'Bug chaser' AIDS story disputed

Washington Times ^ | 1/24/03 | Ellen Sorokin

[kattracks]

A magazine's claim that 25 percent of newly HIV-positive homosexual men sought infection with the virus for erotic reasons has set off a dispute with homosexual advocates and public-health officials.

Rolling Stone asserts that about 10,000, or 25 percent, of the 40,000 new infections recorded each year in the United States are homosexual men who deliberately seek out infected partners so they can contract AIDS.

[Stallone]

Gay lifestyles seem incompatible, in the long term, to the survival of the species.

Is it just me, or do many Liberal 'causes' seem to direct our culture to its own demise?

Pro-abortionists are alive ONLY because Mom didn't have one.

Gays are alive because Mom & Dad weren't.

Peace activists are alive because Americans went to war to defend them.

Anti-life, the Liberal agenda, is the very definition of evil.

[AntiGuv]

Dr. Marshall Forstein, the medical director of mental health and addiction services at the Boston-based Fenway Community Health system, was one of the doctors quoted in the story who agreed that the "bug chasing" phenomenon exists, and that "bug chasers" are seen regularly in his health system.

"That is entirely a fabrication," Dr. Forstein said last night. "I have seen two such cases in the last three years, and I can count on one hand how many patients like that I've seen in the last 21 years. I said this was a small phenomenon, that it's a real and significant phenomenon for a specific group of men. The real phenomenon in the gay community is that many gay men do not take safe sex seriously. That's a real problem."

The Rolling Stone article struck me as sensationalism from the very first - hardly surprising when one considers the source.. If this were a genuinely widespread pathway of HIV transmission, both the medical journals and the mainstream press would have been riddled with commentary on the subject for years now. Somehow, I just couldn't see that Rolling Stone's "investigative journalism" prowess would have been required to get such a compelling subject out...

[Iris7]

I'm murdering him in a sense, killing him slowly, and that's sort of, as sick as it sounds, exciting to me," he said.

Homosexuality in a nutshell.

[rocknotsand]

This week on FR a 'gay issue' thread has dragged on toward 400 posts as advocates of each side -for and against- trade studies, reports, polls, clinical results, blah blah, as the pro-homo advocate covers his ears and screams 'I can't hear you!" etc. It is a classic in the genre.... And then along comes Rolling Stone magazine report from the haunts and blows all 'gay cred', and 'gayness is not a pathology' agitprop to shreds. Do the gays have an image problem? Yes. Why? The obvious. And of course, because they are cursed.

[Dajjal]

A magazine's claim that 25 percent of newly HIV-positive....

Rolling Stone asserts that about 10,000, or 25 percent, of the 40,000 new infections....

From my reading of the piece via Drudge, "the magazine" "Rolling Stone" does not "claim" or "assert" any such thing. The reporter merely quotes verbatim one of his interviewees, who voices this as his opinion.

Nothing more, nothing less.

It's not a statistic put forward by Rolling Stone.

It's just one guy's opinion, faithfully reported.

[MadIvan]

The dispute appears to be the raw numbers of "bug chasers", not that they exist. Those that do exist need to be quarantined as a public health issue.

Regards, Ivan

[rocknotsand]

The thread link I forgot

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

"Is it just me, or do many Liberal 'causes' seem to direct our culture to its own demise?"

Romans 1 spells it out clearly. He surrenders them to a reprobate mind. It's like lemming who run off a cliff for the good of the species. The word 'decadence', a marxist term which means moral decay, helps to explain that attitude.

True believers are much less likely to have abortions [although a few will sin].

True believers are much less likely to sodomize [although a few will sin].

Of that 11 percent who catch AIDS who are heterosexual, I wonder what percentage were in orgies and/or participating in prostitution?

[dasboot]

Most of the scientific and lay journals stick to the nuts-and-bolts of transmission and prevention, and omit examination of the psychological motivation. I think that subject is carefully avoided because it points to homosexuality--in some cases--as one of several symptoms of self-destructive personality, rather than genetic attribute.

There is no doubt in my mind that there are many practicing homosexuals who have given over to a genetic or other ingrained penchant for the practice; there is also no doubt that it becomes an acquired taste for certain others who seek attention and sympathy by indulging in aberrant behavior. I have friends and relatives of both types: some born, some made; some finding themselves, through uncontrolled, unyielding appetite, in a place of some comfort with like-plumbed partners; and others who sacrifice dull happiness for the more piquant arousal of alcohol, drugs, ribaldry, naughtyness and self destruction...with any and all types of "sexuals".

The forensic psychology of these latter cases is compelling, but it's also politically incorrect in its predictable conclusion; upsetting for the activist promoters of innocent physical victimhood--as opposed to treatable mental derangement--to acknowledge at all.

[These activists would have us believe that all homosexuals are the product of God's intention, and deserving of our money to fix the bad consequences of all homosexual behavior. Casual, empirical observation explodes the myth of homogeneous causation.]

I see the behavior as perfectly consistent with motivation in at least some cases.

Dr. Forstein's denial of his purported statistical quote is rather weasely--it's a fine line between insouciance and suicide--and what I'd expect from someone who wants to continue practicing without people yelling at him , calling him names, and financially injuring him.

[Claire Voyant]

You made a TERRIFIC point!!! Should be said again and again....please do!!

[Claire Voyant]

Just when you thought they couldn't get any more base, and along comes "bug-chasers"!! What a cute name!

[GATOR NAVY]

Uh oh, looks like the "bug chaser" is out of the bag...and now the damage control starts as the homos realize this sort of thing makes them look like the freaks of nature they are.

[AntiGuv]

Andrew Sullivan addresses a number of relevant points while demolishing Rolling Stone's yellow journalism in the article posted at this thread: Andrew Sullivan nails Rolling Stone over HIV story.

[Cuttnhorse]

Excellent post Das.

[dasboot]

Yeah, just read it. The main thing is that Andy doesn't deny the existence of the thing, just the degree.

Now, in his circles, the "syndrome" may be almost non-existent; but I can say that I have professional contact with many of the type he says are few. In fact, they are the majority of the homosexuals I encounter: the ones who break the law. These guys are basket cases, and their homosexuality is often among the least of their problems. I'm talking guys who cut themselves, smear themselves with feces, have sex with anything...all the time, get themselves beat-up...and pay others to do it: guys who'll proudly announce they're "positive". These dudes are always involved in the 'suicidal process'. Their homosexuality is more like just another manifestation of their sociopathic minds. I don't think it's uncommon; I think that the two types don't have much of a social overlap, territorially speakin'. But that small overlap would be enough to introduce infection into a bunch that only very occasionally walks on the wild side. (And not uncommon among heterosexuals, either.....like married workin' stiffs who visit prostitutes on their birthdays. The infection rate is probably higher among homosexuals, though....mechanics of the thing.)

Andy is just defensive....and probably with good reason: he fears the barbs of those who would say that all homos are nuts. Crazy is crazy....don't matter if you like boys or girls.

And , finally, a long time ago--when I was a reprobate, horny teenager, my girlfriend went off the pill. What I remember was that the added danger got me twice as wild. The forbidden became intolerably desirable. I can, in a way, understand the increased arousal one of these "bug chasers" experiences.

[dasboot]

Yeah, Stallone: pretty keen observatorial prowess. Bump!

[AntiGuv]

...I can say that I have professional contact with many of the type he says are few...

What is the context of this acquaintance and how are these people relevant to the matter at hand? I see descriptions of generic self-destructive behavior with barely more connection to "bug chasers" than your own adolescent thrill-seeking... (And that a difference of degree, not a difference in kind). Your narrative does not succeed in making a connection beyond the most tenuous, tangential fashion. You seem to assume that describing enough outrageous behavior expressed by a certain number of homosexuals will induce a conceptual cascade whereby I'll connect this to "bug chasing" and then onward to a broadbased phenomenon of intentional HIV contraction. I'm not succeeding with that conceptual leap.

And, no, a generally reckless lifestyle (whether homosexual or heterosexual) is not "bug chasing" - whether or not one manages to contract HIV in the course of one's dissipation. So, would you mind explaining the direct relevance here? Thanks.

[AntiGuv]

Actually, lemme modify part of that. Some of the behavior you describe does amount to a difference in kind, though not that aspect by which you appear to insinuate a connection to 'bug chasers'. The only connective thread I see running through your narrative is an indifference to consequences - varying only in degree, not in kind...

[lady lawyer]

"Some may think they're going to look like these men if they become infected," Dr. Forstein said. "They'll just think, 'Well, I'll just take some pills for the rest of my life,' and they're OK with that. There's really no one reason why this happens. These are very individualized psychological states that you really can't generalize."

Maybe one reason why this happens is that they know that someone else will have to pay the enormous cost of the pills.

[dasboot]

I am the officer-in-charge of a large municipal police lockup.

I started to reply, and ended up writing a book. But having no officially recognized expertise in psychology, I decided that I'd be better-off keeping my observations and analysis to myself. Kinda sorry I threw in my two cents at all.

Let's discuss else, and say that I don't know what I'm talking about. I am truly out of my bailiwick here.

[FormerLib]

Bump!

[AntiGuv]

I'd guessed law enforcement as the probable context for your experience, but wanted to make certain and was curious to know the particular vantage point.

I'm quite genuinely intrigued to read your perspective on the matter; hopefully you saved whatever you had written. Either way, I would appreciate you either post remarks or send me a mailbox reply based on what you would have posted before. I did not intend to come across as dismissive - if that's how my response appeared - but rather to point out clearly where I thought your reply fell short of the question at hand.

If anything, I agree with much of where you seem to be going with your comments apart from the direct connection to this "bug chaser" phenomenon. I am open to persuasion in any case, but I'm interested in substance; the hotbutton rhetoric a lot of people use really doesn't have much impact on me. Truth be told, nothing shocks me anymore (revulsion, certainly, but not astonishment).

It's worth noting that I've been aware of "bug chasing" for almost a decade now. My objections relate to the magnitude & nature of the problem, certainly not to its existence per se. Most of all, I disagree with the implicit extrapolation of general insights from "bug chasers" to the homosexual population at large.

If nothing else, I have my own professional interest in the subject matter. I may very well not end up agreeing with your viewpoint, but I'm interested nonetheless. Thanks!

[dasboot]

OK, I will construct an argument, based upon my observations, that "bug chasing" is a symbolic "pregnancy" that satisfies human behavioral templates, in extra-ordinary circumstances, among some homosexuals.

However, not right now.....I'll get back...then you can take a whack at my folk-psychology. :^)

You weren't off-putting; I just have no bona fides for my opinion; and, therefor, thought to shut up was prudent.

[Richard Kimball]

The nature of the disputation of the Rolling Stone story indicates a pretty clever deception, IMHO.

Health officials and homosexual groups acknowledge that the phenomenon known as "bug chasing" is real, but insist that the assertions in Rolling Stone exaggerate the number of men who have become infected this way.
"We have no data to show how many people are participating in this phenomenon," said Jessica Frikey, a spokeswoman with the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for HIV, STD and TB Prevention. "No studies have been done to see how many 'bug chasers' there are."

Here, the statements go from admitting that the premise of the story, people are deliberately getting infected, is true, claim that the numbers used in Rolling Stone are exaggerated, then state they have done no studies to confirm or deny the numbers done in Rolling Stone.

In your statement, It's worth noting that I've been aware of "bug chasing" for almost a decade now. My objections relate to the magnitude & nature of the problem, certainly not to its existence per se. , you admit to knowing about it for over a decade, but quibble over the percentage of people doing it.

According to the CDC's own numbers, Sexual relations between men accounted for the largest share of the AIDS cases, at slightly more than 45 percent. Another 25 percent of the cases were the result of drug use, 11 percent were the result of heterosexual sex, and an additional 6 percent of cases were homosexual men who also used drugs. Hemophiliacs accounted for 0.6 percent of the cases.

These numbers indicate that over 50% of new AIDS cases are homosexual men, either through sexual contact or IV drug use. Once again, though, homosexuals are deliberately covering up actions which are killing members of their own, at least tacitly approving of the actions by remaining silent, even though they know the action is occuring. Now, they are once again circling the wagons to attack someone who wrote about a real phenomena, by selecting one area of disagreement to try and smear the entire article.

I attended a gay film festival (no I'm not and it's long story as to how I was there) during the height of the AIDS hysteria, and there was about a 45 minute film of homosexual men with AIDS talking about how they would not tell a partner they were positive because they didn't want to spoil the moment. It seems to me that if someone was deliberately trying to get infected, that after they got infected, their psychological profile would indicate they would also enjoy infecting other people (just my suspicion and not provable.) However, it brings me back to the original point. Even if you accept that homosexuals are 10% of the population (a seriously inflated number, created by Kinsey, IMHO) that would indicate that at most 5% of the population is composed of male homosexuals, who continue to make up over 50% of the new AIDS cases. However, the only solution that continues to come up is to circle the wagons and dispute by any convoluted logic possible the problems that are creating what is still, in the US, a predominately male homosexual problem. BTW, I suspect the numbers are actually higher than indicated, as CDC accepts the word of the individual as to how he got infected, and many homosexuals are still in the closet, and will claim conduct other than that by which they got infected. I won't even get into homosexual rape in prison as a method of transmission.

[Stallone]

Thanks for your kind comments, Claire Voyant.

It is becoming clearer to me that the Leftists are intensely vulnerable, and even the Bubba vote of the sheeple is at risk. But only if we learn to streetfight, instead of debate, these animals.

Most everything the Left stands for is irrational, anti-life, and unworkable. From the Gay Agenda to Terrorist Sympathizers to High Taxation to No Responsibility, the Socialists are the Evil Within, bent on destroying America.

The Right, in the past, has been too pious, prissy and polite to call these murderous thugs out. If you put them out on the streets of Harlem, intellectual but naive William F. Buckley Conservatives using Marquess of Queensbury rules would not last a single night.

Courageous Rush, Ann and Sean, and of course Free Republic, have changed the political landscape, and have the Left worried, scrambling for cover.

They are exposing their hypocrisy and lies with confontation, ridicule, derision and scorn. They are rooting out the Evil that is the Left.

Just look at how the Left seeks power at all costs!

When the peace-loving Leftists say they hope the War with Iraq goes badly for Bush, they are really saying they pray that innocent Iraqis - including children - die, and that American soldiers are killed in high numbers.

When the poor-loving Leftists say that they hope the economy tanks for Bush, they are really saying that they pray many Americans lose their jobs and otherwise endure financial hardship, and that our children, retirees, and other vulnerable and disadvantaged people suffer.

Conservatives, armed not only with the truth, but with swords, will destroy the disgraceful Socialist power-hungry thugs.

The time is now to be Crusaders - Warriors for Good - and take back our America.

If you love your life, your family, your friends, and your country, destroy the Left in the name of God.

[Timesink]

The Rolling Stone article struck me as sensationalism from the very first - hardly surprising when one considers the source.. If this were a genuinely widespread pathway of HIV transmission, both the medical journals and the mainstream press would have been riddled with commentary on the subject for years now. Somehow, I just couldn't see that Rolling Stone's "investigative journalism" prowess would have been required to get such a compelling subject out...

While I agree with you about the relevance of RS's "investigative journalism," this sort of thing has indeed been around for a number of years now. You may have heard of "barebackers," which are gay men who've gotten tired of the whole "use a condom" routine and intentionally have sex without any sort of protection whatsoever. And there are a LOT of such men out there; I just did a quick Google search and found a bareback list on Yahoo that has 10562 members! And there are personals sites for barebackers where the guys specifically check off whether or not they're a "bug chaser."

In short, the only reason this hasn't hit the mainstream media before now is because the mainstream media will not report anything that contains the slightest hint of a negative portrayal of homosexuality.

[Claire Voyant]

That needs repeating ALSO!!!

[dasboot]

What would cause a homosexual to crave HIV infection, and to become a "bug chaser"
I assume that man , as he is created or as he has evolved, acts according to strong impulses which direct him to fulfill a "template". That template, from which impulses flow, is a design consistent with propagation of the species. Man constructs a life in accord with the template, and when the construction meets the general contours of the template, he experiences "happiness".
There are many templates. The painting of a picture is a manifestation of the creative impulse which flows from a template that, when satisfied with the appropriate construction, gives conscious satisfaction to the painter.
A mating pair of warblers act in accord with impulses to build a nest, mate, and care for their offspring until they are self-sufficient. Are the birds happy? Don't know; but they follow the impulses and continue their kind.
Man is more complex, but still driven by impulse. Our impulses are, however subject to free-will, and a knowledge of good and evil.

Now it is manifest that we are driven to mate, male and female; to "cleave" with our mate; to spawn and raise offspring. The successful construction of this existence brings contentment, in accord with the template.
A homosexual can, perhaps, cleave with a mate of the same sex; but the attendant barrenness of the relationship cannot satisfy the template's requirements fully: the search is begun for a mate that can satisfy the requirements, and bring contentment.
Some homosexuals exhibit genuine female behaviors and qualities. I think that some come from the womb that way, or that these traits can be awakened and nurtured in the male: a template conscripted from the nascent, suppressed ones that universally exist in man.
The same impulses in the female, that flow from a template which requires fertilization to bring happiness, are attendant with the impulses that drive the attractive behaviors of females-- that increase the chances of acquiring a mate. I think that among the feminized homosexuals, there is this impulse to become pregnant.
Consider the relationship of children to their parents. Biologically considered, they are the result of sexual intercourse; they have a parasitic existence; they require the sire to exert himself hunting the buffalo, the mother to sacrifice her physical self for the child's benefit. They outlive the parents. Why do human couples find these parasites tolerable?
They are the life's construction that satisfies the template. They bring contentment. Bear in mind that I'm discussing satisfaction at a brain stem level.
I can see how a feminized homosexual would follow the impulse to become pregnant by constructing a situation in which he becomes "pregnant" with the HIV virus. The infection, gestation, and sacrifice required bear a strong resemblance to the requirements of the "make children" template. Of course the template cannot be satisfied by the perverse construct: rejection upon attempted fit is certain, and therefore long-term happiness is thwarted, but the impulses are satisfied in the short-term.
I can think of a similar circumstance that exists elsewhere among living things. Allow me to return to my warblers.
The warblers build a nest, have bird-sex, and lay their eggs.. Along comes a cowbird that lays its egg in the nest. The cowbird chick hatches, expels the warbler chicks from the nest. This parasite is nurtured and fed by the host parents. Cowbird has a voracious appetite, and often, I understand, the parents die from exhaustion trying to satisfy its appetite. The warblers are following their particular template; but they don't have intellect to discover that they are being used, harboring a parasite, damaging themselves and the species. The now adult cowbird, nourished by the hosts, flies off to continue its infection, leaving the parents exhausted or dead. But the birds were "happy".
From the above example, I can extrapolate that a homosexual, having acquired the female stamp, will attempt to satisfy the impulse to become pregnant by volunteering to harbor the parasite: a decision bereft of the admonitions of conscious thought; a decision that will satisfy the impulse--at the id or appetite level-- and nearly fit the feminine template he has developed, and from which flows the impulse that now controls his actions.
The idea I here present is incomplete in its presentation, unscientific, and perhaps nutty; but it makes sense to me.
You remember, in my previous post, I described the increased urge to procreate with my girlfriend when she went off birth control. I think that was because our previously barren relationship suddenly became full of the potential construction that would satisfy the impulses flowing from my male stamp, or template, that commanded fatherhood. I was overwhelmed, but serious application of consciousness over sheer appetite admonished me that the life construct resulting therefrom would not be amenable to happiness long-term. How easy it was for me to ignore the conscious level and submit to the irrepressible appetite! I think there is a parallel that can be reasonably inferred between my experience and the strange phenomenon of "bug-chasing".