← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Centinel
Thread ID: 4559 | Posts: 12 | Started: 2003-01-22
2003-01-22 01:36 | User Profile
Your tax dollars at work and higher insurance premiums to treat these sickos...
From Drudge Report, available online at: [url=http://www.drudgereport.com/rr.htm]http://www.drudgereport.com/rr.htm[/url]
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE JAN 21, 2003 17:59:25 ET XXXXX
MAG: 25% OF NEW HIV-INFECTED GAY MEN SOUGHT OUT VIRUS
New ROLLING STONE Managing Editor Ed Needham is set to hit complete controversy with a 4-page report: "Bug Chasers: The Men Who Secretly Long To Be HIV+."
Filed by Greg Freeman, the shock story claims some men with HIV are deliberately having unprotected sex with those who want to be infected!
MORE
"The men who want the virus are called 'bug chasers,' and the men who freely give them the virus are called 'gift givers.' While the rest of the world fights the AIDS epidemic and most people fear HIV infection, this subculture celebrates the virus and eroticizes it," reports Freeman in the February 6, 2003 edition of ROLLING STONE.
At least twenty-five percent of all newly infected gay men fall into [bug-chasing] category, according to one claim in the magazine.
"In this world, the men with HIV are the most desired, and the bug chasers will do anything to get the virus."
Gay groups "aggressively encouraged" Freeman to drop the article.
One sad passage captures a young man in New York City who wants to be infected:
"His eyes light up as he says that the actual moment of transmission, the instant he gets HIV, will be 'the most erotic thing I can imagine.'"
An infector is quoted as saying: "I'm murdering him in a sense, killing him slowly, and that's sort of, as sick as it sounds, exciting to me."
Developing...
2003-01-22 06:19 | User Profile
But, haven't you heard that homosexuals are just normal people who happen to love people of the same sex?
Why shouldn't they be allowed the same rights to marry and raise families?
They're just like us!
Are you some sort of homophobe, Centinel?
I'm shocked, just shocked . . .
[sarcasm off]
Walter
2003-01-22 10:28 | User Profile
**One sad passage captures a young man in New York City who wants to be infected:
"His eyes light up as he says that the actual moment of transmission, the instant he gets HIV, will be 'the most erotic thing I can imagine.'" **
If you think that's a turn-on, Mary, just wait till you feel that silk and crinoline coffin-lining against your skin. To die for!
2003-01-22 12:23 | User Profile
I'm gonna head on over to Andrew "glutous maximas" Sullivan's site and see how he rationalizes this.
He has made it plain that he now considers HIV to be a manageable condition like diabetes.
The guy just turned 40, is HIV positive, and shoots up testosterone like an addict to overcome the fatigue factor. We'll see how long he manages it.
2003-01-22 13:43 | User Profile
Here's what Sullivan has to say:
Is there an actual study showing this? Nope. Just one doc mouthing off. Is there any evidence supporting such an extraordinary claim? None that I can see. There's one lonely fact, though: Dr. Cabaj estimates that at least twenty-five percent of all newly infected gay men fall into [bug-chasing] category. With about 40,000 new infections in the United States per year, according to government reports, that would mean 10,000 each year are attributable to that more liberal definition of bug chasing. But those alleged 40,000 are for all cases of HIV transmission, and as anyone knows, gays form a declining proportion of those cases - maybe a little more than half at this point. So the only actual fact in the extract is obviously wrong. This urban myth was peddled in the 1990s and couldn't get any traction. Is Rolling Stone that desperate for sales? I guess I'll wait to read the piece.
This man is in a serious state of denial.
Here's his take on Joe Millionaire
Yes, I must confess, the underwear pics won me over. My colleague, Michelle Cottle, on the other hand, has a cow about a reality show whose basic premise is that women often seek men with real financial resources. I take her point about misogynist stereotypes. Sure, many women marry for pure love, lust or good company. But a woman who may have to have kids isn't crazy to want a husband who can earn a good living. This isn't gold-digging; it's self-protection. And prudence. Men are far less sensible. I realized this when it dawned on me that I found Mr Millionaire far more attractive when I realized he was a construction worker. Maybe Fox should do a gay version where the contestants for the guy's, er, heart are first told he's a construction worker and later given the awful news that he's a millionaire merchant banker. They'd be crushed.
What a piece of work.
To think that as a youth he was considered potential PM material!
2003-01-22 14:02 | User Profile
Sure, Andy. We could call it SURVIVOR SLOAN-KETTERING, or JOE BUGCHASE.
2003-01-26 05:13 | User Profile
Good, I hope they all get Aids and die.
2003-01-26 15:32 | User Profile
HL: I hope they DON'T get AIDS. We'll have to pay for their outrageous medical bills. Jorge believes in "compassionate conservatism" and spending your tax dollars to accomplish it.
-Jay
2003-01-26 16:29 | User Profile
Perhaps if a strain of AIDS developed that was not treatable by antiretrovirals, the gays would die faster and the insurance companies would end up spending less.
A cleaner and safer solution, of course, would be to treat AIDS with hemlock.
2003-01-26 18:15 | User Profile
AIDS is controllable. People who get AIDS today don't die, they just suck of huge amounts of our tax money for the rest of their lives to treat AIDS. Taxpayers have already paid (including research), well over 100 thousand dollars for each and every person with AIDS.
And, it's easy for me to believe that there's a queer subculture of people who want to get AIDS. Homos are true perverts. Again, homosexuality is not at all a same-sex equivalent of heterosexuality. They celebrate being perverted. And, wanting to get AIDS is perverted.
2003-01-26 23:59 | User Profile
As one comedian (quite observantly) put it, drug companies don't want to cure AIDS, they want to make it treatable, like diabetes, so you'll keep buying drugs from them forever. So all research is being put into treating AIDS, not finding a cure or vaccine.
"Hey, you weren't at work yesterday.." "Yeah, my AIDS was acting up."
2003-01-28 19:43 | User Profile
Here's gay advice columnist Dan Savage's take on the issue:
*Taking stupid sexual risksââ¬âeven if risk turns you onââ¬âis reckless; anal sex on the first dateââ¬âeven with condomsââ¬âis a bad idea; giving someone HIVââ¬âeven if he wants itââ¬âis immoral; being a huge fcking slutââ¬âas popular as that might make youââ¬âhas physical and emotional consequences. Gay men need to be told that stupid decisions don't deserve anyone's respect. **
[url=http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0305/savage.php]http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0305/savage.php[/url]
Savage Love by Dan Savage January 29 - February 4, 2003
On the Drudge Report today I read what must be a bunch of sh*t or a complete hoax: "Mag: 25% of New HIV-Infected Gay Men Sought Out Virus, Says San Fran Health Official." Is there any truth to this? The link was e-mailed all over my office, and it makes gay men look awful. Can you prove or disprove Matt Drudge's outrageous claims? I sincerely hope it's not true and that Matt Drudge's "journalist" badge is revoked! ââ¬âCan't Trust Drudge The claim that 25 percent of all new HIV infections in gay men are intentional wasn't made by Drudge. He doesn't do much actual reporting; his Web site is almost entirely composed of links to stories in other publications. (What would the Washington Post Web site do without Drudge?) Drudge disseminated a claim made in the February 6 Rolling Stone. Gregory Freeman wrote the story that Drudgeââ¬âwho takes a perverse delight in pumping stories that make gay men look awfulââ¬âtrumpets. Freeman's piece focuses on so-called "bug chasers," HIV-negative gay men actively trying to get infected, and "gift givers," HIV-positive gay men who are only too happy to infect others. After a depressing slog through the cracked thinking of one bug chaser, Freeman whips a little amateur psychoanalysis on us ("[Some] see HIV infection as inevitable . . . so they decide to take control of the situation and infect themselves. For others, deliberately infecting themselves is the ultimate taboo . . . and that has a strong erotic appeal for some men who have tried everything else"), then introduces Dr. Bob Cabaj, director of behavioral-health services for San Francisco County. "Some men consciously seek the virus," Freeman writes, paraphrasing Cabaj, "while many more are just as actively seeking HIV but are in denial and wouldn't call themselves bug chasers." Then Freeman blows his wad: "Cabaj estimates that at least 25 percent of all newly infected gay men fall into that category," i.e., guys consciously or subconsciously seeking the virus.
The day after Drudge broke the story, Cabaj accused Freeman of fabricating his quotes. In an interview with Newsweek, Cabaj denied ever saying that 25 percent of the new infections in gay men are due to bug chasing. Freeman told Newsweek he quoted Cabaj accurately and implied that Cabaj got cold feet once the story hit the cable news talk shows. "I can only imagine that now that it's getting a lot of attention," Freeman told Newsweek, "people are getting worried." Rolling Stone's editors defended Freeman and their fact checkers in the Newsweek story.
Who to believe? On the one hand, I know from personal experience that at least 25 percent of the people who work in AIDSââ¬âhow can I put this nicely?ââ¬âare gutless wonders. Such people have told me things in on-the-record interviews that they denied saying once their quotes were published and the sh*t hit the fan. On the other hand, Freeman goes on to make such a huge, glaring, obvious error that any reasonable person has to doubt his skills as a reporterââ¬âand even his motives. After trotting out the 25 percent figure, Freeman writes this: "With about 40,000 new infections in the United States per year, according to government reports, that would mean around 10,000 each year are attributable to that more liberal definition of bug chasing."
Uh, no. While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that there are "approximately 40,000 new HIV infections occurring in the United States every year," only 42 percent of the total figure are occurring in men who have sex with men. (The rest of the infections are attributed to heterosexual sex and IV drug use.) That means the number of new infections in gay and bisexual men each year is roughly 17,000, not 40,000. Even if that sensational 25 percent figure is accurateââ¬âand that's one motherfuckin' huge ifââ¬âthat would mean there are "only" 4200 conscious and subconscious bug chasers getting infected every year, not 10,000. By lumping conscious bug chasers (a very small number of very crazy assholes) in with subconscious bug chasers (a comparatively large number of self-destructive gay dopes), Freeman distorts the scale of the problem. Considering how badly he botched some relatively simple and widely available stats, Freeman's entire piece may be easily dismissed. But the damage has been doneââ¬âthanks in part to Drudgeââ¬âand the 25 percent figure, as Andrew Sullivan complained on Salon last week, "will soon be accepted as fact," despite the story having "completely fallen apart." Personally, I don't think it has completely fallen apart, nor I do think it should be dismissed. While the 25 percent figure is clearly bullshit, the barebacking Web sites Freeman writes about are real and some men with HIV are only too willing to engage in unprotected sex with guys who aren't HIV-positive. And before gay men congratulate themselves for "only" making up 42 percent of all new HIV infections, consider this: Gay and bisexual men make up only 3 percent of the population. Regardless of how gay men are getting the virusââ¬âbug chasing? stupid risk-taking?ââ¬âthey are getting infected at appalling rates. Why? There's a clue in Freeman's piece. Daniel Castellanos, assistant director of community education at Gay Men's Health Crisis in New York, acknowledges that the bug chasing phenomenon is real. Would he try to talk someone out of trying to catch HIV? "If someone comes to me and says he wants to get HIV," Castellanos replies, "I might work with him around why he wants to do it. . . . But if in the end that's a decision he wants to make, there's a point where we have to respect people's decisions."
While active "bug chasing" may only account for a handful of new infections in gay men, the inability of HIV/AIDS educators to aggressively challenge gay men surely accounts for a large chunk. Since the arrival of effective treatments for HIV, gay men in urban areas have been busily re-creating the kind of sexual subcultures that laid out the welcome mat for HIV in the '70s. Infection rates for HIV and other STDs are soaring andââ¬âwho knows?ââ¬âperhaps some unknown STD is gaining a toehold in urban gay scenes, just as HIV did in the '70s. At the same time, the education strategy in vogue at GMHC and other AIDS organizations is this: We must respect the decisions gay men makeââ¬âup to and including the decision to get infected with HIV for shits and giggles. It's a bizarre and, judging from those HIV infection rates, shockingly ineffective strategy. It's time for GMHC and other AIDS groups to start telling gay men the truth. Taking stupid sexual risksââ¬âeven if risk turns you onââ¬âis reckless; anal sex on the first dateââ¬âeven with condomsââ¬âis a bad idea; giving someone HIVââ¬âeven if he wants itââ¬âis immoral; being a huge f*cking slutââ¬âas popular as that might make youââ¬âhas physical and emotional consequences. Gay men need to be told that stupid decisions don't deserve anyone's respect.
So long as AIDS educators refuse to challenge gay men, HIV infection rates will continue to rise. That's the real scandal, CTD.