Skip to comments.
THE "BUG-CHASERS" -- is there any hard evidence at all to support the 25% claim?
The Daily Dish (AScom) ^
| 1/19/03
| Andrew Sullivan
Posted on 01/22/2003 10:12:37 AM PST by xm177e2
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
Is there any hard evidence at all to support this sensationalistic claim? I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
1
posted on
01/22/2003 10:12:37 AM PST
by
xm177e2
To: All
2
posted on
01/22/2003 10:15:43 AM PST
by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: xm177e2
My thoughts exactley when I read this piece on Drudge. What a nice round percentage. Seems designed to boost readership and cause a controversy. There is definetley a gay subculture out there that is practicing this sick pursuit (as some freepers on other threads researched) but 25%? That just seems outlandish.
3
posted on
01/22/2003 10:19:59 AM PST
by
Burkeman1
To: xm177e2
When the Apollo 11 astronauts returned from the Moon, we put them in quarantine for a month or so, just in case they brought back from the surface of the Moon some hitherto unknown and incurable bacterial or viral organisms.
When I ponder upon the history of AIDS in this country and the world I always remember that cautionary quarantine. Had those three men brought back some disease of the magnitude of HIV, what would we have done with them? Gassed them, then incinerated the quarantine trailer? I wonder.
AIDS has been a tragedy of biblical proportion. It is also a public health issue that has been, from the start, horribly mis-managed. It seems that it still is.
4
posted on
01/22/2003 10:31:18 AM PST
by
elbucko
(Guilty of "Thought Crimes".)
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
To: elbucko
Mis-managed is one way to describe public health policy on Aids in this country. Criminal negligence is another.
6
posted on
01/22/2003 10:40:53 AM PST
by
Burkeman1
To: xm177e2
To: xm177e2
"With about 40,000 new infections in the United States per year, according to government reports, that would mean 10,000 each year are attributable to that more liberal definition of bug chasing."Who said this? You? Or are you claiming that Dr. Cabaj extrapolated 10,000 out of 40,000? Please provide your cite.
Dr. Cabaj estimated twenty-five percent of all newly infected gay men, not twenty-five percent of all new infections.
To: xm177e2
I don't know how many of them really WANT to get AIDS. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist these days to understand that every homosexual act of buggery with a stranger subjects you to considerable risks, and even if you are wearing a condom the risks are still very considerable. And since very few homosexual couples are faithful, you are also taking a risk with a known partner.
Condoms are thought to have a failure rate of about 15-25% protecting against the HIV virus.
However you like to characterize it, this kind of behavior still resembles Russian Roulette. It's not clear why the taxpayers should have to subsidize this behavior.
9
posted on
01/22/2003 11:01:04 AM PST
by
Cicero
To: xm177e2
18 months ago, a very "out" journalist from the San Francisco Chronical wrote an exhaustive article about this. He, too, introduced readers to these new terms. He had another:
"Russian Roulette Party".
Apparently, party attendees pay entrance to such parties at private Bay Area homes. Two rules prevail; no condoms, and no talk whatsoever of HIV status. The catch?
Only the hosts of the party know for sure what person or persons at the party have THE BUG.
How many such people are present? I don't know that, but I guess it varies. I got the feeling that at most parties your odds of getting staying healthy afterwards are pretty good for a 1-time visit, assuming you have only a couple partners.
Look in the SF Chronicle about 18 months ago or so. The article was listed here at FR around that time, and drew many, many hits.
10
posted on
01/22/2003 11:18:28 AM PST
by
gaijin
To: gaijin
I forgot to add that people who go to such parties do so because they claim it adds to eroticism.
I'm not really an expert on this issue, but I'd wager that what we're dealing with here is an ironic side-effect of acceptance of homosexuality.
Eroticism, you see, comes from transgressing some kind of taboo.
In the old days before reliable contraception, sex outside of wedlock was quite a bit more erotic than the sex of this very same type prevalent these days. The reason is that part of the thrill was the awareness that you could be creating a new, unwanted life- obviously something heavily laden with implications for both parties.
But with the arrival of The Pill, part of the air fizzled out of the tire. Today, yes, you have people hooking up on a much more frequent basis, but I'd wager it's not as exciting.
Same thing with gay sex: in the stuffy old days when guys ran some risk of getting cracked upside the head with a police trucheon for persuing their natural inclinations, such assignations realllllly got these guys' pulses racing --it must have been realllllllllly hot stuff.
Times have changed: you've got gay marches that take over cities. You've got mainstream TV programs with gay characters. You've got straight people required at at some schools' orientation programs to introduce themselves as, "My name is Mike, and I AM GAY" --especially if they AREN'T, just to break down perceptions and barriers.
My point?
Much of the taboo against homos has gone up in smoke, and with that, much of the eroticism that gay people crave.
-->SO FACED WIT TOLERANCE, BUG CHASING IS WHAT SOME DO TO RECAPTURE EROTICISM.<--
I have some really strange-sounding advice for these guys: Go to Tehran, and your PULSE WILL RACE ON!
11
posted on
01/22/2003 11:33:44 AM PST
by
gaijin
While this is incredibly stupid behavior (risking a deadly disease to enhance 'eroticism'), I would wager that the actual number of gays who intentionally court HIV is about the same as the number of straights who intentionally court hepatitis by engaging in 'scat' or 'watersports'. I.E. a very SMALL percentage. Still, I'm sure it won't stop 'people' tarring all homosexuals with the same brush.
To: robertpaulsen
Who said this? You?The link at the top of this page clearly goes back to Andrew Sullivan's web site. I am not Andrew Sullivan, so no, I did not say any of this. If you read what was posted, you would have noticed this "The piece is not online, but the precis reads like Stephen Glass". That's clearly where the quote is from. Sullivan hasn't linked to it because it isn't online, or at least, he doesn't know where it appears online.
13
posted on
01/22/2003 1:53:57 PM PST
by
xm177e2
(you aren't really reading this, you just think you are)
To: RockandRollResurrection; gaijin
...I would wager... I disagree. A "normal" homosexual would find satisfaction with someone who was "clean". gaijin's point is that flirting with death is PART of the erotisicm of bug chasing.
I understand your point to be that hepatitis is a risk when engaging in watersports etc. There IS a risk. However, those engaging in these activities are seeking the thrill of that specific experience. That they could become infected probably never crosses their mind.
14
posted on
01/22/2003 2:23:47 PM PST
by
jonno
To: jonno
There's probably two groups who go about it; thrill-seekers who like free-climbers crave the idea of cheating death, and a second, larger group -- those who feel left out amidst a growing social emphasis on belonging to a "grievance elite".
A very huge part of Bay Area culture revolves around AIDS issues, and after a while of "just" being gay, it probably is a little off-putting to sit on the sidelines.
Just speculating...
15
posted on
01/22/2003 2:58:14 PM PST
by
gaijin
To: elbucko
If this had been a disease that primarily affected hunters, nascar drivers, or conservative talk show hosts etc. etc.; their would have been cry from the liberal media, holywood crowd and democrats that they be quarantined for the good of the masses. Why haven't we heard not a hint of quarantine about this highly contagious and deadly disease? As for these nuts (bug-chasers) I say it sounds like a good thing for you to do. It's too bad the tax payers will have to pay for it though.
By the way Shawn Hannity had the author of the article on his show today.
16
posted on
01/22/2003 2:59:34 PM PST
by
my right
To: jonno
Please excuse my ignorance, but what are "watersports?"
To: Bennett46
what are "watersports?" you would have been happier not knowing. I believe another term for it is yellow discipline.
18
posted on
01/22/2003 7:34:25 PM PST
by
jz638
To: xm177e2
So that's why the Brits called it "buggery."
19
posted on
01/22/2003 7:44:32 PM PST
by
keats5
To: xm177e2
The Bugaloos
The Bugaloos
We're in the air and everywhere
Flyin' high
Flyin' loose
Flyin' free as a summer breeze
The Bugaloos
The Bugaloos
We're climbing high and diving low
Through the sky
Across the land
Straight to you with a helping hand
Ready with a helping hand
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson