Then stop! No seriously, for some reason, people are seemingly becoming more complacent about HIV and other STDs, and are willing to take more risks as a result. The result of that is more sex, and in particular, more high risk sex (which includes unprotected sex). I spoke yesterday about saying something about this, and while I don’t want to get preachy, I do want to say my piece, and hopefully open up a dialogue with all of you that read this site. The article that I read, which was pretty much the straw that broke the camel’s back, considering it is one of umpteenth million things I have seen referring to this subject, talked about increased risk behavior amongst the highest risk groups for HIV infection. While I don’t need to remind anyone that HIV is transmitted through sex, I often wonder what it is that convinces people that certain things are acceptable, and causes them to place their actions into the category of ‘risks they are willing to take’?
Why is it that some people have sex with their partners (of known or unknown status), and find it an acceptable risk to go without protection?** There are even barebacking parties that still occur, and we are 25+ years into this epidemic; which is showing no signs of slowing down. Is this because people can live longer on HIV meds? Is it because people don’t care about becoming infected with HIV anymore? Or is it because people don’t see HIV around them, and so they don’t believe it exists, or could happen to them? It is certain that things are very different now with regards to the visibility of HIV in the community, but is that the reason? Are people just forgetting that they are still just as susceptible today to HIV infection as in the past?
I guess I pose this topic, because it honestly baffles me, as a behavioral scientist that works in HIV research, how people still continue to put themselves in unnecessarily risky circumstances, when the education, information, protection, and preventative measures are readily available. Is it complacency? For some it probably is. Is it purely the ‘heat of the moment’ mentality (i.e., no condom because sex was animalistic or whatever) or sensation seeking? I am sure that is some of it. But I feel like it has to be something more than that. What is it that you think causes people to believe that one experience (or many for that matter), may have a risk threshold that is acceptable to take; even when the threat of HIV infection does not decrease (and in many cases, increases)?
What do you all think? Seriously, this is very interesting to me, and honestly, it totally varies by individuals, as I am speaking directly about individual behaviors. Let me know what you think, what you have observed, and, if you want, what the answer is to you. Is having unprotected sex in the continued wake of HIV an acceptable enough risk to just go forward? Does one really not think about the consequences of participating in risky behaviors (like barebacking parties), or do they have a mechanism for turning off that protective voice in their head? If so, why do you think that is? Do people just not think about it? Why do you think that is so?
Alright, I have asked a lot of questions, and really do what to know what you think. I hope this will be a good and informative discussion, I am really excited to see what people think.
Sidenote: I know I have a lot of gay readers, but this isn’t solely focused on gay sex. Heterosexual females are actually the current highest risk group for infection, so I am interested in heterosexual views on the “disappearance” of safe sex.
**It was pointed out to me via email that I neglected to mention exclusions to this, such as monogamous serocordinant partners. This would be the safest situation in which to have unprotected sex, and is a situation in which I find myself; we are both negative, and we are monogamous, and therefore, there is minimal (if any) risk for either of us getting infected (so long as that monogamy is honored).
I don’t understand why people continue to have unprotected sex or otherwise risky sexual encounters, but I approach the whole thing with a “live and let live” mentality. I would never put myself at risk like that, but what’s morally correct for me isn’t necessarily the same for everyone.
Good post on a very important topic. Here’s my 2 cents…
I think a false sense of complacency is a large part of what’s going on here. Those of us who grew up in the 80s remember when AIDS was new - everyone was freaking out about it, people were dying, there was a push everywhere (yes, even here in the South!) to stress the importance of safer sex. Everyone knew about the risk of AIDS, everyone was freaked out, and so the proper precautions were on everyone’s mind.
I get the feeling that it’s not the same with the generation of kids coming up today.
For one thing, advances in medicine allow HIV+ people to live longer and healthier lives. And that’s wonderful! But it also means that you can’t necessarily “spot an AIDS patient” just by looking in a crowd. So the ignorant conclusion would be, fewer people are HIV+, when in reality the people who are HIV+ are living better lives, and so aren’t as visible as HIV+. (Hope that sentence made sense… I’m writing this quickly.)
Secondly, the whole abstinence-only thing and the increasingly zealous fundies that push this agenda of ignorance. I feel like awareness of AIDS peeked sometime in the early 90s and has been going downhill every since… a bell curve, of sorts. I just hope it doesn’t continue on this same path. I’m eternally optimistic, because otherwise I think I’d just go catatonic.
And of course, for whatever reason, there are still idiots out there who think of AIDS as a “gay disease.” This has always baffled me. The stats have been showing that this is not the case, for well over 10 years now. But I guess some people believe what they want to believe. I really don’t have a good explanation for that particular phenonemon… I find it difficult to wrap my head around, quite frankly.
As for bare-backing parties… another one I find difficult to understand. I guess some people like the risk? Get high off the risk? I don’t know. I really don’t know what to say about that.
That’s all for now, gotta get back to work…
Rich - I don’t see it as an issue of morals here. I see it as a public health issue. I admit I’m a little confused by how/why you see it as a moral issue?
I’ll take a guess, because the “risky sexual encounters” part of your comment stood out at me. If by “risky sexual encounters” you mean non-monogamy, multiple partners, sex parties, etc., then I guess I can see where you’re coming from… however, there’s no reason that those types of situations have to be inherently risky. One can have a different partner every night and still practice safer sex. So I guess I just don’t really get the “moral” thing here?
I see it as a moral issue because, to me, whom and how you choose to give your body forces you make a moral decision. Will I feel guilty if I hookup with this guy I met on gay.com? Is it a bad idea for me to go home from the bar with this guy I just met? Should I have unprotected anal sex with him? I don’t know what goes through the mind of people who have unprotected sex, because I don’t do it. But I am guessing they are not unlike the heroin addict who uses a mystery needle. As long as they get their high, they don’t care where it comes from. And to hell with the consequences- let’s live for today. As they say, tomorrow never comes. Unfortunately, their hedonistic actions will catch up with them one day. Protecting myself is part of my moral code- I’m not going to do something that puts me at risk for HIV, because I think it’s wrong and disrespectful to myself to put myself in harm’s way.
I think it comes down to education and awareness. Because everything having to do with sex is so damn taboo in this country it doesn’t get talked about enough.
On the other hand, there are people that are fully aware of the consequences that still have unprotected sex. I can’t fathom why. I would assume there would have to be some breakdown in their education as well, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Another thing is the availibility of comdoms. Yes you can get them free from a clinic or AID Atlanta or such, but that can be embarassing (again the taboo, and stigma associated with sex). I actually saw condoms locked behind a glass case at Kroger yesterday. wtf? They need to be freely availible in more places. Sadly with this administration’s stance of “abstinence only” that isn’t happening, and people are still having sex.
I think they should hand out condoms and do education about STDs and HIV in schools. Start ‘em young on knowing how to use safe behaviors!
I get that, Rich; but I would just be careful not to paint everyone who has multiple partners, hook-ups, etc. as irresponsible about safer sex. Also, the term “give your body to” rubs me the wrong way, but that’s just me.
If you use condoms and common sense, there is very little risk with multiple partners and hookups. As for “give your body to”, I am one of Duane’s more melodramatic friends. I can’t just simply say “have sex”, I have to make it lyrical.
From a behavioral point of view- we humans are wired to deal with life and death stress. In fact, small doses of stress are actually healthy for us. In the modern world, we are no longer being chased by wild boars and pachyderms nor do we live in constant fear of unpredicable bouts of severe weather. In order to satisfy that urge to be stimulated, people seek out other channels- such as skydiving, car racing, rollercoasters, bungee jumping…and unprotected sex. The knowledge that you could die coupled with the hubris that it won’t happen to you is what causes 16 year olds to wrap their cars around telephone poles and for otherwise intelligent people to contract HIV from unprotected sex.
Amber and Rich:
You both are right, and I picked what Amber said, because it struck me like it does when I think about it within the context of my job. Unfortunately, with respect to public health, multiple partners is considered a higher risk, regardless of condom use. This is perhaps why there is less emphasis on condom usage… who really knows? All I know is that abstinence only is like putting a fat person in a house made of chocolate and asking them not to touch it; it’s too tempting for anyone and you can’t be expected to succeed when you are set up for failure. The problem, is that people are not taught how to be sexually active AND safe; they are taught that being sexually active is wrong (YOU WHORE!), and as a result, the emphasis on being careful (even in public health professionals eyes) takes back seat to “sleeping around”; because the probability of someone being safe every time decreases as numbers of partners go up.
I wish that weren’t the case. I wish people could just have safe sex. And lots of it!
Maybe that’s an untapped marketing angle. “Hey. You. You know, less people would know you’re a whore if you used condoms. You wouldn’t have chlamydia or eight kids.”
Mmmm… I’ll take the chocolate house please.
Maybe it’s just me…but there is no answer to these questions…until someone can fully understand the complexities that are each and every human mind…because there is never a right answer for everyone…what’s wrong to one person is the best thing for someone else…
*shrug*
LOL, GREAT idea John! LOL
This is completely honest so please try not to judge…personally, I have had unprotected sex recently. My mentality was, “it can’t happen to me.” I know this is completely absurd, but honest. Unfortunately, it took Magic Johnson to open a lot of eyes in the early 90’s. I remember that being such a huge deal. I was scared, but young and not having sex yet. I think Magic was the reason I used protection for so long (until I got with my now ex husband).
Now that I am divorced and dating again, I am having sex. The first man I was with did not want to use protection when I gave it to him. He told me, “I ain’t worried about you, you’ve been with the same person for 10 years.” I about died. I assume this is how most men around here think. Scary, huh?
Btw, I am a 30 year old heterosexual female from Kentucky.
Please don’t joke on me, but wth is a bareback party? I have never heard of this. I swear I have not been living under a rock, just tied down for too long.
Pocahontas, I don’t judge, I am just here to help. I don’t think that judgement is appropriate, so don’t worry, you have none coming from me. Just be careful, as the reason I wrote this, is because I honestly don’t anyone to get infected. I care!
As for a bareback party, it is when a bunch of gay men get together and have unprotected sex. Bareback sex is just gay sex with no condom. Pretty dangerous all for a little pleasure if you ask me.
As a gay man, I’ve always been ueber careful. Part of this is because I’m old enough to remember the epidemic of the 80s. Another part is that when i was in the army, we had quarterly “health” classes given by nurses and doctors. They showed us the proper way to use condoms and what could happen if we didn’t. It was discussed often. I wish those frank discussions could occur in every junior high, high school and university-level class.
I’m not sure why single people have unprotected sex. You’re preaching to the choir on this subject.
Here’s my 10 cents, ok maybe dollar’s worth:
1) first of all, using condoms is a learned behavior, not a natural one. natural sex is unprotected. from a public health perspective (and i’m also a behavioral scientist and work with duane), its very difficult to get people to stop a behavior that would otherwise be done without thought, even when there is risk/disease involved.
2. I agree with other people’s points about education. you would be suprised how much of the educational push of the 80s and 90s never trickled down to many of our more isolated and marginalized populations. some people still don’t know even the most basic information about HIV/AIDS.
3. over the last 10 years, the HIV epidemic has become poorer and browner and therefore has become less and less of a national health priority. those people who are now most in need of help, who were already underserved and behind the educational curve, have found themselves with a raging epidemic going virtually unchecked. perfect recipe for disasterous results.
3. i’ve always felt that one of the most important reason for why anyone doesn’t take the necessary steps to take care of themselves is self value/self esteem/self worth. its not a coincidence to me that the brunt of the epidemic is concentrated in populations that are marginalized - gay men & african americans. i think it is very difficult for some people to overcome the stigma that being an “undesirable” carries. those elements affects a whole host of psychological and behavioral outcomes that most definitely includeds protecting oneself during sex.
People do what people do. If they catch something, then oops… they’re fault. It’s not for anyone else to deal with it. Unless that person is a whiney bitch that won’t let anyone forget about it but I tend to exclude myself from those types of peeps. I would recommend trying it. It’s awesome.
Anyways, if STDs are really that big of a deal and pose such a cataclysmic problem for society as a whole, why don’t we just execute everyone that has one so that the rest of us can have as many bareback parties as we want without worrying about catching anything more than the common cold.
While we’re at it, can we kill the ugly, poor, fat, and handicap, too?