Advertisement
<< Back To Blog Post
Will HIV Ever Be Safe Enough for You?

Write a Comment

I have read and agree to the terms and conditions in the Posting Rules*

14 Comments

BiGuy

"But that would place an equal burden on negative men, and what a bother that is." What a nonsense statement that is. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You state this then complain when negative men reject any kind of sex with positive men or have fear of HIV. A fear that has kept them negative. There are many negative men who put the burden on themselves and go out of their way to avoid HIV. They do it by avoiding drug fueled sex parties and multiple partner situations and extreme promiscuity, by using alcohol responsibly, by asking potential partners if they are STD free and HIV negative and by always using condoms regardless of the answer. They have to navigate liars, irresponsible people who don't know their status, people who think "undetectable" means HIV negative and people with all sorts of unhealthy attitudes. I ask this question to check the general attitude of a person. If they even blink on it I'm not having safe sex with them. HIV will never be safe for me. Undetectable? The viral load fluctuates and who knows what it is at the time of sex. It might be undetectable at the point of a test but I have no idea what is happening at any other time. I wouldn't risk it with a condom and is always why I ask specifially if someone is HIV negative. I ask this in an attempt to reduce the risk of safe sex to make it as safe as possible, though of course you can never be totally sure of anyone status no matter what they or their doctor states. HIV is way too much of a serious disease to not take very seriously. I learned this a very long time ago from all the public service messages and warnings. I took it seriously then and I take it seriously now. I don't understand the attitude of many HIV + people with regards to the way many HIV - people feel and behave. If I was HIV+ I would always only have safe sex with HIV + people. I would never put a negative person at risk no matter how big or small. I wouldn't want to deal with that or a persons fear of it. That said, I'm sorry that so many people have HIV and I hope someday it is eradicated. But until that time, I am doing all I can to avoid it. And unlike many other serious diseases, HIV is completely avoidable.

October 21, 2014

G

That's great news, really it is. However, if you were HIV negative you would be singing a different tune. Everyone should take responsibility for their sexual health regardless of status but if you know you are positive it's is just as muchyour responsibility to tell your partner as it is for them to ask you to wear a condom. I would bet all my worldly posessions that if you could go back in time and not become HIV positive you would. I'm sure if you could go back in time and speak to your younger self you would change the circumstances that led to you becoming infected. If the person that infected you had only told you , you could have made your own choice to whether you were willing to take the chance or not. and I'm am sure you would have still been wanted to know even if they had or were undetectable at the time. so I don't agree with your theory of not wanting to go into a " science lesson" with your partner if you are undetectable. Remember you were negative once and I'm sure you would have appreciated a science lesson back then. So although we'll written artical you lost the the most important point , that being HIV positive is no longer a death sentence and you can have a healthy , responsible , sex life. You sound irresponsible to me and inconsiderate. And if you were wondering. I always use a condom, I am a woman and I'm negative.

June 18, 2014

JJO

I recently encountered a negative guy that rejected me in 1998 after I disclosed to him. He was terrified of course, since we had barebacked (without climax). I told him I would let him know when the funeral was if he cared to come. I saw him a little while later and he said he talked to a doctor so he wasn't so afraid. Fastforward to last week: He was surprised when I told him who I was and he said I was looking great (he on the other hand had become morbidly obese). I asked him what his status was and he said, "negative". So I said, "SEE? there really CAN BE safe sex with HIV". I walked away from him. Another guy I had used a condom with but did not disclose to him 15 years earlier, became irate when I told him my status after we met on facebook again. "You could have infected me!" and I said, "but thats just the point: I didn't infect you" and he said, "WEll, now I have to go get tested again"..I asked, "after 15 years?! gimme a f--cking break!!!" we didn't talk again... At least, if anything, I was able to get them to think...if only for a second...

May 1, 2014

Jim willeford

Outstanding article. I just wish it were being picked up by mainstream press. I have disagreed with this author in the past, but if do this story spot on.

March 30, 2014

Mark S. King

JS, it's a fair question to ask if I might be overly fixated on the negative folks who see us as dangerous, rather than recognizing that there are a lot of negative people who understand the science and have no such hang-ups. I really do understand the difference. Frankly, even though I qualify myself by referring to "a sizable portion of skeptical gay men," I know I'm provoking people. I'm mirroring, I believe, the frustration of a lot of other poz guys, as evidenced by some of the comments here. Because I'm observing the views of only a portion of gay men doesn't make their ignorance any less irritating to me.

March 23, 2014

JS

I worry that the war against stigma and (vilification?)of guys who refuse to date or sleep with Pozzies is sending the wrong message. It perpetuates PWA as "victims", albeit in a new way. Having HIV is bad enough but now there's a big drum beat emphasis on "keep your guard up because everyone potential partner is going to reject you". This might be the experience of some living in small towns, but in any large urban city, there's a large enough Poz community and enought enlightened neg people for this not to be an issue. What am I missing? Is this specific to certain age groups or demographics? Or like other comments have pointed it out, are you overly fixated on and lambasting the ones who won't have you.

March 22, 2014

Eric

I just re-read Michael Callen's 1989 essay "in Defense of Anal Sex" which took D.C.'s Whitman Clinic to task for suggesting back in the day that people avoid anal sex because it was perceived as too risky for transmitting HIV. Callen's essay makes some good points, many of which stood the test of time and remain valid in 2014. Callen's arguments seemed to be directed at a very particular group-- those for whom giving up or to some extent changing sexual behavior, was off the table. I see some parallels to King's arguments. Both provoked a weird laissez faire response in me. If an HIV negative person in Callen's 1989 world or King's 2014 world feels comfortable engaging in a particular activity, let's respect that choice. But who are we to judge others for sero-sorting and saying no to Poz people. Even if all the studies say that undetectable means no risk, it's their body and as long as they say no politely, why should anyone care?

March 21, 2014

Mark S. King

Arlie, thanks for mentioning Oprah going back years later to Willamson and how many of those attitudes had changed over the years. I had intended to mention that in the piece. The link in the post will take you to a review of both the original town hall and the followup.

March 20, 2014

Advertisement

Hot topics


POZ uses cookies to provide necessary website functionality, improve your experience, analyze our traffic and personalize ads. Our Privacy Policy

Manage

POZ uses cookies to provide necessary website functionality, improve your experience, analyze our traffic and personalize ads. By remaining on our website, you indicate your consent to our Privacy Policy and our Cookie Usage.