Going back to the earliest days of this Message Board there's been a lot of discussion about "safe sex" and "danger" and other words and phrases associated with HIV/AIDS and other STDs. These are serious concerns and they rightfully need assessment for your sex life.

Things have changed over the years, of course, with new treatments, PrEP, and the increased number of HIV+ people over age 50 facing special issues with aging, comorbidities, and so on.

Keeping that in mind, I want to share with you an article that was in The Atlantic a few days ago, People Are Terrified of Sex.

For me, it illustrates some points I've believed in all of my adult life, and I should add that I'm 54 and came out just as HIV/AIDS was beginning to hit gay men. It's always been present in the background or foreground for me. Even though I am HIV-, my partner is a long-term HIV survivor who is increasingly and profoundly disabled from various conditions associated with HIV from the early 80s as well as life-long Type 1 diabetes.

Having said that, my view is that most people simply don't have a clue about actual risk assessment and risk management. I wont pontificate further, instead give you the first few paragraphs of the article.

There is so much more in this article, including quotes and assessment from the psychologist who led the study, a section about how study participants assessed other diseases - chlamydia and swine flu - and discussion of the larger issue of stigma.

It's not an overly long read and it's well worth the time. I encourage you to take a couple minutes to read the piece, pause and think about it, then come back and share your thoughts here.

~ Bob

Quote |

Indeed, the issue of unprotected (bb) vs. sex with condoms used to be one of those major points of debate on these boards in their time and day.

I find the risk comparison quoted above rather misleading, too. Whereas the numerical information showing the risk probability may be wrong, the comparison is flawed per se.

See, I have got to work, earn my income and live my life. At times, I have to fly, drive, take trains, and eat in Paris restaurants, too, which we now know can be deadly, too. Short of committing a suicide, I really have no other choice but to expose myself to a number of possibly lethal risks inherent to daily living in order to both survive and live a reasonably fulfilled and satisfying life.

Yet, I can consciously choose NOT to smoke, and thus statistically reduce the health risks associated with cigarette smoke. I can also choose to use condom, and reduce (NOT eliminate) the risk of HIV transmission, etc..

Speaking for myself alone, I consciously choose to do everything I can do within the reason to reduce the risks involved with my daily living more as a matter of personal attitude than as a result of rational and numerical analysis of the probabilities involved. I believe in doing my best and utmost within the reason, and leaving the rest that I cannot affect to their own devices.

I also fully understand that many people choose to smoke, have unprotected sex and that they are NOT keen on doing what is within their power to minimize the risks affecting their lives. I fully agree that they are independent human beings, living their own lives, and hence, having every right to call their shots as they find appropriate. Naturally, I reserve the very same right for myself.

KD

Quote |

When reading posts on this and other websites it is the "within reason" that I find so interesting because it varies so much from person to person.

You see posts from people that will still bareback with guys they just met as long as he says he has been tested....

You also see posts from guys that will not suck a cock without a condom...

It is the finding the balance between safety and still having fun -

I was in college when AIDS began being public knowledge - and it scared the hell out of me. At a time when I thought I would be fooling around non-stop I pretty much shut down except when back home with a few guys I had known for years and felt safe with.

You have to remember when AIDS first hit the news it was "gay sex causes AIDS" - at first they did not even talk about condoms or anal sex - it was just gay sex that was the culprit.

I missed out on a lot of fun - and it probably helped cement the closet door shut for me - but basically I considered no risk to be "within reason".

These days I am more relaxed but still cautious.

But I see posts from some younger people that are gay and out - but yet have never had sex at all -and I worry for them about their threshold of "within reason" and all they are missing out on.

In this world we live in today there is risk in everything - it is balancing the risk with having a life that is such a challenge.

Quote |

The other wording for doing precisely what you described above is 'doing the things within the reason', isn't it?

Sure, we are all different people, and hence, define 'reasonable' in vastly disparate ways. So, the wording, i.e. usage tends to fall an easy victim to the relativistic nature of such definitions.

IMHO, this is where one's personal integrity enters the stage.

See, I have a few rental properties here that I am renting to the tenants. Would I rent to someone just because he promises that he would be paying rent on time? Nope. I would want all the background checks, security deposits, contracts, etc. I would want a degree of security because I honestly intend to protect my investment here. Yet, we are talking about something that is replaceable, and really does not have any major impact on the quality of my life.

Now, I am going to turn around and have BB sex with someone who says that he is 'clean'. I mean, he promises to be 'clean', rite?

Nope. My own sense of integrity tells me where the usual 'pragmatic' approach does not really work. I cannot be possibly trusting one guy with my life in exchange for his word, and sending another dude on a mile long footwork over a relatively minor issue, can I?

Living by your own word, and being honest to yourself about the nature of your actions is not only laudable because it serves the others. It serves the subject first and foremost.

So, speaking for myself, I have little problems in establishing what I see as being 'within the reason'. I am happy to share my thoughts with those who would like to hear my argumentation, too.

Naturally, every dude out there is free to call his shots as he finds fit. Should he be facing the possibly dire consequences of his decisions, well, we will all tell him that this comes with the territory.

KD

Quote |

Speaking only for me, these days I have so little free time. Either I'm working as a caregiver or working on work or working with our pets and household needs. I'm preoccupied and (not to whine, I'm grateful for many things) I don't have the energy, emotion, or time to play anymore, not sexually or otherwise.

From the beginning of being sexually active years ago I always assumed any guy I was with had a good chance of being positive, regardless of what they said or didn't say. This is still true, and the men I'm most attracted to are close to my age. Many are long-term HIV survivors. Although I'm HIV-, many men that I know or would be likely to meet make the same assumption I do. It often goes unsaid, each of us having made it this far knowing we are responsible for our own choices.

If my personal circumstances were different, I would ask my doctor to prescribe Truvada for me and then I'd go out and play. For me, today at least, that's unneeded. PrEP gives us new risk management options. For me, that would be a good choice. I take my meds - even the osteoporosis one! - and do what I know I must do.

Clearly people with different life circumstances may have different habits, make different choices, or fail to follow through on the choices they intend.

I don't tell people what to do, simply urge them to educate themselves and decide, with honesty and self-assessment, to make choices that will work for them and be respectful and thoughtful toward others. I also know that each of us must be prepared for the possibility that the other guy or guys don't do this, or that their actions - chosen or by circumstance - aren't the same as mine.

All for now. I write too much, must move on to other things.

~ Bob

Quote |

This is where Bob and I behaved in precisely the same manner, without necessarily starting from the very same premise.

Unlike Bob, in those days, I used to believe that many/most(?) of the guys I was meeting for sex among the members of my college coterie were actually HIV negative guys. A few of them used to be virgins to anything sexual when I met them, and a few others hardly had any experience worth mentioning. Well, as we all know, of all the problems in this world, virginity and the lack of sexual experience are probably the easiest and by far, the most pleasant ones to solve.

But there was a nasty outbreak of Hepatitis C out there, AND I had made a very conscious decision to have sex with condoms ONLY. It was one of those things, that I refused to think/debate about. Condoms have been a non-negotiable for me in all these years.

Again, I can only speak for myself, and am very much aware of the fact that other guys may have made a very different experience. But I have never had any problems using condoms, and practically all of the guys I have been having sex with agreed to the condom use without anything ado. You fucked with condom and lube. Full stop. And you moved on without spending any time thinking about what really happened last night. That peace of mind has always been priceless in my books. And still is, to this day.

I always saw m2m sex as pure, recreational fun.

Two guys mess around, get their rocks off, and move on. If the experience was worth repeating, they'll probably do so. The sun rises in the east, we go to work/school, and still have to pay our bills, put food on the kitchen table, etc.

Call me spoiled, or whatever, but the very idea that the m2m sex should have ANY consequences for the players involved just does not sit well with me. So, I fucked the dude. (Wow!) Now, I have got to go, make doc appointments, take batteries of tests, start taking meds, pay the bills associated with all of the above? Definitely not my cupper... But I fully understand and accept the fact that other guys may hold a vastly different opinion here.

KD

Quote |

Truly a different context: I came out in my final year of college and didn't have a group of friends like that. The time of exploring and becoming more adventurous for me was when I moved to DC, right as the HIV/ADS was beginning to reach high public awareness.

DC was a hot spot both gay men and for HIV/AIDS. I knew the first man to publicly identify himself in DC as being a PWA and to be interviewed by the Washington Post. I didn't know him well but I became a better friend with his lover, who later also died.

As an introvert just beginning to come out of my shell as a person, not just as being gay, I had very few truly close friends. So many of my (what should I call them?) friendly acquaintances and and sex partners did indeed have HIV. There were funerals, quilt panels, demonstrations, and more.

Eventually I had a boyfriend of many years who was a hospice volunteer. He taught me a lot. The whole thing, the sheer sense of mortality, permeated one's consciousness and life.

I must go, running late again, and the dogs are demanding breakfast. Just as well.

~ Bob

Quote |

Whatever the context, background, etc., the HIV outbreak was a very major game changer for all of us. I doubt that anyone would want to seriously deny this.

On a more mundane side, being a member of a closely knit coterie of college dudes and few working guys belonging to the same peer group really meant not just lots of sex with the guys you knew, (or well, sorta knew) but also a lot of unplanned, spontaneous sexcapades. We are talking here about the pre-cell phone age, too...

With dudes acutely lacking both knowledge and experience in specific matters of hygiene, AND with life being a bit less organized, and a bit more spontaneous, too, accidents of less savory nature were bound to happen.

No one really used to panic or even comment much about those. Everyone pretty much understood that such 'accidents', well, came with the territory. By this very same token, most guys actually agreed that the condoms came in very handy...

No doubt that everybody started using the condoms first and foremost because of the Big Bug as it used to be called. But as it is so often the case in life, other, frequently very mundane aspects of life entered into the equation, too, cementing the only hitherto known survival strategy.

Looking back to this time and age, I believe that it really was the time when we all learned to dance like kites on the rim of a volcano...

KD

Quote |

It really changed everything - before the general public became aware of AIDS I remember a buddy of mine talking about how sex with another guy was safer - no chance of getting pregnant.

As the disease and knowledge of it grew people were talking about how "gay sex can kill you" - and a few guys I knew who were "casual bi" - in other words way more into girls but in the right mood with some beer.... well they just stopped fooling around at all. The idea that no one would ever know - what could go wrong - the one time "oh what the hell" that happened as kids was over.

For myself it scared me deeper into the closet and made masturbation look like it was going to be my way of life.....

Quote |

You hit the nail on the head reminding us all that at the time and age, the idea of having sex with women, attractive as this may have been to the str8 guys, was seen by many men as a possible or even probable trap with very far-reaching consequences. A dude thought he was using her for sex, and she thought of using him as a convenient source of income.

Men were neither going to say anything to anyone nor were they going to be asking for anything afterwards. It was simply a mutual sex release, occasionally mixed up with some light emotions adding a bit to the pleasures of our encounters. The NSA really reached its full meaning in those days...

Surprisingly, very few of my buddies really stopped, once the news reached us that, well, 'gay sex could kill you'. By that time we must have had so much of it already that we reasoned: if it was meant to kill us, we would be all 6 feet down and under...

Yet, the nastiness of the Hep C mixed with the previously mentioned practicalities made us all use condoms all the time. Sure, the exceptions must have happened but those must have been far and few between.

In practical terms, our inner coterie rarely exceeded 2 dozens of actively playing guys. The outer interference was relatively minimal, and basically the pool stayed largely protected by the very idiosyncrasies that we very much disliked in our time and day.

Sadly, couple of guys did catch the bug once we all graduated, and our closed coterie became a matter of the past.

Most of us knew that what held us so tightly together were actually our specific college-life related circumstances. We were all there doing the same thing, and a few of us enjoyed sharing some intimacy among ourselves. Convenience is often overlooked as being a powerful motive of human behavior.

KD

Quote |

That was one of the great things - there was no expectation of love or romance or staying together forever -

Early on it was just a physical release - we were friends - we were horny - we needed to cum. As I got a bit older with some there was a degree of, as you say, "light emotions" - we cared about each other - but it was still not the passion that was expected with heterosexual sex.





With me it was not so much my buddies stopping - it was more my being afraid to expand my number of sex partners. AIDS was all over the news when I was in college - giving some of the stigma back to gay sex that had faded a bit in the 70's.

So every time I was in a situation where it could have happened I had to wrestle with my own internal issues as a guy in the closet and then add to that "and what if he has...." - it made masturbation and waiting till I was home on vacation with my buddies seem like a much safer route. So there were a lot of opportunities I missed that in the pre-HIV days I think I would have gone for....

Quote |

Sex was passionate, though. The feelings afterwards however, never went anywhere close by. The bottom dudes got their act together very soon. They were showing passion and emotion during the actual intercourse. The tops matched this fully, as a rule. In other words, everyone was putting as much energy and enthusiasm and knowledge/skill as he had at the time to make sure that the actual sexual experience was as good as possible. A bottom friend of mine used to say, 'since I am getting fucked anyway, we all may have some real fun along the way, too...'

Once the sexual bit ended, and we returned out of the zone, the guys you messed around with were sure, still your friends, but no further expectations of any kind were raised on anyone's part.

Naturally, once the freshman year ended, a few of the guys figured out that some of their buddies were real keepers, and that the others, well, not necessarily so.

So, the dudes who kinda became 'regulars' started hanging out amongst themselves a bit more, and the already existing bonds of friendship grew a bit stronger. Hardly anyone really spoke about being in love of any kind, but a good top guy made sure that his favorite bottom dude got reasonable support if needed.

The tops, too, tended to group together, and made sure that if one of your friends needed a hand here and there; he got the support needed, too.

There was quite some bonding, quite a few seemingly great friendships, but hardly anyone tried to emulate any heteronormative emotional life associated with the heterosexual intimacy.

This is where the practicalities of life interferred. In a pre-internet and pre-apps age, the best (not the only) way of meeting the 'new' guys used to be through the network of your buddies and friends - basically through your coterie.

Add to this equation the fact that being caught was really not an option. The necessary planning forced you to call your shots ahead of time.

So, Michael asked me if I was up to meeting a new bttm dude he had messed around with. Like every horny top, you'd say, 'yeah, sure.'

Michael went on to organize a meet up over coffees or something at one of the public places. Both the 'new guy' and I had the chance to opt out if we did not like each other... But that used to be the case very rarely. The default was that the 'new dude' already had that afternoon free, and I also made sure that my downtown flat was available. So, both he and you shrugged down with your shoulders, thought WTF, and went on with the business at hand

KD

Quote |

I think for those of us who came out as being gay in the 70s and 80s and who were open - whether in the gay community only or to families, the workplace, or the public or whatever - the experience was a bit different.

If you lived in or had access to a "gayborhood," whether the Castro, Christopher Street/etc, Dupont Circle, and so on, you could walk down the street or into and out of stores knowing you were seen as gay and that you saw gay men around you. You could pick up a guy in the supermarket, on a train, on a bus, or just standing or sitting somewhere.

For many of us, there was an expectation of forming relationships and having lovers, later called "longtime companions" in all those many obituaries, later partners, now sometimes husbands. Some had serial lovers or partners, some had a primary partner and also played around casually. There were some who said they were "monogamous" (monoandrous?) but I suspect that was as factual and malleable as the monogamous status of straight married couples. And of course, there were "it's complicated" situations (a guy had a lover but was also a "Daddy" to a couple "boys" and played around together or separately..) and some simply wanted to be single and unattached.

That was where I arrived after coming out in college and moving to DC after graduation. It seems like a different mindset and social context than KD's and John's. In my early years I was usually looking for a lover and some emotional bond more than just sex. Later I realized I was happier alone. When I temporarily moved to a northeastern suburb, I told people, "I'm no longer looking for Prince Charming, I'm looking for Prince George's!" For a year and a half I lived in an apartment in suburban Prince George's County, Md. Eventually I did have an "it's complicated" partner, not the one I'm with now but still a dear close friend decades later.

I could go on and on, but the main thing is that for guys like me being "caught" or "outed" simply wasn't a concern. Everybody who needed to know, knew. Some people who didn't need to know also knew.

It was like in the office where we talked about our weekends. A woman would say, "Dan and I took the kids to Busch Gardens." I would say, "Paul and I went to Fairfax to see the Martha Graham Dance Company." This was just normal life.

Quote |

Indeed, we are talking about very different personal experiences altogether.

Living in a culturally speaking 'eastern mediterranean' society during my college years really meant that very, very few people were openly out. There were no gayborhoods, and everybody including most of my buddies and yours truly thought that no one would really want to be gay, live in a gayborhood, least of all, publicly admit that he was having sex with other men.

By far, most of my college buddies depended for their survival on their parents who were most certainly going to be very much against anyone being openly gay; as would be all your friends - not that the concept carried much weight in those days. Being gay, caught, outed etc., simply was NOT an option.

On the upside, we were definitely having a ball, the society around us knowingly turning a blind eye on our underground activities, and even being supportive of the idea that a college guy was naturally going to be hanging out with other college guys. If a dude was 'too much' into hanging out with girls, well, that was seen as pretty unmanly.

In retrospect, I have very little doubt that our fathers, brothers, uncles, etc., all must have known what was really going on. They must have gone through a set of similar arrangements in their time and day, too. The generations before them shared in the experience, too. Hence, the true nature of our close friendships was certainly no secret to anyone with some basic life experience but the society as a whole decided that raising the subject to any level of public discourse was really both entirely unnecessary and fully uncalled for.

--

I cannot think of any of my buddies in those days who really did not like the guys he was having sex with, at least to some extent. We belonged to a closely knit coterie of friends, and you made sure that your really kept meeting up with and having sex with the dudes whom you thought both attractive and friendly enough.

A few months into the process, human nature took its course. I was having coffees and chatting with at least two dozens of guys whom 'I knew', meaning I had sex with or at least a very close buddy of mine had sex with. Naturally, I found some of the guys far more attractive and interesting than the others, and was working towards landing those who I was really interested in. No doubt, the others followed the same tactics, too.

Soon enough, the coterie started to function as a social platform, but 'everybody within' knew that I was meeting for sex, say 3-4 bottom boys on a regular basis. No one talked any exclusivity here but those dudes and I clicked together, and the chemistry worked for us, too. No doubt, both they and I strayed away sometimes or even pretty often which was deemed perfectly natural if rather immaterial. Other top dudes played around with maybe only 1-2 bttm guys, some got stuck with 1 bttm dude only, but the pattern was there.

Sure, what kept us all together was the underground, secret nature of our arrangements, and the idea that we all benefited majorly by keeping in touch. This is how you got to meet the 'newcomers', have some fun on the side, and compensate for the fact that sooner or later one of your regulars would drop off, graduate, move away or even find a new, possibly more suited 'partner'.

The coterie typically concerned itself with three basic issues only:

First off, the dude was one of us. He had sex with one of our guys.

Second off, he was either a top or a bottom. (Few people took versatility seriously those days.)

Third off, for all we knew, he fitted the pattern. He belonged to our peer group, and was at least superficially not seen as a source of trouble. (He was not a heavy drug uses, petty criminal, etc.)

The coterie did not share all the information among its members. People have been having secrets since the dawn of times.

Say, one of my bttm dudes was also meeting a sugar daddy totally out of the coterie for some fun and benefits on the side. This stayed buried six feet deep between the two of us. Additional income, presents, clothes, etc., were always welcome. And you would not judge the dude. A guy has got to do what a guy has got to do.

Another good example of a 'deep secret' used to be that a certain top dude wanted/agreed to bottom for a very specific top dude.

On a purely social level, tops tended to communicate among themselves, hoping to exchange pertinent information about the available bottom guys, first and foremost. Bottom dudes did the same. This, too, was deemed as perfectly natural.

An archetypical situation occurred if the two tops organized a threesome, and less frequently a foursome. Once the play was over, the guys parted. If you knew how to read the signals right, you would know that your top buddy may be returning for some more 1:1 fun with you, once the designated bttm dude was seen driving away in public bus, taxi or a tram.

Neither my 'oh-not-so-exclusively-top' buddy nor I would ever mention the little remission to anyone. But once the first 'remission' occurred, you would expect him to be repeating the pattern, and possibly stopping by at your place alone at all the ungodly hours, hoping not to be seen by anyone for some top-to-top fun on the side. If a dude was sighted approaching your place, everybody agreed that he must have been too drunk to go home, and crushed in at your place until the morning.

---
Once I post-graduated, the game was largely over. I moved into a major European capital for business, and shortly thereafter transferred to San Francisco, CA. I slipped into the new 'public gay world' without much ado. And life actually got even better.

KD

Quote |

Although I grew up in a North Eastern USA small city my experience was much like KD rather than infopop...

There was not a "gayborhood" and really no one was "out".

For the most part everyone acted as if it was "temporary" and they expected when they got older to get married and settle down.

Being openly gay was left for the "fruits and nuts" in California.

Gay sex was something we did - it was not considered who we were. Even in college I do not remember there being anything like a "gay / straight alliance", and if there had been I would not have had the courage to join it, but now you find clubs and organizations like that even in Junior High schools!

Basically we just lived our lives like everyone else acting just like the rest of the gang - except after everyone else had left when alone we would have sex. There was a degree of emotion involved but nothing overwhelming and certainly nothing public.






Very much the case with us - it was truly "don't ask / don't tell". Families had "bachelor uncles" that never got married, "Bob's" brother and his roommate shared an apartment, even though it only had one bedroom. But it was not talked about.

What was frustrating about no one being open or talking about it was when you would find out someone was into it years later. A guy I always thought was cute as hell in high school ended up getting caught and outed in college - and all I could think of was "If only I had known back then he was into guys!"

Quote |