Op-ed: Zachary Quinto, Check Your Privilege on HIV

There are things a lot worse than infectious viruses. I suspect that when the *equality* Ideology/era is done...it'll prove to be every bit as bad as any virus.

Mud on the evolutionary wall.

quote:

---

My father died of an AIDS-related illness. My mentors knew Spencer Cox while he was in college. My friends are on New York State's task force on AIDS. I frick activists.

---

quote:

---

Isn’t any consensual sex that isn’t for procreation, by definition, recreational sex? Even some sex that has the potential for procreation is recreational — hell, the whole reason sex feels good is because biology wants us to frick ourselves into perpetual existence.

---

that is kind of an ironic argument coming from a gay person. don't go too far down that rabbit hole, sir

the pure fear of progressives to avoid having to face actual consequence of individual decision making is just insane. that's all that this op-ed does...try to promote the narrative that engaging in risky behavior is not a factor in exposing yourself to the risk itself. the author is trying to turn this into a "them" v "us" scenario with gays v. straights, b/c it's easier to blame a self-created "privilege" than to admit that the behavior generally discuss is risky, but the behavior of that social group is simply riskier

basically, he wants to live in a world of the risk of a straight male when he is not a straight male. he's stomping his feet and whining that it isn't fair that his preference in sexual behavior is riskier, because he fears that admitting it is different means it is...well different.

i'm pro gay rights and i think the anti-gay marriage belief system is bankrupt. however, this argument is just as bankrupt. if you're a gay man, engaging in sexual behavior is risky. engaging in promiscuous and unprotected sex is VERY risky. if you're upset about this fact, then do what quinto suggests (minimize your risk by engaging in sex with partners you know to be free from HIV, which means monogamous relationships, or always use protection)

i'm bumping this b/c i believe that HIV may become the next "movement" for lib-progs once gay marriage gets taken care of

the front-runner is obviously fat people, but i think HIV makes a strong push for the "check your privilege" crowd

Very logical POV Spock.

quote:

---

Quinto's advice of "have sex with partners you know are clean" might be the least controversial thing ever said in this country as regards the gay community.

---

i do love how that statement received such smug vitriol by the author in the OP

quote:

---

Very logical POV Spock.

---

Ah frick.

Beat me to it.

I don't think the author is saying what you think he's saying. You're echoing Quinto who is saying risky sex with PrEP is risky behavior and lazy irresponsible. The author is saying:

quote:

---

Also troubling about Quinto’s interview are his troglodytic comments about pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, which has been shown to reduce HIV infection by up to 99 percent,

---

If this is true, and I have no reason to believe it is not, then sex with PrEP is safer than sex with a condom. So how is that "very risky"?

I'm not advocating either side, it's a personal choice. But your argument and his is born out of ignorance.

There is a huge problem in the young gay community because they did not grow up with friends dyeing and did not witness what we did. But a Toddy is wrong because education is key. If you're going to choose to go this route of PrEP, then education is key.

Personally I don't have experience with it and would probably use it only if I was involved with a an HIV pos person. But you calling yourself libertarian should understand choice and that's what the author is advocating. Education rather than fear.

And he makes a great pint here:

quote:

---

Somehow, Quinto has confused the responsibility it takes to speak to one’s doctor about going on a new medication, speak with insurance to secure prior authorization for PrEP, go to doctor’s visits four times a year, swallow a pill every day, call up mail-order pharmacies to get refills on time, make sure to get payments in order, successfully manage side effects, and follow up on lab work with your doctor with irresponsible behavior. Yes, so much thought around PrEP — especially it being dubbed a panacea — is incredibly lazy and irresponsible. PrEP may end up unearthing new challenges for us all, challenges that I feel that our queer communities are equipped to face.

---

(no message)

quote:

---

If this is true, and I have no reason to believe it is not, then sex with PrEP is safer than sex with a condom. So how is that "very risky"?

---

i'm not really commenting on the second part of that article about the drugs, b/c i don't know shite about them. toddy did, though

i can treat it like the "condom" issue, though. if it's effective (like or moresoe than condoms) then having sex with people on those drugs is a step forward. however, how many people are on the drugs? does engaging in promiscuous/random sex with strangers increase the chance that you're having sex with a person not on them? yes. it boils down to the same argument

quote:

---

But your argument and his is born out of ignorance.

---

taking rational steps to minimize risk is not ignorance. i do this as a hetero male (for STD and baby worries)

it's also not puritanical. it's about risk-reward.

does the introduction of those drugs lessen risk? yes, but you still have the issue of knowing if that person is on the drugs. it's like being a hetero male taking a risk that the girl you have sex with is taking her BC. i can never know, but if i know the girl and limit my partners to know them better, i know who i can trust and who i can't. random hookups increases the odds of me getting a girl preggo, b/c i dno't know them. so i don't do random hookups

it's the exact same argument for everyone. HIV is just a bigger issue for gay males (and having babies is a 0 issue for them in exchange) because (a) anal sex transmits the disease at a higher rate than PIV sex and (b) the male-gay population is starting with a higher % of infected. i'm not anti-gay sex. but male-male gay sex is a very risky behavior and that is a scientific fact. there is nothing wrong or anti-progress about stating that fact