Dick the Hung Redneck is TAKING a LOAD Live!

[Boston Guy]

RE: deja vu. greedy bathouse owners, early 1980s

 

>LIFE is a death sentence. could

>someone please tell me ONE

>PERSON who was ever born

>who has not died, or

>will not die?

>if you live, you die.

 

 

My friends who died in their 20's and 30's instead of their 80's and 90's would probably like the chance to suggest to you that dying at an early age is not the same as dying at an old one.

 

But, of course, they cannot, for they are dead.

[Guest bottomboykk]

RE: Kiki would NOT have tuned in tonite!!

 

DCescortBOY: You said in another thread you need to take a break from the message center...why don't you start right now?

[Guest DCescortBOY]

RE: Kiki would NOT have tuned in tonite!!

 

why don't you lick my left nut & mind your own MOTHERFUCKING business?

you may not LIKE what i say, but i have as much right as the next person to say it.

 

ENJOY... absent amazingly compelling interest, i think my contributions are at an end. i find it more than obnoxious that, merely because someone is a volunteer moderator, he feels justified in assuming a faux-superior tone & hurling insults at me when we happen to disagree.

[+ deej]

RE: Kiki would NOT have tuned in tonite!!

 

Both of you go to your rooms!

 

DCescortBOY, your participation here is welcome, even though you've been bordering on libel in other threads.

 

Bottomboykk, what were you thinking?

 

I smack you both on the butt and send you to bed without dessert. (I'll be right up ;-))

 

Come back tomorrow and kiss & make up.

[CT Dick]

>

>Its my ass, my health and my decision. Even tho

>the guy who is gonna seed me tonite says he

>is neg, I fully accept that he may not be

>and I may spend the rest of my life on

>medication. MY CHOICE!

 

Yes, your choice. But, who is going to pay for those med's?

 

You are entering into this as if society bears no responsibility for you. Will you feel that way when you start collecting piles of pills at a clinic?

[Guest Daddy-In-Training]

RE: Kiki would NOT have tuned in tonite!!

 

Thank-you Deej! Gentlemen, I'm tired and I'm cranky. This is the 2nd wig-pulling contest that I've come across

 

Mangle the Issue, not each other!!!!!

 

In this case...The Issue is one that is very worthy of discussion!

 

-- Daddy

[Guest Fin Fang Foom]

RE: deja vu. greedy bathouse owners, early 1980s

 

>learning to

>shoot well, and going about,

>in cold blood with ample

>premeditation and no remorse, taking

>out one of the conservative

>supreme court justices.

 

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there's been a single case come before the court that has dealt specifically with AIDS or HIV.

 

Thoughtfully yours,

 

FFF

[Guest Daddy-In-Training]

RE: deja vu. greedy bathouse owners, early 1980s

 

>Someone please correct me if I'm

>wrong, but I don't think

>there's been a single case

>come before the court that

>has dealt specifically with AIDS

>or HIV.

 

I can't cite the case...but I did read about at least one...If I wasn't so blasted tired...I'd be able to point you to them!

 

-- Daddy

[guyinsf]

Don't mean to single you out, as other posts have contained similar sentiments.

 

While I don't want to promote irresponsible behavior, the thing that most bothers me about some of these posts is that they come from a very judgmental place. And I wonder, in this context, if these same things would be said about: People with lung cancer who smoked? People with diabetes or heart disease who are "overweight"? People who had accidents who did "reckless" things, including high risk sports?

 

Should someone who attempts suicide not have his hospital stay covered because he "chose" to slit his wrists, or should we understand that "choice" as part of an underlying illness (depression)? Would guilt-tripping that person about the social costs of his actions be an effective intervention?

 

I think it's easy for people to attack someone who gets an STD or becomes HIV infected for being irresponsible. While that person may very well have made choices that led to his infection, isn't that true of many other illnesses as well? Why do people feel free to attack the one but not the other? Mind you, I'm not equating the illnesses, I'm talking about the process.

 

>>

>>Its my ass, my health and my decision. Even tho

>>the guy who is gonna seed me tonite says he

>>is neg, I fully accept that he may not be

>>and I may spend the rest of my life on

>>medication. MY CHOICE!

>

>Yes, your choice. But, who

>is going to pay for

>those med's?

>

>You are entering into this as

>if society bears no responsibility

>for you. Will you

>feel that way when you

>start collecting piles of pills

>at a clinic?

[Guest Fin Fang Foom]

Licking the left nut

 

>why don't you lick my left

>nut & mind your own

>MOTHERFUCKING business?

 

I'm confused. How can someone lick your left nut and, at the same time, be minding their own "MOTHERFUCKING business"? The very act of licking your left nut would require them to be engaged with you on some level and thereby involving themself with your "MOTHERFUCKING business". I believe you've asked of him something that is quite impossible.

 

Theoretically yours,

 

FFF

[Guest jizzdepapi]

RE: deja vu. greedy bathouse owners, early 1980s

 

Dear FFF:

 

that may be true. i would imagine the Supreme Court might be a target (real or rhetorical) for the entire U.S. government in this case or possibly for lower courts that have made decisions regarding health care and other matters affecting people with AIDS.

 

it also expresses the frustration felt by many during this pandemic.

--in 1992, in El Salvador--of all places--i saw billboards everywhere promoting safer sex. that is true of other foreign countries. with all of the resources available in the United States, no similar widespread campaign has been launched to this day.

--the U.S. government was complicit in aiding the blood industry in avoiding the expensive process of testing blood as long as it was able. i might have mentioned this on another thread but 85% of the hemophiliacs receiving blood at the time testing was finally instituted, are now dead of AIDS.

--AZT (a product of the firm now known as Glazo Wellcome), a rejected dusted-off cancer drug, was introduced at a cost approaching $100,000 per patient per year. It was only after media attention following lobbying by activists and health care professionals that the cost was lowered to $10,000 per year per patient. all this for a drug whose clinical trials were paid for 100% by the U.S. government.

--recent concessions by pharmaceuticals and patent holders (including non-profit universities) allowing provision of AIDS drugs in Africa at reduced or no cost were made only under extreme duress and years after the institutions were made aware of the projected death rates due to AIDS.

 

one caveat regarding pharmaceuticals and research funding is that they have stepped up to the plate as government funding has plummetted--never to recover from drastic custs enacted during the Reagan administration--not only concerning AIDS but a host of other diseases. conflicts of interest and heightened concern about the profit motive should be considered inevitable in this scenario.

 

though Clinton, in many peoples' view, courted the GLBT and progressive heterosexual vote heavily before winning his first election, he never delivered on his promises to maintain a cabinet-level position dealing with the AIDS crisis. his increased funding for research and treatment fell far short of the necessary dollars for his full tenure.

 

the list of life-costing misteps and refusal to deal with the pandemic goes on and on. as Randy Shiltz so eloquently details in "And the Band Played On," government agency and business refused to take responsibility until health care professionals, activists and the media (under great duress) forced their hands. i think that just as we say, "all people with AIDS are innocent," we might also say, "all irresponsible governments and concerned organizations are guilty."

 

the response of the U.S. government, the health care industry specifically, and businesses and organizations providing services to or conducting research affecting people with AIDS has been appalling, and in some (radicalized) peoples' minds calls for similar genocidal, albeit unpleasant, measures.

 

jizz

[Guest jizzdepapi]

RE: Licking the left nut

 

i was wondering something more along the lines of "how much would it be to lick both nuts?" what, is he nuts to give that away? would not pay to mind my own MOTHERFUCKING business.

[Guest jeffOH]

Re: #35

 

People who have cancer, diabetes or heart disease CAN NOT be

participants in the spread of their condition the way someone

who is HIV+ can. Big difference. Yes, some people do participate

in "reckless" activities, high-risk sports, sky-diving riding

a motorcycle without a helmet. But choosing an activity which

COULD further spread a disease which we are trying to eradicate

from the face of the earth, shows no respect for yourself or your

fellow man...very selfish behavior.

 

The only good thing to "cum" out of what this idiot has done is

the thought-provoking discussion. Honestly, I LOVE the idea of

a man blowing his hot load in my ass, but not enough to risk my

life for it. For some people this is "sexual Russian Roulette",

they really get off on it. Hopefully, prospective clients of his

will have the knowledge of his bare-backing activities before

they consider hiring him.

 

Jeff4hire@aol.com

[+ deej]

RE: Kiki would NOT have tuned in tonite!!

 

>>Thank-you Deej!

 

Ohmygosh!

 

I genuflect appropriately and say "thank you Daddy!"

[Boston Guy]

>While I don't want to promote

>irresponsible behavior, the thing that

>most bothers me about some

>of these posts is that

>they come from a very

>judgmental place. And I

>wonder, in this context, if

>these same things would be

>said about: People with

>lung cancer who smoked?

>People with diabetes or heart

>disease who are "overweight"?

>People who had accidents who

>did "reckless" things, including high

>risk sports?

>

 

I really appreciate your concern about being judgmental, but there are certain things that responsible people just have to be judgmental about. Being judgmental is not always bad and can be the right place to be on certain issues.

 

In this case, though, I think you are mixing apples and oranges. Judging someone who gets lung cancer or heart disease is not the point, just as we are not suggesting that people with HIV be judged badly. I did not and do not judge harshly all of my lost friends.

 

But I do urge friends who smoke not to smoke and friends who are overweight to diet and friends who do not exercise to do so. Being responsible about one's life choices is part of being a responsible citizen, friend, brother, son, neighbor.

 

But I am very judgmental about people who commit murder or rape. And I am judgmental about people who purposely, publicly engage in very risky sex and do so in a way that is meant to generate 'favorable' publicity. I'm sorry -- young people are getting infected at higher rates again and people are dying. It would be irresponsible not to be judgmental about someone publicly engaging in this behavior and then being proud of it and claiming it's his right and his duty to then have unsafe sex with clients who want to have unsafe sex. I think everyone here should be appalled. And I can only think that those who aren't haven't yet seen enough death.

 

Smoking a cigarette is a potentially dangerous thing to do and, when carried on over a lifetime, is a habit that is likely to have very severe health consequences. However -- smoking a single cigarette is not going to kill someone, just as eating another hot fudge sundae isn't going to kill you. People who smoke continue to have the choice to stop smoking and, by so doing, recover from much of the ill effects of smoking. People who are overweight can diet and exercise themselves back into shape.

 

People who knowingly expose themselves to HIV are risking giving themselves what is still quite clearly a fatal disease, one that you cannot cure by diet or exercise or any other similar step. It is not chronic. It is fatal. Someone who is HIV+ who knowingly has unsafe sex with someone else -- no matter what that person asks for -- should be viewed the same as someone who hands someone a loaded pistol and says "let's play Russian Roulette."

 

These are lives we are talking about and they are precious. Comparing the value of a life, all of the promise of an unfilled life, with few minutes of pleasure that might come from unsafe sex is to compare everything with nothing.

 

>Should someone who attempts suicide not

>have his hospital stay covered

>because he "chose" to slit

>his wrists, or should we

>understand that "choice" as part

>of an underlying illness (depression)?

> Would guilt-tripping that person

>about the social costs of

>his actions be an effective

>intervention?

>

 

No. As a responsible society, we need to properly care for people who are ill, no matter how they became ill. However, it is irresponsible for someone to say "it's my choice" and expect everyone to simply say "Oh, OK." when the consequence could easily be a bill to society in the hundreds of thousands of dollars or more.

 

Sometimes individual choice -- the ability to make a personal choice about an action that the person is free not to take -- must take into consideration the possible consequences to society. We are not living on this planet or in this nation alone and our choices have consequences on those around us. For someone to say "it's my choice if I want to become infected with HIV" is irresponsible in the extreme and we should judge that decision and that action harshly.

 

You ask if 'guilt-tripping' someone over the costs would be an effective strategy. First, I reject the label of guilt-tripping. Pointing out the very high possible cost to society of an adult taking an irresponsible personal action is not guilt-tripping that person: it's asking them to grow up and consider the full consequences of their action.

 

Unfortunately, some people are so selfish and so wound up in their own personal pleasure that such considerations are unlikely to make any difference to them.

 

>I think it's easy for people

>to attack someone who gets

>an STD or becomes HIV

>infected for being irresponsible.

>While that person may very

>well have made choices that

>led to his infection, isn't

>that true of many other

>illnesses as well? Why

>do people feel free to

>attack the one but not

>the other? Mind you,

>I'm not equating the illnesses,

>I'm talking about the process.

>

>

 

You're right, it is easy and we have labored over this issue as a society for 20 years. Someone who accidentally gets HIV should be treated with compassion. Someone who purposefully gets HIV should be treated with the same level of medical care but should be judged for taking the actions that led to their infection.

 

Someone who is HIV+ and who purposely has unprotected sex with other people should be judged harshly and prevented from continuing in this potentially lethal behavior. I personally believe that it is criminal to willingly expose someone to HIV.

 

Your name suggests you live in SF. Certainly HIV is all around you. I don't know how old you are. And I am sorry that we still have to deal with this issue, so many years later.

 

But infection rates are going up. More and more young people are getting infected.

 

We've lost a large part of one generation of gay men. All of my friends my age around the US had dozens of friends die. We all got to the point where we'd turn to the obituaries every day to see who else died. We'd go to the quilt to look for people who had disappeared. We went to too many funerals and too many memorial services. We helped too many friends die.

 

I don't want to see this start again. I don't want to see more young men die. I don't want to see young gay men going back to memorial services and helping their friends die. I don't want to see young gay guys discussing the merits of complicated medical treatments and knowingly discussing experimental new drugs.

 

HIV still kills and gay men are still a target. We know how to prevent it. We know how to save the lives of the gay men around us.

 

Those lives are precious. They have so much promise, so much to offer, so many years yet to run. I don't want to see them cut down.

 

And that is why the actions described in this thread appall me and horrify me and disgust me. When personal freedom amounts to suicide and murder, color me judgmental. Count me on the side that wants to preserve life and fight HIV.

[Guest jizzdepapi]

FUCKING WITH A CONDOM IS FUN!

 

I'd like to weigh in on this though I certainly hope CT Dick jumps in too.

 

A problem faced by early AIDS health care providers and activists, and vehemently avoided, where possible, by the government, was the "morality" of sexual behavior and a conflict in regulating or advising about this behavior and civil liberties. hence, the saying "all people with AIDS are innocent," a tenet which was believed by a distinct minority of Americans, in the beginning and probably now by only a somewhat larger minority. within the ranks of gay men, there are have been a range of choices people have made during the pandemic from total abstinence to totally ignoring the risk of HIV transmission, which Dick promoted, causing the stir on this thread.

 

In the early days of HIV/AIDS, there were similar questions asked by bathhouse owners, whose livelihood was certainly at stake should health departments shut them down, which did happen. in the late 1970s and early 1980s, many gay men, freed from legal restrictions against "sodomy," were promiscuous in numbers never experienced in the past; this occuring in the jet-set age quickly made HIV/AIDS an international crisis. a call to zip it up was seen by many as an infringement on civil liberties. biostatisticians and epidemiologists were hard-pressed in those days to convince communities that real changes in behavior had to occur if entire enclaves of gay men were not to perish. They were not knowingly judgemental in their pronouncements but were calling for measures to contain an untreatable virus, as a health care professional might do in a time of crisis.

 

Since I'm the one who started the ballyhoo on this thread about Dick's profitable (which is what I think it's all really about)barebacking activites, I'd like to state that I don't judge barebacking as an intrinsically evil choice but as a proven lethal one. The choice Dick has made to engage in this activity with multiple partners and to actively promote it IS evil. I might be parsing my words here but I think there's a very real difference between the two.

 

I don't think a person who has become addicted to cigarette smoking (which would be me, incidentally) has made an evil choice to smoke though I do think the cigarette manufacturers, who deliberately set out to ensure that smokers became and remained addictive, DID make an evil choice. I think a suicide attempt by a depressed person is a manifestation of their illness and they have not made an evil choice. Ditto for people who don't regulate their diet and exercise. I'll let someone else address whether these people should be provided health care.

 

I'm glad Dick appeared on this thread with his callous and greedy message and glad gay men are participating. I'm sure there's a range of opinions on how situations like Dick's deadly escorting and webcam promotion should be handled but there needs to be discussion about this in all our communities.

 

Sex Panic's statement said it well: It is EVERYONE’S RESPONSBILITY TO BE A PREVENTION ACTIVIST, to create and implement strategies to stop the spread of HIV, to fight for funding for HIV prevention in gay and lesbian communities, and TO HAVE SEX SAFELY, well and often.

 

And something we all know but have not stated on this thread is that FUCKING WITH A CONDOM IS FUN. I always wondered how that 2 or 3 oz. of liquid buried in someone's asshole could be such a big deal anyhow.

 

best to you, guyinsf, and all the m4m posters,

jizz

[Guest JT]

With many of us witnessing HIV/AIDS destroy and take away the lives of people we know and those we don’t in the last 2 decades, I’m not surprised that the issue of barebacking is such a hot potato here. This is especially true in light of the recent increase in HIV incidence (particularly among younger gay men) in the US and Canada, which is believed to be at least partly attributed to a greater number of people who are barebacking.

 

Judging from the messages posted so far, I guess one can safely say that many of us have strong views about this sensitive topic. BG, while I appreciate and agree with many of the concerns (public health and societal cost etc.) you and others have expressed here, I do feel that we need to remind ourselves a few things:

 

>It would be

>irresponsible not to be judgmental

>about someone publicly engaging in

>this behavior and then being

>proud of it and claiming

>it's his right and his

>duty to then have unsafe

>sex with clients who want

>to have unsafe sex.

>I think everyone here should

>be appalled. And I

>can only think that those

>who aren't haven't yet seen

>enough death.

 

>People who knowingly expose themselves to

>HIV are risking giving themselves

>what is still quite clearly

>a fatal disease, one that

>you cannot cure by diet

>or exercise or any other

>similar step. It is

>not chronic. It is

>fatal.

 

Don't forget that bareback (anal) sex is not the only risk factor for HIV/AIDS. Intravenous drug use is another major risk factor. To a lesser extent, having sex with multiple partners also increases one's chance of contracting HIV/AIDS. So does it mean that escorts and clients KNOWINGLY choose to expose ourselves to higher risk? We all know that wearing a condom does not mean safe sex, maybe just safer. Moreover, how many of us use a condom for oral sex, despite the fact that there is a risk, albeit low, of HIV transmission? Are we also playing Russian Roulette, perhaps just with fewer "bullets"? Does barebacking once necessarly have a higher probability of getting HIV as compared to having "protected" sex with many partners (the majority of them we "know" little about) over a period of time?

 

>I really appreciate your concern about

>being judgmental, but there are

>certain things that responsible people

>just have to be judgmental

>about. Being judgmental is

>not always bad and can

>be the right place to

>be on certain issues.

 

> Being responsible about one's

>life choices is part of

>being a responsible citizen, friend,

>brother, son, neighbor.

 

Now let us honestly ask ourselves the following two questions,

 

1. Do we consider ourselves (as escorts and clients) responsible people?

2. Do others in the community at large (gay, bi and straight) think that we (including those who are married with or without children, or those who are in a long term relationship, etc.) are responsible people?

 

 

>Someone who is

>HIV+ who knowingly has unsafe

>sex with someone else --

>no matter what that person

>asks for -- should be

>viewed the same as someone

>who hands someone a loaded

>pistol and says "let's play

>Russian Roulette."

 

To be fair, we have no evidence to comfirm or even suggest that Dick or his partner is HIV+. He has never mentioned in any of his messages that they are. Of course, many of us would assume that the person whom we have sex with is HIV+, but this is still only an assumption. Since we don't have any scientific data to support that everyone who barebacks is HIV+, one really cannot conclude that barebacking automatically means HIV infection (i.e. a single exposoure to semen during barebacking may or may not expose you to HIV). It comes down to probability again!

 

 

>No. As a responsible society,

>we need to properly care

>for people who are ill,

>no matter how they became

>ill. However, it is

>irresponsible for someone to say

>"it's my choice" and expect

>everyone to simply say "Oh,

>OK." when the consequence could

>easily be a bill to

>society in the hundreds of

>thousands of dollars or more.

 

>Sometimes individual choice -- the ability

>to make a personal choice

>about an action that the

>person is free not to

>take -- must take into

>consideration the possible consequences to

>society. We are not

>living on this planet or

>in this nation alone and

>our choices have consequences on

>those around us. For

>someone to say "it's my

>choice if I want to

>become infected with HIV" is

>irresponsible in the extreme and

>we should judge that decision

>and that action harshly.

 

>You ask if 'guilt-tripping' someone over

>the costs would be an

>effective strategy. First, I

>reject the label of guilt-tripping.

> Pointing out the very

>high possible cost to society

>of an adult taking an

>irresponsible personal action is not

>guilt-tripping that person: it's

>asking them to grow up

>and consider the full consequences

>of their action.

>

>Unfortunately, some people are so selfish

>and so wound up in

>their own personal pleasure that

>such considerations are unlikely to

>make any difference to them.

 

BG, you mentioned that poeople who smoke or who are overweight (by the way, I'm overweight ) have many opportunities in their lifetime to quit smoking or diet/exercise to lose weight. Are we then supposed to judge these people as irresponsible and judge their decisions and actions harshly if they still keep smoking or remain to be overweight? Should we judge them ever harsher given that they're supposed to have many opportunities to improve their health? How does all this judement help stop the most explosive epidemics --- obesity, that is happening right here (in North America) right now?

 

Some have also argued that the decisions/processes that lead to smoking-induced cancers or overweight-related health conditions (diabetes, heart diseases, stroke, COPD, etc) are different from HIV/AIDS because those disease do not spread to others. While this is true from an infectious disease point of view, there're many studies that have demonstrated the adverse effects of smoking and overweight can be "spread" to others. e.g. people who get exposed to second-hand smoking have been shown to have greater incidence of lung cancer and respiratory illnesses as compared to those who don't; kids whose parent(s) are overweight are found to be more likely to be overweight; etc. Of course, we, as a society, still have to bear both the economic and HUMAN costs of their decisions that lead to these diseases and health conditions, as in the case of HIV/AIDS.

 

>I don't want to see this

>start again. I don't

>want to see more young

>men die. I don't

>want to see young gay

>men going back to memorial

>services and helping their friends

>die. I don't want

>to see young gay guys

>discussing the merits of complicated

>medical treatments and knowingly discussing

>experimental new drugs.

 

>HIV still kills and gay men

>are still a target.

>We know how to prevent

>it. We know how

>to save the lives of

>the gay men around us.

>

>Those lives are precious. They

>have so much promise, so

>much to offer, so many

>years yet to run.

>I don't want to see

>them cut down.

>

>And that is why the actions

>described in this thread appall

>me and horrify me and

>disgust me. When personal

>freedom amounts to suicide and

>murder, color me judgmental.

>Count me on the side

>that wants to preserve life

>and fight HIV.

 

I don't think any of us here wants to see a single person losing his/her life to HIV/AIDS. However, for some, barebacking is a form of sexual expression through which the individuals involved attain both psychological and physical gratification and fulfillment. While I and many others like you may choose not to practice barebacking after carefully weighing its “risks” and “benefits”, this is a choice that we made without having it forced upon us by any government or religious institutions. So even though I do not personally condone or practice barebacking, I do believe that each individual has his/her rights to choose to bareback or not.

 

Of course, here I’m not referring to the situation where HIV+ individuals knowingly bareback without disclosing their infection status and obtaining their partner’s consent. An HIV+ individual who knowingly has unprotected sex with another person without disclosing their HIV staus is indeed a criminal offense. A Canadian newspaper reported several months ago that an HIV+ male escort (who has worked in some of the largest cities in Canada) was arrested for knowingly having unprotected sex with his clients (who were not informed of his HIV status). I'm not sure whether the case has gone before the court yet, but this case also begs the question about the clients' responsibility.

 

BG, I do appreciate your passion and concerns about the safety of members of the gay community. There is no doubt that we, as a community, should try our best to make the resources available to help each other, particularly the younger generation, better understand the risks of sexual activities so that they're able to make their own, informed decisions. This should not be done, however, by suppressing the fundamental rights to freedom of expression, even though we may completely disagree with the other side of the debate.

 

Yours sincerely,

JT (who has fantasized about barebacking but does not do it in real life)

[guyinsf]

Well, though I acknowledge these mechanisms are different, people who smoke and people who over-eat definitely affect the health of other persons as well. Ever hear of second hand smoke? And do you not think that a parent who has a poor diet is likely to raise a child with similar dietary habits?

[CT Dick]

guyinsf , I am not being judgemental of any behavior which might/could cause medical needs.

 

I AM being judgemental of someone getting fucked ON A PAID WEBSITE with the attitude of "it's my choice and no one elses business."

 

It becomes our business when he shows up at a public hospital needing help. He doesn't live in a bubble, no matter how much he swaggers on this site.

[Guest jeffOH]

>Well, though I acknowledge these mechanisms

>are different, people who smoke

>and people who over-eat definitely

>affect the health of other

>persons as well. Ever

>hear of second hand smoke?

> And do you not

>think that a parent who

>has a poor diet is

>likely to raise a child

>with similar dietary habits?

 

Yes, I've heard of second-hand smoke, but someone raised with

poor dietary habits, over-eats, someone who smokes, someone who

drinks or someone who abuses drugs...all have the opportunity

to change their behavior and POSSIBLY save their lives. Some-

one who becomes HIV-infected doesn't have that option, now do

they?

 

I just don't get the comparisons you make. Should we not say

anything about guys who bareback and take a load up their ass?

And if stating your opinion about it sounds "judgmental", so what? Yes, I can be just as judgmental about over-eaters, smokers, drug abusers, but I wouldn't advocate denying medical

care to ANYONE, even this Redneck guy.

 

Jeff4hire@aol.com

[Guest HungRedneck]

MY FINAL POST

 

I havent checked in here til today..coz i knew i wouldnt like what i read...i swear it sounds more like a church picnic than a fag whorehouse in here

 

a couple of points

 

1)

jizz you need some help...who died and left you to be responsible for all of us....do you drive slow in the left lane on the freeway too? to keep the speed down? ("those speeders need to be slowed down DAMNIT they're a public hazard!!!") you are a walking definition of 'codependant'.

 

2)

i have private insurance and i will not be a burden on the public health system...i cannot speak for those who get infected without the ability to care for themselves

 

3)

i was 18 in 1981...so i spent my entire adult sexual life under the shadow of aids...i was a 'good' boy for alllllllll that time...everyone died...i hurt for years...

 

4)

if i die at 60..ok..i can live with that..and jeez guys..dooom glooom...do u remember when everyone died within 2 years? its called medical PROGRESS...did yall miss the fact that they have mapped the genome? do any of you know what that MEANS? .....ever think that aids may NOT Be a death sentence?

 

5)

why is the 'russian roulette' thing so exciting and erotic? the VERY same people who were looking after the 'public good' back then made latex-free sex so taboo that there was no way it WOULDNT become a fetish

 

6)

i have never 'promoted' bareback sex for anyone...i am VERY in favor of personal choice and responsibility (ever heard of the constitution?)....i still think its supremely insulting to tell someone that i know better for him than he does...i have never disrespected or denigrated anyone for choosing safe sex

 

7)

i have 'sold' raw sex online...u think it may be possible that since guys can watch me do it raw..that they wont need to do it themselves? there IS a big market for this..am i responsible for THAT too?

 

8)

as you guys can see..i DID NOT make the first post and was NOT responsible for making it 'public' on this site..i only weighed in after i was informed about the little tempest in a teapot yall had created here

 

9)

JT are you single?

 

im outta here boys..

 

live and love and be true..its so much easier that way

http://www.HungRedneck.com

[Guest Theron]

I'd like to weigh in on this one. I know you are all probably thinking doesn't Thereon have enough opinions already, lol.

 

Engaging in bare baarebacking is not something I would do. It also is not an activity I would encourage others to engage in. I have lost friends to AIDS, worked as an activist to raise money for research, worked to educate people by rasing public awareness about the benefits of safe sex, so people can make informed choices, participated in demonstrations, and even volunteered in Hospice. Personally, I consider barebacking irresponsible behavior, and with the recent rise in HIV infections, primarily because youth have been engaging in unsafe sex, I believe it is incorrigible to promote the activity as HungRedNeck is doing. Finally, I believe that after a person becomes infected with HIV that they have a legal and moral responsibility to tell every partner they are with their HIV status, and I believe that we all have a responsibility to protect ourselves by assuming every partner is HIV positive.

 

That said, I still support the right of HungRedNeck, and his sexual partner, to make their own choices -- even if I believe those choices are irresponsible and incorrigible. As far as our all "minding our own business" -- well, if this were private sexual behavior, I would whole heatedly agree with that -- but it isn't. HungRedNeck has elected to make his choice and behavior public, and is promoting it. Therefore, I strongly feel that the choice and behavior are open to public debate.

 

And that folks, is all I've got to say about it.

 

Hugs,

 

Theron

Based Out of Chicago

http://theronb.homestead.com/files/home.html

[Guest BenDover]

RE: Licking the left nut

 

What an incredibly important discussion this has been. I am so proud of all of you guys who feel so passionately about this topic, whether I agree with you or not.

This fucking disease has has permeated nearly every aspect of my life. As a health care worker, in the early 80's we scrambled to make sense out of what we were seeing; those of us in health care who were also gay men and women, also struggled mightily to help formulate public policy around testing, privacy, visitation rights of lovers and friends, getting funeral homes to tend to our dead, getting firemen to help us out when there was an emergency and they were "afraid" to enter apartment buildings filled with queers. We spent hundreds of thousands of our own dollars trying to provide services when no public agencies would help out; we formed our own task forces, poured dollars into political camgaigns to at least acknowledge that there was a serious public health crisis (fucking Reagan never once said the word AIDS in his entire administration.)

In the last 20 years, I personally was so afraid of sex I became a celibate, choosing to watch porno (where I felt guilty watching other men take chances I was unwilling to take); As a middle-aged man, I spend a lot of time wondering where all my friends have gone, the guys I used to dance with all night long, the guys I used to go to brunch with, play softball with, dish with. Sometimes I wonder why I have survived after living in the Bay Area at the end of the 70's and early 80's and was anything but celibate.

I have only in the last two years, after years of therapy in dealing with grief and sadness, exhaustion from working as a "professional AIDS worker," begun to come back to life and have found physical contact again to be caring, loving and even safe.

So what have I learned from reading all of your posts, each one filled with caring, passion, understanding, anger, hope, love? I am responsible for ME. I must make decisions about my own life, my own safety. I WILL NOT ANYONE FUCK WITHOUT A CONDOM. I WILL NOT BE FUCKED BY ANYONE WITHOUT A CONDOM.

If everyone would take personal responsibility for their own health, perhaps this shit will change.

[Boston Guy]

RE: Licking the left nut

 

>In the last 20 years, I

>personally was so afraid of

>sex I became a celibate,

>choosing to watch porno (where

>I felt guilty watching other

>men take chances I was

>unwilling to take); As a

>middle-aged man, I spend a

>lot of time wondering where

>all my friends have gone,

>the guys I used to

>dance with all night long,

>the guys I used to

>go to brunch with, play

>softball with, dish with.

 

From the opposite side of the country, I understand how you feel. Although I did not become celibate, there were a couple of years there where it was pretty close. And while I've been fortunate in being able to meet new friends, they don't replace the old ones who are gone. Empty chairs at empty tables...

 

 

>Sometimes I wonder why I

>have survived after living in

>the Bay Area at the

>end of the 70's and

>early 80's and was anything

>but celibate.

 

God, how my friends and I who have survived (negative, even!!) have asked ourselves this question.

 

>I have only in the last

>two years, after years of

>therapy in dealing with grief

>and sadness, exhaustion from working

>as a "professional AIDS worker,"

>begun to come back to

>life and have found physical

>contact again to be caring,

>loving and even safe.

 

I am happy you have found a road back. As difficult as it was for us, it always seemed to me that the medical people had it worse and the gay health care workers the worst of all: not only were you losing your own friends, you were facing others all day who were dealing with the same things. I used to marvel at the incredible levels of compassion my friends received from their caregivers and used to wonder how they could be so compassionate, all day, every day. I have friends now who started out as straight and gay caregivers for friends who were dying. Sometimes the emotions were so strong and the process of dying so long that after sharing so much intensity we just ended up as friends. If you've been working in this field for the last 20 years, I salute you and hope you know how much difference you have undoubtedly made to so many lives.

 

I wish you happiness on your road back to life.

[Guest BenDover]

RE: Licking the left nut

 

Dear BostonGuy

Thank you for your kind words. I'm being indulgent by continuing my thoughts, here, but your words about care givers through the AIDS pandemic brought something to mind.

I remember in the first year thinking, "This will be over within the year. Its probably poppers, and we just need to stop using them right now." Well, not so twenty years later, and the research is bleak.

I actually work in the field of mental health, and I know, or should have known, that one needs to deal with matters as they arise and not put feelings and responses off for some other time. My first buddy to die devastated me. I grieved immediately, feeling as though "okay, this is my experience of the AIDS situation. Now, get on with your life and get to work."

Then the second one became infected and the third and fourth, and we were getting cases over and over again at the hospital where I worked. Because I was considered the AIDS "guru" at the hospital because no fucking doctor could see it as anything but "a fascinating teaching opportunity," friends, friends of friends and friends of friends of friends would call me from all over the place to ask me questions, to tell me about spots in their throat, about night sweats, about every sniffle and cramp. I realized it was war. Full fledged, in the trenches war, and all the young guys were dropping left and right. I saw myself as the medic in the battle zone with no time to feel or think about what was going on.

I remember my brother asking me how I could deal with it. I very deliberately told him that I was putting all my feelings in a box to open up and examine when all of this was over. I just didn't have time to really address my own stuff.

Well, the war hasn't ended yet. The straw that broke the camel's back, oddly, was having to put my schnauzer down. It simply devastated me, and I ended up taking a year off from virtually everything. I sat in my yard and read books, gardened, cried, drank too much, avoided friends and family until my best friend in the world (a straight man, by the way) intervened.

I no longer do direct client care. I no longer deliver meals to housebound people. I no longer argue with medical directors or politicians. I give money to the organizations that I know will actually do something with it instead of just squabble about policies and means-testing and cachement areas or the inner politics of organizations. I do a group for gay youth in a high school with an old girlfriend/co-worker.

I see these young kids with all their chutzpah and charm, their tattoos, piercings, attitude and low riders and I am just amazed that they have the courage to step forward as young gay men and lesbians while still in high school and hold their heads up so proudly and defiantly.

And I want them to have everything we didn't have. And they are demanding it and taking it, the best way that power can be shifted to them. And then I hear about guys barebacking and I feel so sad, so struck with a sense of "what the hell was this all about?"

So, again. Thank you for the honor you gave me of your words. And HungRedNeck, if you decide to read all of these posts, and I hope you do, I hope you realize you are not alone. You're a member of the tribe and whether you believe it or not, what you do affects us all.