Where this behavior dramatically differs from other “self-destructive sexual behaviors” is in its capacity to kill innocent bystanders. What about police, rescue workers and medical personnel who’ll come into contact with those who intentionally get themselves infected, and who stand a chance of contracting HIV through contact with bodily fluids, accidental needle sticks and other surgical mishaps?
It’s one thing to bear these risks while helping people who had no choice about becoming infected. The thought that an innocent person will die because of someone’s desire for self-immolation is sickening.
In my experience researching the story for more than a year, I found that the guys who do this are motivated largely – at least at first – by a belief that HIV infection is inevitable. (It doesn’t have to be inevitable for anybody, of course, but for most of them that would require changing their lifestyle and they don’t want to do that.) So they decide to seize control, to get infected on their own terms, to become less of a victim.
From there, many go on to eroticize it because they’re turned on by doing anything that everyone else is so repulsed by. Remember, there are a lot of bizarre fetishes and for many people the very idea that you and I are appalled makes it that much more fun. Others are drawn by the way society seems to embrace those with HIV, offering support (including financial support) and a sense of community that may be very appealing to a disaffected, newly out young man who doesn’t think he fits in anywhere. They talk about joining the fraternity or the brotherhood.
I didn’t see any indication that this has a political motivation behind it. I can see that someone might appreciate that as a benefit after the fact, but on an individual level these guys don’t give a damn about the politics of AIDS or anyone else. The common attitude is “It’s my life and I’ll do what I want. If you get hurt, you should have been more careful.”
The sense of guilt pops up sometimes, but more often you see the opposite: younger people who didn’t spend the 80s watching their friends die and dont’ have a real appreciation for what HIV is and what it can do. One bug chaser told me he grew up hearing about HIV, but it wasn’t “real.” He said it was like when your parents warned you about the boogeyman or Communists. The psychiatrists I talked to also mentioned the element of self-hatred as a motivator. Some of these guys have some deep seated hatred of themselves for being gay – no doubt encouraged by society and family – and they see AIDS as their fitting end. That’s often an unconscious motivation, not likely something they would tell you outside of a therapy session.
I do think there is a comparison to other dangerous behaviors like smoking. Some people will do what feels good and then find lots of sometimes nonsensical ways to justify it, even saying they actually want to get hurt by it. And when society says X is bad for you, there will always be a population who wants X just to show how wild and different they are.
I vote for “Raving Stupidheads” (which, since no one else has mentioned it, is a better Band Name than either “Bug Chasers” or “Sexual Outlaws”). This sounds like giving yourself the flu every winter because you know you’ll catch it anyway, even though there are easily obtainable preventative measures available.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I can’t afford to buy fake tan so I’m off to give myself jaundice.
I agree that the smoking model is not a perfect fit. However, IMHO, the above statements (with minor tweaking) could apply to a youngster who takes up smoking for the first time.
My motivation for introducing the smoking model was to introduce a way to view these people as other than lunatics. We all know about smoking, that it is a dangerous behaviour and that it will kill you. And we all know about smoker’s justifications. Yet we don’t think of smokers as lunatics.
Imagine the effect hearing this would have on some average tax-payer who is asked to pay for treatment for someone who deliberately contracted AIDS. If he wants to die, why should we stand in the way?
This sort of sexual Munchausen’s Syndrome exhibits a kind of deliberate stupidity that is very hard to sympathize with. If AIDS is going to be “a disease of us”, “us” had better show a lot more sense than this.
I too dismissed this as an urban legend the first time I heard about. Another example, I suppose, of how naive I can be.
Raving stupidheads for sure. That said, so long as they are peaceful and honest in their dealings by not infecting others without willful consent, they should be allowed to pursue their own happiness in their own way.
I was always puzzled by the insistence within the gay community to be resistant of the use of condoms during sex?
Years ago I was vacationing with friends, one of whom happened to have a gay brother, and she had given me a volume of short fiction by noted gay writers. In this collection were several stories concerning this practice. Where gay sexual partners choose not to inquire about HIV with potential sexual partners relying instead on the luck of the draw. I just couldn’t figure that one out. I said as much to my friend about this and thought it strange because as a heterosexual I would never engage in unsafe sex, and the risks of HIV for me were fairly slight. At that moment I had an epiphany. Homosexual contact can’t result in unintended pregnancy, which for me was my over riding concern when engaging in sex. Gays traditionally aren’t concerned with pregnancy so the introduction of the idea of “safe sex” was actually for them quite new! I think in many ways much of the resistance to wearing condoms stemmed from that reality.
I think the practice being discussed in this thread stems from the fact that homosexuality is still considered an aberration in our society. This generates negative pressure for practicing homosexuals. Furthermore this repression that gays feel, whether they are closeted or not, has a negative impact on any gay person. This repression is often acted out in other forms of negative individual behavior (motivated no doubt by socially imposed self-loathing). I’d say what we see here in individuals desiring to flirt with contracting the HIV is a prime example of this negativity.
Sexual repression is a bad thing no matter how you slice it. I also think that heterosexuals often engage in similar unhealthy practices. The spread of STD’s is a testimonial to the fact that hetero’s knowingly engage in unsafe practices with little heed to the consequences. The difference is one of magnitude, but fundamentally I see the behavior is essentially the same.
I didn’t raise the money issue, and it’s a shame to interrupt elucidator in the middle of a “bash the heartless conservatives/libertarians” rant, but consider:
Health care funds are limited. It’s bad enough that substantial spending is required to take care of people whose conditions are the result of reckless behavior, but when you start to add the cost of patients who deliberately* get sick in a manner that will result in years of expensive drug therapy and complex hospitalizations, selfishness takes on a whole new dimension.
I reserve my compassion for the diabetic on long-term dialysis, or a child needing a bone marrow transplant.
*again, not applying to people not competent due to mental illness.
Jackmanii - while I agree with the gist of your statement, shouldn’t we extend the same view to other “deliberate” invalids - drug addicts, alcoholics, smokers - who (at least in countries with a national health system) end up draining public funds through their own bodily abuse, yet are increasingly treated on a level with disabled or involuntarily sick people, despite the fact they arguably had the choice to cease and desist their abuse?
Thank you, Greg, for your thoughts - QUITE enlightening.
Texican and Shodan, I suggest you read what Greg posted - politics doesn’t enter into it.
Greg, did you find any evidence of people who were sick of practicing safe sex (i.e., the “hassle” of using condoms, wanting to feel “natural,” etc.) that either remember a time when gay men didn’t use condoms, or just hate the restrictions, figuring if they got HIV they’d never have to worry about it again? I know that’s how barebackers feel, and I know they’re different sub-cultures, but obviously there’s crossover.
Well, looks like we’ll need some kind of breakdown here, some schedule of diseases we treat with compassion, and which ones we kick you to the curb and let you rot. Get right on that, will you, guys.
STD’s have a known cause. Sex, specifically unprotected sex. Drug addiction, alcohol addiction, tobacco addiction have diseases that are manifest as a result of engaging in abuse of these substances. In all of these cases, the individual CHOOSES to engage in behavior that exposes him to the disease. You are perfectly free to make your own choices. You are not free to reach for my wallet when the consequences of your behavior result in your disease. It is called being responsible for one’s actions.
On the other hand, there are diseases like certain cancers that strike without any known reason. The person afflicted with that disease had not knowingly exposed himself to any specific risk factor. These people are deserving of compassion.
From your logic, I suppose that you think that people who lose all their money gambling should be entitled to public support. Same idea. They made a choice, lost, and now you want us to carry them along.