer to take the risk for temp pleasure. I always think all the local LGBT orgs should have educated young ppl more about the risk -- there is nothing called 0.01%, it's either 0% or 100%! 

Pretty dumb bottoms.

Also, its not just young gay men. The 40-60 set has been seroconverting as well. Sociologists say maybe its a kind of shared post traumatic stress syndrome.  The crystal trend a few years ago also contributed.  I dunno what it is, really. 

[Matty the Damned]

Pretty dumb bottoms.

Also, its not just young gay men. The 40-60 set has been seroconverting as well. Sociologists say maybe its a kind of shared post traumatic stress syndrome.  The crystal trend a few years ago also contributed.  I dunno what it is, really. 

There's been discussion in ivory towers down here that a notable proportion of infections in homosexual men aged 35 and up are happening within serodiscordant long term relationships.

One wonders if undetectable VLs combined with condom fatigue lead to couples taking extended risks.

MtD

[mecch]

There's been discussion in ivory towers down here that a notable proportion of infections in homosexual men aged 35 and up are happening within serodiscordant long term relationships.

One wonders if undetectable VLs combined with condom fatigue lead to couples taking extended risks.

MtD

Ew, thats not good news. I hope the epidemiologists are researching that now!

[Hellraiser]

Ew, thats not good news. I hope the epidemiologists are researching that now!

It's interesting that amongst white males the infection rate is higher in the 30+ subset than the younger crowd.  This was THE first wave risk group that saw the epidemic in its infancy and rage through the 80s and mid 90s.  I tend to think it's not the long term monogamous relationship crowd that's getting infected though.  Anybody in a magnetic relationship for that long seems to actually care about their partner and would go out of their way not to infect them.  Granted I know a couple that goes bare and the bottom is poz and unmedicated, recently the top got sick with flu-like symptoms and I told him to get tested immediately as it's not flu season and he had flu like symptoms.  The other guy refuses to take meds or monitor his health.  I suppose he'll learn in due time.

[MarcoPoz]

Pretty dumb bottoms.

Also, its not just young gay men. The 40-60 set has been seroconverting as well. Sociologists say maybe its a kind of shared post traumatic stress syndrome.  The crystal trend a few years ago also contributed.  I dunno what it is, really. 

Did we forget that sex without condoms feels wonderful (physically, emotionally and maybe even spiritually)?  I think as people living with HIV we are a special group.  We're the ONLY people on the planet who knows what it is like to be HIV negative and HIV positive.  When we ask questions like "What ARE they thinking?",we need to remember what WE were thinking/feeling/doing.  Nothing new--people are continuing to get infected exactly in the same way we did. Perhaps we can contribute to HIV prevention by searhing our own issues relative to our seroconversion behaviors, emotional needs etc and helping to inform others of what was going on for us.

This isn't really rocket science.  Like I said, people are getting HIV the same way we did:  They're injecting and or fucking their way into it.  Most of us "knew" HIV was out there--but the messages didn't work for us.  So why not?  We're the key to understanding what can work and what can't, but we have to be honest about what we were thinking, feeling, wanting etc.

[Hellraiser]

Did we forget that sex without condoms feels wonderful (physically, emotionally and maybe even spiritually)?  I think as people living with HIV we are a special group.  We're the ONLY people on the planet who knows what it is like to be HIV negative and HIV positive.  When we ask questions like "What ARE they thinking?",we need to remember what WE were thinking/feeling/doing.  Nothing new--people are continuing to get infected exactly in the same way we did. Perhaps we can contribute to HIV prevention by searhing our own issues relative to our seroconversion behaviors, emotional needs etc and helping to inform others of what was going on for us.

This isn't really rocket science.  Like I said, people are getting HIV the same way we did:  They're injecting and or fucking their way into it.  Most of us "knew" HIV was out there--but the messages didn't work for us.  So why not?  We're the key to understanding what can work and what can't, but we have to be honest about what we were thinking, feeling, wanting etc.

The message didn't work for me because in my community no one was gay, and obviously if they weren't gay they weren't hiv+.  I knew 0 openly gay men for the first 18 years of my life until I started seeking them out and I thought that the place in which I lived was fairly well insulated from the epidemic.  There was no education aside from "Have safe sex, or else!".  Even amongst gay men those who are positive aren't necessarily going to bring it up, so then all I heard were back handed stigmatized comments.  So-and-so is sick and I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole.  That made me want to get tested a lot less, coupled with my pre-conceived notions of what hiv sickness would look and feel like after a couple of years I just figured I had dodged the bullet.

My own rationalizations coupled with small town Mississippi societal beliefs are what pretty much fated me to this.  I'm okay with it, but it would have been easy enough to avoid had I just used condoms.  I remember seeing educational talks in the auditorium about drunk driving and drugs, but where was the safe sex talk?  Hell even in the general health class that I HAD to take we didn't talk about HIV at all.  I put the majority of the blame for my infection on myself, but I reserve a small amount of it for the community of adults who kept their children ignorant of the disease and its effects and prevalence.

[MarcoPoz]

The message didn't work for me because in my community no one was gay, and obviously if they weren't gay they weren't hiv+.  I knew 0 openly gay men for the first 18 years of my life until I started seeking them out and I thought that the place in which I lived was fairly well insulated from the epidemic.  There was no education aside from "Have safe sex, or else!".  Even amongst gay men those who are positive aren't necessarily going to bring it up, so then all I heard were back handed stigmatized comments.  So-and-so is sick and I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole.  That made me want to get tested a lot less, coupled with my pre-conceived notions of what hiv sickness would look and feel like after a couple of years I just figured I had dodged the bullet.

My own rationalizations coupled with small town Mississippi societal beliefs are what pretty much fated me to this.  I'm okay with it, but it would have been easy enough to avoid had I just used condoms.  I remember seeing educational talks in the auditorium about drunk driving and drugs, but where was the safe sex talk?  Hell even in the general health class that I HAD to take we didn't talk about HIV at all.  I put the majority of the blame for my infection on myself, but I reserve a small amount of it for the community of adults who kept their children ignorant of the disease and its effects and prevalence.

Thanks for your honesty and courage.  My quess is that there are people in small towns like yours all over, who are going through the same things right now.

[Miss Philicia]

The message didn't work for me because in my community no one was gay, and obviously if they weren't gay they weren't hiv+.  I knew 0 openly gay men for the first 18 years of my life until I started seeking them out and I thought that the place in which I lived was fairly well insulated from the epidemic.  There was no education aside from "Have safe sex, or else!".  Even amongst gay men those who are positive aren't necessarily going to bring it up, so then all I heard were back handed stigmatized comments.  So-and-so is sick and I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole.  That made me want to get tested a lot less, coupled with my pre-conceived notions of what hiv sickness would look and feel like after a couple of years I just figured I had dodged the bullet.

My own rationalizations coupled with small town Mississippi societal beliefs are what pretty much fated me to this.  I'm okay with it, but it would have been easy enough to avoid had I just used condoms.  I remember seeing educational talks in the auditorium about drunk driving and drugs, but where was the safe sex talk?  Hell even in the general health class that I HAD to take we didn't talk about HIV at all.  I put the majority of the blame for my infection on myself, but I reserve a small amount of it for the community of adults who kept their children ignorant of the disease and its effects and prevalence.

This would make sense if it was 1989, but not 2009 -- HIV statistics by state are very easy accessible even to a 18 year old.  As a % your state's infection rate is almost the same as New Jersey.

[MarcoPoz]

This would make sense if it was 1989, but not 2009 -- HIV statistics by state are very easy accessible even to a 18 year old.  As a % your state's infection rate is almost the same as New Jersey.

I couldn't disagree more.  This sets up the erroneous argument that those infected earlier are somehow less personally responsible for their infection than someone infected later.  It is a false syllogism and relies on the false assumption that all people in all places have at all times the most up-to-date epidemiological data available and have then used that information in a manner which assisted in adjustment of their behavior based on an increased perception of risk.  It's simply hogwash.

Perception of risk balanced with value of behavior versus risk, is how we make most of our decisions.

If we 'knew' that statistics about motor vehicle safety and the likelihood of a negative occurrence happening for each of us in our lifetimes, we'd never get into cars and we'd vilify car drivers as wanton risk-takers.

[mecch]

This would make sense if it was 1989, but not 2009 -- HIV statistics by state are very easy accessible even to a 18 year old.  As a % your state's infection rate is almost the same as New Jersey.

This presupposes that a 18 yo in buttholefuck West Virginia has the canniness to consider the risk let alone the selfpreservation wherewithal to go looking on the Internet to assess it.  As Hell says, in some places the topic is taboo among family, friends and HS health class.  That leaves what - pop culture references?

Although, generally, i'd have to agree with you the message "should" be clear by this day n age.  Funny that it isn't, isn't it?

Somebody here read me the riot act and called me a fool the other day because I said in the early 80's we were all having unsafe sex on campus since HIV was something we had vaguely heard about and didn't seem to concern us, straight or gay.   80-85 I fucked women and men with no condoms at Cornell Vassar Columbia Princeton Swarthmore Williams etc etc etc.  I knew 0 openly gay men, well a few queens at Vassar but does that count?
Guess we were all fools, or in denial, but sometimes the message just doesnt slam home in one clique or community or another for a long time.  

I woke up to the harsh reality when I moved to SF in 1985 and saw the walking skeletons.

I moved to NY in 1986 and fell back into the post ivy crowd and it was HILAROUSLY repulsive - the denial. I specifically remember being in bed with this blueblood banker and he said "AIDS doesn't touch our crowd" cause he wanted to bareback.  MDR (mort de rire!) Die laughing!  I hope he wizened up and survived!

Like Hellraiser's experience, AIDS was "declasse"

I mention that because this is a thread about "bug chasers" who see HIV and AIDS as the opposite of vulgar or tacky - its the glamour "get" - the accessory that will make their lives so very much better. Or complete.

When the message on safe sex and risk is there and people refuse it or deny it, its one thing.

Sometimes we have to take at face value that some people really don't have a good sense of the risk in which they are putting themselves and others.

[Miss Philicia]

I don't care what state you live in.  Every 15 year old hears gay-fag-AIDS jokes these days.  If someone at 18 has the ability to contemplate that their state has a low HIV infection rate, it's not a giant leap to enter "HIV Mississippi statistics" into Google.  If you have the means to hunt for cocksucking on the interwebz you have the means to look up HIV rates.  This ain't rocket science.

This wasn't the case 20 years ago.  Well, they'd have heard the jokes but google didn't exist.

Somebody here read me the riot act and called me a fool the other day because I said in the early 80's we were all having unsafe sex on campus since HIV was something we had vaguely heard about and didn't seem to concern us, straight or gay.   80-85 I fucked women and men with no condoms at Cornell Vassar Columbia Princeton Swarthmore Williams etc etc etc.  I knew 0 openly gay men, well a few queens at Vassar but does that count?

I fucked a couple of girls in my decidedly plebeian non-elitst higher education institution, but I wasn't so stupid as to do it with guys.  Well, actually I was stupid to do it with guys but that was due to alcohol and cocaine, not a lack of knowing what I should be doing in the mid-80's.  My college years were a bit after yours though, and back then that made some difference in terms of knowing what to do and when.

Also, is there a reason you have to trot out "Cornell Vassar Columbia Princeton Swarthmore Williams" instead of just stating where you went to college?

[MarcoPoz]

I don't care what state you live in.  Every 15 year old hears gay-fag-AIDS jokes these days.  If someone at 18 has the ability to contemplate that their state has a low HIV infection rate, it's not a giant leap to enter "HIV Mississippi statistics" into Google.  If you have the means to hunt for cocksucking on the interwebz you have the means to look up HIV rates.  This ain't rocket science.

This wasn't the case 20 years ago.  Well, they'd have heard the jokes but google didn't exist.

I fucked a couple of girls in my decidedly plebeian non-elitst higher education institution, but I wasn't so stupid as to do it with guys.  Well, actually I was stupid to do it with guys but that was due to alcohol and cocaine, not a lack of knowing what I should be doing in the mid-80's.  My college years were a bit after yours though, and back then that made some difference in terms of knowing what to do and when.

Also, is there a reason you have to trot out "Cornell Vassar Columbia Princeton Swarthmore Williams" instead of just stating where you went to college?

You've completely missed my point.  Do you jump on the interwebish google thingy to check safety statistics when you decide to drive down the street?  DO you do the same let's say--for opening a bottle of bubbly to consult the probability that there will be some sore of injury or damage from a popping cork?  etc etc ad infinitum.

One MUST have a perception of risk for risk to be a mitigating factor in behavior change.  It's not data--it's about whether we actually THINK and FEEL we're at risk.

I mean--using statistics alone WHY in the world would ANYONE actually live in, New York, Philly, D.C (add your favorite urban area here)

In using your logic it was "ok" to fuck women--but stupid to fuck men and you blame substance use on that?  I was infected by a woman--so does that make it ok?  Oh--and she went to Smith.

[mecch]

I don't care what state you live in.  Every 15 year old hears gay-fag-AIDS jokes these days.  If someone at 18 has the ability to contemplate that their state has a low HIV infection rate, it's not a giant leap to enter "HIV Mississippi statistics" into Google.  If you have the means to hunt for cocksucking on the interwebz you have the means to look up HIV rates.  This ain't rocket science.

This wasn't the case 20 years ago.  Well, they'd have heard the jokes but google didn't exist.

I fucked a couple of girls in my decidedly plebeian non-elitst higher education institution, but I wasn't so stupid as to do it with guys.  Well, actually I was stupid to do it with guys but that was due to alcohol and cocaine, not a lack of knowing what I should be doing in the mid-80's.  My college years were a bit after yours though, and back then that made some difference in terms of knowing what to do and when.

Also, is there a reason you have to trot out "Cornell Vassar Columbia Princeton Swarthmore Williams" instead of just stating where you went to college?

Cause thats where I fucked and the reason to state it was that a lot of people supposedly smart enough to go to such places also didn't give a rats ass about HIV.  So calling us fools, just like calling someone even today who hasn't really come to terms with HIV risk some kind of fool, is disingenuous.

And rightly so, there is a big difference between 1983 and 1985 in this cohort so thus I was rupulsed when in 1986 I got the "not our crowd" rationale.  LOL

[mecch]

In using your logic it was "ok" to fuck women--but stupid to fuck men and you blame substance use on that?  I was infected by a woman--so does that make it ok?  Oh--and she went to Smith.

Eh voila, my point exactly! Thanks

[Inchlingblue]

It's not about statistics, everyone knows that not using condoms means you could get HIV, right? This message has been drilled into the collective consciousness since the 80s.

Don't people in their teens and twenties know this? Who cares if the incidence of HIV is low or high in whatever town you live in? HIV is everywhere. It may be more prevalent in big cities but that doesn't mean it's non-existent elsewhere.

I was kept negative for 25 years by using condoms always, without exception. I then decide it's OK not to use them for the first time in my life with one specific person who I assumed was negative and I get HIV!

It's very simple and straightforward: use a condom always with anal sex or you could get HIV, no matter where you live, be it New York City or Tenny, MI (the smallest town in America). With oral sex, use a condom if there is actual cum involved (i.e. someone cumming in someone's mouth). It's not rocket science or brain surgery.

If you are in a monogamous relationship and you have both gotten tested and are negative and have both made a vow not to fool around on the side and you trust each other 100%, then you can discuss not using condoms. That should be the only exception.

[Miss Philicia]

In using your logic it was "ok" to fuck women--but stupid to fuck men and you blame substance use on that?  I was infected by a woman--so does that make it ok?  Oh--and she went to Smith.

Where did I state it was "OK"?  I was merely commiserating with my good friend meech about the unwise sexual activity on college campuses when AIDS first bubbled to the surface in the national news media in the early/mid 80's.

Otherwise I find your point about young gay men in the year 2010 looking up state infection rates being akin to looking up cork popping in bottles of Veuve Clicquot somewhat lacking.

[MarcoPoz]

Where did I state it was "OK"?  I was merely commiserating with my good friend meech about the unwise sexual activity on college campuses when AIDS first bubbled to the surface in the national news media in the early/mid 80's.

Otherwise I find your point about young gay men in the year 2010 looking up state infection rates being akin to looking up cork popping in bottles of Veuve Clicquot somewhat lacking.

No anger at all, but thank you for your concern.  I just have a differing viewpoint.  Knowledge by itself does not equal behavior change.  It's been proved over and over again in behavioral sciences and I have even authored articles and created interventions based on this premise.  To assume that anyone now 'knows' and I mean --has integrated HIV risk information directly into their sexual and substance use behavior--simply because a few years have passed by, is an erroneous assumption.

Matter of fact, most public high schools have actually scaled back both the quantity and quality of comprehensive HIV education they have provided in the last ten years.  Add to this, decreased risk perception among younger MSM who feel that HIV may be less dangerous because of HAART.  Now also add to this younger age of initial sexual behavior, younger use of newer substances like Ecstasy, meth-based products etc.  And a slew of other socially contributing factors that allow people every opportunity to rationalize their way out of assuming they are personally at risk for HIV.  With this--where do you end?  Exactly where we were all at when we became infected. 

One can have an opinion based on information, knowledge, experience etc and not have to have it come from an emotional place like anger.

My use of the term 'ok' comes as a response to your statement that you had sex with women, but weren't 'stupid' enough to do it with men.  I replied that I was infected by a woman, which challenges the assumption you provided that only having sex with men was stupid.

And seriously, I'm not emotional at all in my posts here--just stating my simple opinions that in the end, are no more valid then anyone's.