Back to Metroland's Home Page!
 Columns & Opinions
   The Simple Life
   Comment
   Reckonings
   Opinion
   Letters
   Poetry
 News & Features
   Newsfront
   F.Y.I.
   Features
   Profile
 Dining
   This Week's Review
   The Dining Guide
   Leftovers
 Cinema & Video
   Weekly Reviews
   Picture This
   Clips
   The Movie Schedule
 Music
   Listen Here
   Live
   Recordings
   Noteworthy
   Clubs & Concerts
 Arts
   Theater
   Dance
   Art
   Classical
   Books
   Art Murmur
 Calendar
   Night & Day
   Event Listings
 Classifieds
   View Classified Ads
   Place a Classified Ad
 Personals
   Online Personals
   Place A Print Ad
 AccuWeather
 About Metroland
   Where We Are
   Who We Are
   What We Do
   Work For Us
   Place An Ad

I went on to the Drudge Report today and read something that must be a bunch of shit 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 today and it makes gay men look awful if it’s true. Can you prove or disprove Matt Drudge’s outrageous claims? I sincerely hope that it’s not true and that Matt Drudge’s “journalist” badge is revoked!

—Can’t Trust Drudge

Sorry, CTD, but we can’t take away Drudge’s journalism badge. First, there’s no such thing as a journalism badge (good thing, too, since I probably couldn’t get one), and second, the claim that 25 percent of all new HIV infections in gay men are intentional wasn’t made by Matt Drudge. Drudge doesn’t do much actual reporting; any Drudge Report regular can tell you that his Web site is almost entirely composed of links to stories in other publications. (Where would the Washington Post Web site be without Drudge?) All Drudge is guilty of is disseminating a claim made in the February issue of Rolling Stone.

Gregory Freeman wrote the story that Drudge—who seems takes a perverse delight in pumping stories that make gay men look awful—trumpeted on his Web site. Freeman’s piece focuses on so-called “bug chasers,” HIV-negative gay men who are actively trying to get infected, and “gift givers,” HIV-positive gay men who are only too happy to infect other gay men. 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, spewing the shocking sound bite that the Drudge Report made famous: “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 that 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.”

Who to believe? On the one hand, I know from personal experience that at least 25 percent of the people who work in AIDS—how can I put this nicely?—are gutless wonders. People who work in HIV/AIDS have told me things in on-the-record interviews that they denied saying once their quotes were published and the shit 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 reporter—and 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 estimates 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 accurate—and that’s one motherfuckin’ huge if (there’s no actual data backing it up, only a disputed quote)—then that would mean there are “only” 4,200 conscious and subconscious bug chasers getting infected every year, not 10,000. What’s worse, 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 dishonestly distorts the scale of the problem.

Considering how badly Freeman botched some relatively simple and widely available stats and how Freeman sought to distort the size of the problem, Freeman’s entire piece is easily dismissed. But the damage has been done—thanks in part to Drudge—and 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 Freeman’s story has completely fallen apart, nor I do think the entire piece 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 virus—bug chasing? stupid risk taking?—gay men are getting infected at appalling rates.

And why are gay men getting infected at such alarming rates? There’s a clue in Freeman’s piece. . . .

When I read Freeman’s piece I didn’t think that the now infamous and disputed “25 percent” was the most shocking quote in it. To my mind that honor goes to Daniel Castellanos, assistant director of community education at Gay Men’s Health Crisis in New York. Castellanos, who acknowledges that the bug chasing phenomenon is real, was asked if he would 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 the 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 on the scene 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 1970s. HIV infection rates and other STDs are soaring and—who knows?—perhaps some unknown STD is gaining a toehold in urban gay scenes, just as HIV did in the ’70s. And at the same time that HIV infection rates and other STDs are rising among gay men, the education strategy in vogue at GMHC and other AIDS organizations is this: We must respect the decisions gay men make—up 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.

Perhaps it’s time for GMHC and other AIDS groups to start telling gay men the truth. Taking stupid sexual risks—even if risk turns you on—is reckless; anal sex on the first date—even with condoms—is a bad idea; giving someone HIV—even if he wants it—is immoral; being a huge fucking slut—as popular as that might make you—has physical and emotional consequences. And, finally, 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, not the link on Drudge or Freeman’s story or the ineptitude of Rolling Stone’s editors.

mail@savagelove.net


E-Mail Dan Savage
Send A Letter to Our Editor
Back Home
   
Banner #22
Banner 10000948
Banner 10000006
Banner 10000007
wine recommendations 120 x 90
 
 
 
Copyright © 2002 Lou Communications, Inc., 4 Central Ave., Albany, NY 12210. All rights reserved.