I know I’m showing my ignorance about women’s biology, but please don’t hate me because you wish you had “that certain part” of my male body or you are jealous of my viral load.

But seriously, I want to first say that Gabriel’s post was beautifully written. This part was lifted from the pages of my mind, and it was an intimate experience to read it.

Since then, even as medical advances have made AIDS a chronic illness instead of a death sentence, contracting HIV has been one of my biggest fears, which goes to show that the stigma associated with it remains. I fear hearing, “you’re HIV positive” more than being told I have an inoperable brain tumor, which I know is irrational. I’ve had probably five HIV tests, and for all except the first one, the anxiety of waiting a week for lab results has made me run to the nearest rapid HIV testing site and get an answer in 20 minutes, which is also excruciating.

I grew up understanding that gay = AIDS, an equation that I realize is outdated and perhaps prejudiced. But part of me fears that being infected with HIV would confirm all the dire predictions made for me by reorientation therapists and concerned family members. I’ve often felt the pressure to defy these predictions by leading an exemplary life — which I of course haven’t, and won’t. But the point is that AIDS has been framed as the natural “consequence” of homosexuality.

That fear ended when I tested positive back about four years. First there was shock, and about a week of sitting and staring at the wall and wondering how it happened because nobody has ever…well you get the picture.

Then, and now, it is, “Whew what a relief” as the greatest fear of my life was gone. Four years later, I have never been healthier. I don’t take meds, I don’t get sick, and best of all, I don’t get those cold sores that had plagued me my entire life as far back as I can remember.

I love my viral load!

But please, don’t come lookin for me to “seed” you because I only do pre-pozzed guys.

Freaked out ? Wait ’till you read more about what AIDS isn’t.

Remember when KS was the face of AIDS ? Still think all those people dying in the 80s was HIV related?

Think again.

And despite what I DON’T believe about AIDS, I still won’t do the deed for you, mostly because I like to see…oh nevermind…this is getting too x-rated and I forgot there are womyn present.

Roughly 6% of the community is infected with HIV. That is a large enough percentage to “obsess” over. I am not much receptive of the notion that because lesbians are not a high risk group then we shouldn’t give it as much attention.

As for why homophobes obsess over male sex rather than female sex, feel free to ask them. Or, perhaps, an sociologist or cultural anthropologist or whoever it is that studies those sorts of issues. I could make guesses, but they would only be guesses.

You missed the point. My point was that homophobes obsess over gay men while ignoring lesbians or queer females. Why is this? I do not know. Instead of instantly getting offended when someone other than a homophobe points out what homophobes say, I would appreciate a thought-through answer to my question. Why do they obsess over the men? And why do pro-gay people obsess over HIV as a gay issue when it is only one segment of the community that makes itself susceptible to it?

And I think it’s the advertisers themselves assuming promiscuous gay men look at such websites. Otherwise they wouldn’t target them.

Who is making the assumption that it is mainly the promiscuous male segment of the gay community that looks at such blogs?

It is you.

The rest of us just see this as an attempt by hook-up site advertisers to reach their target market: gay men. They know that only a small percentage of the men at any of the sites they advertise on will use their services. So they have to hit every gay site they can.

Unlike straight media, we are a small community. We have far fewer means by which we speak to each other. So they cannot be as selective as hetero hook up sites.

Also, as gay sites, we have fewer advertisers seeking to pay. So there are fewer options that serious political gay sites have.

As for your recitation of the evils of gay men, we already have homophobes to do that. Your contributions towards that effort are about as welcome as are theirs.

I also feel just a wee bit ignored by the comment “all things gay and anti-gay seem to have perpetually focused on the Almighty Phallus™.”

If you mean because you are not a segment of the promiscuious gay community, my intent wasn’t to say that the gay male community is monolithic. I’m saying that it seems even those who are NOT promiscuous seem to be deathly suspicious of other gays, as if they have to assume all the other gay men are promiscuous.

I see very few serious political “straight” blogs that have bikini-clad girls advertising “hook-up” sites, but more than a few “serious” political gay sites have manhunt.net plastered on their posts. Why is it that such advertising is so hard to avoid when choosing to target a gay audience with ads? Who is making the assumption that it is mainly the promiscuous male segment of the gay community that looks at such blogs?

As for the anti-gay obsession: Well, how may times have you heard Peter LaBarbera or Matt Barber talk about “anal cancer” in lesbian women? Or about the promiscuity of lesbians? Or about disease being spread rampantly through women who have sex with other women? How many times have you heard them complain about the idea of a woman wearing a man’s clothes, or women drag kings? We hear about imaginary situations where dastardly males take advantage of trans-equality by entering the ladies room whenever they want, but never about dastardly females going into the mens room. The word “Sodomy” is used most often to refer to anal sex – gays are called Sodomites. It’s not that WSW do not engage in such acts, it’s that they associate MSM with it most of all.

The economics of for-profit online and print advertising make it difficult for straight- or gay-male oriented media to turn a profit without such ads.

However, I think you are ignoring countless non-profit LGBT sites that refrain from advertising.

I also feel just a wee bit ignored by the comment “all things gay and anti-gay seem to have perpetually focused on the Almighty Phallus™.”

Some straight and gay men are like that and some aren’t. Those that aren’t, naturally make less noise and attract less attention than those who do.

I agree that there is a visible subculture that fits your description, but I think you may be greatly overgeneralizing about a “gay male community” that does not really exist. You are describing several separate subcultures and acting as if they were one.

To add perspective, though, I would note that I grew up thinking that it was not possible for gay men to have a committed, monogamous relationship. Everything that I heard as a child reinforced that homosexuals were bad and sinful and perverts; it permeated my psyche, and influenced, for years, how I approached my interactions with men. I honestly think that I had sex (1) to punish myself (2) because I was going to hell anyway and thus it didn’t matter and (3) because, well, sex was fun. Talk about being conflicted!

In any regard, I hope and pray that the generation that is maturing now will have a much healthier sense of self. And, while they will assuredly know that hooking-up for sex is easy, it may not be the desireable outcome. If our committed relationships can be held up to the world as an example, and people can see that, yes, they are happy together(!) then perhaps the standards and expectations of the gay male will change as well and people will be less inclined to look for those easy, fun, but not fulfulling sexual encounters. Excluding, ahem, the closeted gay and bisexual married men who’ll probably troll regardless.

Great post and comments!

Someone who does such things should give him an award for all the reporting he’s done over the last 27 years.