THEGAYUK

Category: Comment

  • OPINION | Why pride?

    At the moment I’m currently working to promote the third year of Warrington pride. The theme that has been selected this year is Pride. At promotional events over summer we’ve been asking people to fill out cards to say what they are proud of.

    I haven’t completed mine yet, as I’m not sure what the answer is.

    I think as a community we become a cynical old bunch. Subtle Homophobia and living in a heteronormative society means that we are outsiders. I’ve almost become numb to this fact.

    Each year we can see and attend pride events which show us the diversity across the communities. This year in Manchester Pride, my boyfriend and I were drawn into a debate as to whether or not the rubber men should be part of the parade. He felt it was not part of sexuality and was a fetish so should not be there as a part of the gay community. We disagreed because to deny any aspect of sexuality across the LGBT spectrum would force it back into the closet and place shame and guilt onto those that identify with that label. I have previously written an article on the dangers of slut-shaming and I think those lessons are prevalent here.

    I also encountered negativity within the LGBT community from people who thought that groups were not representative as a whole. Groups are there to offer peer support and help to those who need it. I don’t want or need any group to represent me or be my voice.

    I have my own.

    The bears are doing their thing and the lipstick lesbians can do their own thing. They don’t need to represent each other. The village community in Manchester is diverse and strong enough so everyone gets their own time without it feeling like they are invading each other’s space. Aside from the pride events, there are things such as the “To Russia With Love” protests earlier this year. This saw the village come together to fundraise and support the LGBT community in Russia.

    What I’m proud of is the diversity we represent. Each and every one of us came out and stood up because we refused to compromise our sense of self just to fit in.

    We didn’t want to be who people told us we should be in the “straight” world why should that change in the LGBT community. We have seen abuse, we’ve seen hatred. We’ve been the victims of cheap jokes. We’ve battled to start to gain some small measure of equality.

    But we endured and stayed together. Pride for me, is about the community. Both local and online. It’s about anyone that talks to us at a fund raising event. Even if you are straight you know someone who isn’t and that person might need support or solidarity. Pride is about being yourself and not having to compromise of your integrity or beliefs and still being able to fit into an imperfect and beautifully weird group of people like me.

    I don’t need to know what drives or inspires you. I don’t even need to know your name. I just need to accept you and hope you will accept me.

    Warrington pride is on 27th September in Queens Gardens, Warrington

    http://warringtonpride.com

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | Ice bucket challenge – enough is enough

    I’m all for giving to charity as much as the next man, but now that every major (and too many minor) celebrities are jumping on this latest bandwagon, we think maybe enough is enough.

    We hate to pour cold water on anybody’s good ideas, but think perhaps that the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge has got a little out of control. We know we are not alone on this and were so happy to watch this Broadcast on the WIN TV Channel in Australia when reporter Lincoln Humphries articulated our feelings so perfectly.

    Handsome Lincoln explains in some detail about the many ways that we can all help people in need without using up water, which is still a precious commodity in many parts of the world. He lists many ways that we can all give effectively and quietly without all the glare of publicity. We would encourage you to watch his wee piece to the very end, as we completely endorse his ideas of what we all should really be using ice cubes for.

    But just before we say goodbye to this worthy charity jape that has got out of hand, we would like to share just one more participant’s very worthy effort.

    Steve Grand the rather sensational gay singing cowboy who’s You Tube All American Boy went viral last year has just done his Ice Bucket Challenge NAKED! I mean, it would be impolite not to support him after he bared his all just for us … ooops, we mean for Charity.

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • Is HIV medication making you suicidal?

    HIV drug increases risk of suicidal ideation.

    A recent study shows an association between Efavirenz (a common anti-HIV drug) and increased risk for suicidal ideation or attempted or completed suicide. The study conducted by Mollan KR et al., and published in Ann Intern Med. 2014 confirmed the neuropsychiatric effects of Efavirenz. With increased life expectancy of people living with HIV infection – and the opportunity to study the long term effects of drugs – the emergence of drug-induced co-morbidities is concerning.

    This underscores the need for the development of longer-acting drugs or treatment modalities that limit the constant (daily) use of antiretroviral therapy. Emerging data also beg the question as to the longer-term benefits of immediate treatment of a young individual with normal CD4 T cell count and low viral load.

    Indeed, early treatment reduces inflammation and impacts the size of the viral reservoir – yet the clinical benefits are questionable.

    One argument for early treatment is epidemiological-based: “to protect the community”. But we probably can dismiss this one because with fashionable PrEP picking up steam we might all be chewing PrEP candies in the near future.

    I think more needs to be done to delay the use of antiretroviral drugs wherever possible, and more reliable measures of inflammation are needed so that we are not only guiding treatment based on CD4 cell counts and viral load but also take into account the levels of inflammation a person has. After all, inflammation (which generally is associated with CD4 T cell count) has been shown to be the best predictor of HIV disease progression and mortality.

    Dr Clovis Palmer is a graduate of the University of Sydney, Australia, and holds a PhD in plant biochemistry and molecular genetics. He conducted postdoctoral studies in immunology, liver disease and obesity at the University of New South Wales, Australia.

    Dr Palmer is a reviewer for several top-ranked international journals including Hepatology, AIDS and Antioxidants and Redox Signalling. He is the chief scientific editor for Natural Immunity-Health, Australia (www.naturalimmunity.com.au).

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • COLUMN | Growing old (dis) gracefully

    I have concluded that I am officially growing old. The use of my reading glasses is causing a massive internal struggle between resistance to ageing and the reality that they really do make a difference. Equally middle aged spread is spreading rather too rapidly and the hair on my head is getting thinner, whiter and further back and even my beard is showing signs of salt and pepper colouring. But most of all, it is the fact that I seem to be turning into my mother. Now, I do not mean that in any derogatory way at all, but, scarily, I can see so many of her ways starting to emerge in my own behaviour.

    Recently, I went to the theatre in Manchester. My first realisation of the day was standing at the kitchen sink, filling a water bottle with orange cordial to take with me, as I couldn’t see the point of paying for a bottle of pop to take into the theatre. As I glanced at my reflection in the kitchen window, I could see my face morph into my mother’s face; staring back at me and giving me a wry smile.

    On the train journey over the Pennines, there were three young girls on the table opposite who spent the majority of the journey complaining about a faux hangover (they were far too young to drink), preening themselves with make-up which was applied whilst using the back of their iPhone as an impromptu mirror and talking giddily about grown up things like how exciting the sixth-form was. The way that they were talking, anyone would think that they had invented doing A-Levels and going out and getting drunk. My days of college tuition and wondering if I looked old enough to get served at the bar seemed a very long way away. This was coupled with my ongoing old(er) person’s amazement at the progress of technology. I was actually sat on the train using my mobile phone, which is not that much bigger than a box of Swan Vesta, to send a birthday message to my friend in Australia and knew that it would be there in a matter of milliseconds. The Atari 2600 was never like this.

    Over the course of the day, there was a plethora of further realisations of my progression in life. The value of the Tupperware in the pound shop. Discussing how I would much rather stay in on a Friday night with a bottle of wine and a DVD than go out to a pub. Standing in a shop listening to thrash metal blare out over the speakers, whilst, in my head, being able to hear my mother’s voice saying in unison with mine “how on Earth can you call that noise music?”. Insisting on using the toilets in Debenhams as “at least you know they will be clean”. Baulking at the youngsters over the top / borderline pornographic displays of public affection. And finally, bemoaning the fact that that I would not have bought any of the olives from the street market, because they were in open baskets and everyone had been coughing and spluttering over them all day.

    But the final realisation came as I left the theatre; given that I had been the first person on my feet, singing and dancing awkwardly in the narrow space between the rows of seats at the finale, without recourse to what anyone who was seated behind me and viewing this disturbing spectacle actually thought. The thing was, I didn’t actually care. I used to sink into my theatre seat, wholly overcome by shame and embarrassment, when my mother used to shout “He’s behind you” at the pantomime when I was younger.

    But here I was, doing exactly what my mother would have done – dancing and clapping along like a demented loon in the theatre and I was thoroughly enjoying myself.

    As I headed to the train station, I glared at the young things heading out for their night out on the town, when all I could think about was getting on the sofa for a nap. But I happily felt comfortable and content in the knowledge that, as I entered the station and got on the train, my bottle of wine and DVD was waiting for me at home… and comfortable and content in the knowledge that I wouldn’t want to swap their evening for mine. This growing old thing isn’t so bad after all.

     

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | “Always Wear A Condom” Isn’t Enough

    It’s some thirty years since the AIDS pandemic began to decimate the gay community. Anyone who survived that time, or, like me, watched on in fear, will never forget the very simple message disseminated at the time: Always Wear A Condom.

    How is it then, with such a simple rule to follow, HIV acquisition rates, especially among young gay men, are rising, not falling? Something’s not quite connecting and this was something I wanted to address in This Book Is Gay, the first guide to sex and relationships for young, modern LGBT people.

    It’s my job, I believe, to not sugar-coat or pretty-up sex for young adults. I don’t think that’s helping. So here’s the truth no-one dares utter: Sex feels better without a condom. A contact describes sex with a condom as ‘like wearing a raincoat in the shower’ and he has a point. The new question becomes ‘is sex so much better without a condom, it’s worth gambling your health?’ Of course the answer is NO, but we can’t rule out this most basic of reasons why some gay and bi men choose to eschew condoms.

    That’s not the whole story. The post-pandemic generation was sufficiently scared into condom-compliance regardless of how much better sex might feel. I’d argue poor education is chiefly to blame, and is certainly the impetus behind This Book Is Gay. By this, I mean both school-based sex education and general health messages. Now that there are effective treatments for managing HIV perhaps emphasis has slipped as a public health issue.

    I interviewed a young man who wished to remain anonymous as part of my research. A pupil at a Catholic school, he received very little sex education at all and didn’t feel able to talk to his parents about sex. As such, with little media awareness, he truly believed AIDS was something that affected women in Africa. He tested HIV positive through unprotected sex aged nineteen.

    I don’t know if pornography is to blame, but it certainly doesn’t help. Post AIDS, nearly all gay porn depicted condom use (even if the condom does magically appear, hands-free, seconds before penetration). However, with a little time, bareback fetishism crept into pornography and you don’t have to look far at all to view condom-free porn. And let’s not even get into ‘bug chasing’ – that’s a whole other issue.

    The problem with porn is that it isn’t sex education. If sex education isn’t robust, young people will turn to the internet for advice, and porn provides only fantasy.

    So what can we do to reduce infection rates? I think while we must continue with the Always Wear A Condom mantra – as this is by far the most effective way to halt the spread of any STI and prevention is better than no-actual-cure – we need a second layer of education. Namely: Get Tested A Lot.

    Knowledge is power, and, HIV carriers are at their most infectious when they don’t know they’re carrying the virus. Once a patient is receiving medication, the viral load (the amount of HIV in their system) can be reduced to ‘undetectable’ levels. Basically, they are lot less infectious. If everyone knew their HIV status every time they had sex, I think we could reduce infection rates greatly.

    Guidelines suggest that sexually active gay and bi men (a high risk demographic) should be tested approximately every six months. I would suggest this should be a minimum. A finger-prick HIV test takes five minutes, you can do them yourself at home or at a sexual health clinic. It’s pain-free and the results are instant. When writing This Book Is Gay, the only reason I heard to not get tested was from a man who was simply terrified of the result.

    The next step is likely to be PrEP – Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis. High-risk groups in the US are now being given a truncated version of HIV treatment to prevent converting to HIV positive. It’s not a vaccine, however, and it’s only effective if taken routinely. Trials are still underway in this country, but it seems likely to be made available on a voluntary basis soon.

    It’s my hope that This Book Is Gay will help drag HIV into the 21st Century. Young people must be made aware of HIV, the risks, and taught the lessons we learned in the nineties but also how to approach HIV without fear and stigma, but knowledge and protection. As HIV campaigner Kristian Johns so eloquently said: ‘HIV is no longer a death sentence, but it’s one hell of a life sentence.’

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | Is porn the gay community’s worst enemy for monogamy?

    One of the most functional gay relationships I know is an open one. Both of them are well-educated professionals in their late twenties. They’ve been together for years. I hear one speak of the other and I can’t help but feel jealous. It’s obvious to anyone that they are so in love with each other. But I struggle to understand how they can be so in love whilst in an open relationship.

    My theory is that it all comes down to porn. We discover porn during adolescence. Be we gay or straight, every teenage boy seeks it out and finds it in some capacity. It soon becomes a daily routine. As it is a depiction of sex, it has become one of the cornerstones of the gay community. As such, it has become the enemy within.

    The problem with porn is that it is (as we all know) a fantasy. It’s not real. Clever make-up tricks, good lighting and flattering camera angles all conspire to create that which is impossible to mimic every moment of the day and night. But what we see on our laptop screens are people having sex – which is a reality.

    The struggle that so many of us seem to have with monogamy is that we expect the sexual aspect of a relationship to live up to the fantasy of porn.

    Once the novelty of our new boyfriends wear off, our minds drift to the fulfilment we could potentially receive from someone else. That someone else – he could be that little bit more aggressive. He might do that one thing your boyfriend casually mentioned in passing that he would never do. He might even have a six-pack. To me, the allure of “what could be” is why I actively chose not to pursue relationships at university – where binge drinking, casual sex and drugs were not only accepted, but also encouraged.

    Porn is so easily accessed now that it’s effects have become diluted. We seek images and videos that are more explicit. So the choice has expanded. Most porn sites now categorise their videos into subgenres. This has caused us to develop sexual profiles.

    We all have to be ‘into something’ nowadays.

    I recall back at university (a time when I actively decided I wanted to be promiscuous to the frequency of about one guy a fortnight) I met a guy in a club and he asked me back to his. He was attractive and just as drunk as I was so I agreed. We started talking flirtatiously about our preferences for a solid twenty-five minutes.

    Alas, when I said I wasn’t prepared to indulge his foot fetish, he just said: “ah, cheers anyway, mate. See ya.” I saw him a few hours later as I was leaving the club. He was sat on his own, typing voraciously on Grindr.

    Like Jordan Lohan, I couldn’t handle an open relationship. He says he doesn’t like to share, as he is an only child. I myself am the fourth of five children. Growing up, everything that was mine would eventually have to be split five ways. I feel as though I have shared enough. A boyfriend/husband would have to be for me and me alone. But in terms of taking our model of monogamy from straight people, this is something I struggle with.

    Yes, I am one of five. But my parents married when they were very young back in the 1970s and had five children between 1978 to 1990. In my twenty five years of life, I’ve only heard them argue four times and they are still happily married to this day. How could I ever possibly live up to that perfect example of monogamy?

    As a gay twenty-something man in 2014, it makes me think that the definition of monogamy does not vary by sexuality, but more our generation.

    The pure simplicity and convenience with which we can watch porn is a testament to our growing technology. But have technological advances coincided with the cultural acceptance of homosexuality at the worst possible time?

    We still face a lot of discrimination.

    But in the Western world, we are more accepted than ever before. Had this acceptance come about in the ’70s and ’80s, we may not struggle with monogamy now. In decades past, it was so much easier for gay men to have casual sex in secrecy than it was to have a relationship with the same discretion. Had we been accepted way back when, it might have given us a chance to master monogamy before the advent of porn showed us what we were supposedly missing.

    Porn is everywhere and all sexualities access it. The ease with which it can be accessed, and the frequency feed us a lie about a ‘world of options’. Why buy the cow when we can just have the milk?

    Porn has lied to us. It just created the illusion that we’re just too spoilt for choice.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | Do We Need To Redefine The Term Marriage To Accommodate Our “Monogaymy”?

    MONOGAMY VS. MONOGAYMY

    Monogamy is not a board game that you used to play at Christmas with the family. Monogamy is not a kind of wood. Monogamy is to practice being with one person only and having sex with that one person only. I know just a handful of gay couples that have a strictly monogamous relationship. Is it old-fashioned or unrealistic to believe you can find happiness in one person?

    The majority of gay couples I know enjoy three-way, utilise Grindr with separate profiles, and indulge in chem-sex parties. It just seems so empty to me. However, these couples are not constantly arguing, striving to be in a different room/postcode from one another- they are very happy. The setup obviously works for them. In fact, it works extremely well as these are the couples that have been together for the longest time, and I am talking up to 20 years.

    For me, an open relationship would not be an option. If a partner even suggested inviting someone else into the bedroom, I would walk away. In a relationship, I want to be my partner’s ultimate, the one and only. Not a supplement, or “just enough”. And I do not share (only child). But, I can’t help feel I am missing out on a big secret, or rather, not quite being able to grasp that the key to a successful long lasting relationship, maybe it being an open one.

    I am single, and for the first time properly in about 11 years. I’m loving it, but I know the novelty will wear off… Perhaps. With the last 3 years being absorbed by absolute time wasters, the next time around, I want to do it properly. Is it bad to say I’m only 28 but am TIRED of dating? I would like the next guy I am with to be the one I end up marrying. Please.

    A lot of these couples that I type of being in open relationships are in fact married / civil partners. If I didn’t understand being in an open relationship with your boyfriend then I certainly am unable to grasp the idea of carrying that through into a marriage. Isn’t the whole essence of marriage to declare your love and devotion to each other? And no one else?

    Perhaps the guidelines, vows etc. of marriage are archaic and out-dated. Marriage is, after all, an extremely traditional concept. Whilst the world, humans, technology, music etc. evolve and grow, what is to say that we cannot rewrite/adapt such things as marriage. Do we need to redefine marriage?

    Gay people have a stigma of being promiscuous with our evident open-relationships, and the club drug sex party scene… I don’t even have to explain, you know we do! With gay rights being pretty much everywhere recently in the news along with gay marriage in particular. Do you think perhaps that in some instances, it may not have been homophobia that sparked people to be against gay marriage, but more that how can we expect a global nod to gay marriage when it would appear to others that a lot of gay couples lack the understanding or are unwilling to abide by what “traditional” marriage stands for?

    Perhaps, we need to take a long hard look at traditional concepts and re-write them according to the times. Perhaps we should not. With ever-evolving guidelines, it would surely ensure abolishment of the idea of tradition altogether. If we redefine terms to match our current normality, then what was normal before this normal? Tradition cannot exist without its contradiction. The task to redefine marriage and monogamy could become complicated as each partnership is different and are likely to have their own mandate when it comes to man dates.

    We are spacious with our sexuality compared to the clearly set span of straight relationships/marriage. Someone said to me recently that straight couples fall casualty to break-ups due to the monogamous regime, and gay partnerships last longer due to the ménage a trois/quatre/cinq/six set up.

    Maybe I have fallen victim to our world encouraging us to put things into categorised boxes and in this instance, I am unable to place where I currently stand and where I want to stand on the idea of someone else being intimate with my partner. What are your views on the subject? Do we need to redefine the term marriage to accommodate our “monogaymy”?

     

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • So Why Are So Many Gay Men Opposed To PrEP?

    So why are so many gay men adamantly opposed to PrEP, the daily dose of the anti-retroviral drug Truvada, which is at least 90% effective at protecting against HIV? Indeed, according to a recent iPrEx open-label extension (iPrEx OLE), to date the largest demonstration project of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis, daily taking of Truvada could be as much as 99% effective.

    This is a question I’ve been asking myself quite a lot recently, especially after reading some negative articles in the press and one, by Joshua Vaughan here in TheGayUK a couple of weeks ago, which was actually inaccurate on several points.

    About nine months ago, the GUM clinic I regularly attend (the Working Men’s Project at St Mary’s in Paddington) offered me the chance to be part of the PROUD study, which examines the impact on gay men of using Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP), and I jumped at the chance, not only because I wanted to do my bit for the community, but because it offered me an extra level of protection against HIV, regardless of whether I was using condoms or not.

    First of all let me tackle some of the issues and downright inaccuracies in Vaughan’s article. Rather than rely on hearsay and prejudice, I spoke to Professor Sheena McCormack, the lead doctor for the PROUD study, who is also Consultant Physician at 56 Dean Street.
    It states that there has been a significant drop in HIV transmission rates between 2001 and 2012, but though this is true globally, there has been no drop in the rates amongst gay men, and there is evidence to suggest that, on the contrary, they are rising. This may have something to do with an increase in the number of gay men presenting themselves for testing, but it is worrying none the less. Vaughan also enumerates at length the terrible side effects which can accompany the taking of Truvada, but fails to mention that those that suffer these side effects constitute only a small proportion of those taking the drug. A recent large study of over 4000 HIV negative men and women in Kenya and Uganda, found that there were very few significant differences when compared to placebo, and only a minority (less than 10%) of HIV positive people taking it in combination with a third drug discontinue because of side effects due to Truvada. Anyone taking Truvada for PrEP who suffers side effects can simply stop taking it, but so far, according to Professor McCormack, only one person has stopped because of problems with the medication.
    Vaughan states “The WHO believe that medicating ALL homosexual men will provide an additional method of preventing infection. Along with condom use and regular testing. But activists have suggested that introducing government mandated antiretroviral would discourage the use of condoms, currently the best method to prevent the transmission of sexually transmitted infections. Resulting in an increase of other sexually transmitted infections such as gonorrhea, chlamydia and hepatitis in the gay community.” First of all, the WHO is not saying that all gay men should be given PrEP, but that they should be offered it, which is slightly different. Nor has any of the data surrounding possible increases in other sexually transmitted diseases been analysed yet, though the Partners PrEP study suggested no significant change in behaviour.
    Regarding the cost, I have no idea from where Vaughan plucks his figure of £10,000 per person per year, but Professor McCormack assures me this is far beyond the mark. Though it would be difficult to put an exact figure on it, because of the National Health’s buying power and their ability to get large discounts, the figure is more likely to be in the range of £5,000. Already it is being offered in the private sector for around £500 per month. He says this is a lot of money to spend on a preventable disease, but that is exactly what the medication is for, and, with a 90% (and possibly even a 99%) success rate, it actually makes it more successful than condoms.
    To quote from a United States C.D.C. study of 2013, “We are also unclear about to what extent condoms actually prevent HIV transmission in anal sex. This last fact may seem surprising, given that condoms have been recommended since the mid-1980s as the only effective HIV prevention method for gay men who have anal sex. In fact, there is only one large study in gay men, dating from 1989. In this study of 2914 gay men, HIV incidence among those who said they used condoms 100% of the time was 70% lower than in men who did not use them at all. There has been one small study in the era of antiretroviral treatment (ART), which found an efficacy of approximately 75%.”
    Vaughan states that introducing the drugs could run the risk of the virus evolving immunity to the drug, but this is in fact only likely in cases where a participant is seroconverting when they start taking the medication. It can also be a problem for HIV positive people who have a gap in their treatment, this being a particular problem in parts of Africa where people have to travel miles to get their medication and end up missing doses.
    So, given so many positives, how can offering PrEP be a bad thing, and why is there so much resistance within the gay community? Professor McCormack is mystified. “This is a good thing,” she tells me, adding that most of her colleagues that work in Sub-Saharan Africa (who are friends and mainly female and straight!) queried why WHO did not specifically mention women in the recent consolidated guidance. And indeed we ought not to ignore the needs of other communities that have been shown to benefit from PrEP, including intravenous drug users, and heterosexual men and women.
    We can bang on as much as we like about better, more targeted sex education in schools, but there is little to suggest it would have a major impact on the epidemic. It has had little effect on unwanted pregnancies, even though no-one leaves school without knowing where to go for contraception. It may be that the UK’s problems come down to an age-old embarrassment about talking about sex. In countries like the Netherlands and Scandinavia, where they have traditionally been more open and matter of fact about sex, teenage pregnancies and STD infection rates amongst young people are far lower. The problem could be more cultural than anything else.
    Coincidentally, I think that most of the resistance to PrEP boils down to shame about admitting to enjoying condom free sex. In the study on condom use cited above that figure of 70% was amongst gay men who said they used condoms 100% of the time. My italics. How many of those were actually lying, or conveniently forgetting that time when the condom broke, or they indulged in dipping, or actually didn’t use a condom at all because they were drunk or high?

    Gay sex itself has been about shame for a long time. It wasn’t that long ago that it became decriminalised here and in most Western countries, and in many countries around the world it is still against the law. After it was decriminalised, there was a brief period when gay sex was fun and the only risk it carried was the possibility of picking up an easily treatable STD. Then in the 1980s it became shameful again as we discovered it was one of the transmission routes for a deadly disease.

    Many people died because of it, and it took a lot of time, and a lot of campaigning, for gay men to take on the safer sex message. Before that time condoms were for preventing babies tout court. No gay man would ever consider using one, but, as our brothers started to die around us, we realised it was either put a rubber on it or become another statistic. Gay sex was shameful again. The advice was cut down on partners, use condoms or die. I remember for a few years I pretty much gave up sex altogether, with or without condoms.
    Then the new combination treatments came along and people began to survive, though many of those first drugs had some pretty terrible side effects. But the advances in the last 10 years or so have been immeasurable. People don’t die anymore. Nor do the new treatments have such terrible consequences. People with HIV can now live a normal life. What’s more, whereas once it was deemed better to hold off treatment as long as possible, because of the toxicity of the drugs, now it is better to get people onto therapy as soon as possible as the therapy quickly brings down their viral load to undetectable, which means they cannot pass on the virus.

    It is of course quite possible that the fact that we are no longer seeing people suffering or dying around us had made us complacent, and this could be the reason we are seeing higher rates of HIV incidence amongst gay men. I’ll admit it; I was taking the odd risk that I wouldn’t have taken even 5 years ago. It may have been a calculated risk, but it was a risk nonetheless.

    Why take the risk at all, you might ask. Well, because I don’t like condoms. For years I have been having sex and not really enjoying it because I have had to use a condom. But even on those occasions, I took a calculated risk, enjoyment was difficult because there was always a doubt at the back of my mind. We may have discussed it, but how sure were we? Could I, or the person I was with, actually unknowingly have the virus and pass it on? We may have both tested negative recently, but how sure were we? And so on.

    Two years ago I wrote an article condemning the indiscriminate practice of barebacking, but the landscape has changed completely since then. There is still much in that article I agree with, and I have not ditched the condoms altogether. I rarely f**k or get f**ked at a sex club, but if I did I would still use a condom. Though, pre-AIDS, I would never have dreamed of using condoms, I would only now go bareback with someone I had a more intimate relationship with. What PrEP does is it removes that lingering anxiety, and how liberating that is.
    I’ll give you an example. A couple of days ago I had sex with a guy I have known now for about a year, a f**k buddy rather than a relationship if you want to put a label on it (I don’t). We have always used condoms before, even though we are both sure we are negative. On this occasion we didn’t, and the knowledge that I am on PrEP allowed us to have the kind of joyful, unbridled pleasure in each other that we had both forgotten existed, in the sure knowledge that neither of us could give each other HIV.That is a liberating experience, yet the moral police out there, would prefer that we didn’t have it. After all, gay sex is shameful, isn’t it? And condom free gay sex is even more shameful.

    I am convinced that many of those that are condemning the introduction of PrEP are also under the misapprehension that those gay men testing positive are just the dirty gay guys, the ones who go to weekend sex parties and take lots of drugs, and no doubt there is an undercurrent of feeling that they deserve it. (I don’t agree, by the way). Indeed only recently, former gay soldier James Wharton (one of the good gays) recommended closing down gay saunas, with the outrageous claim that they were standing in the way of equality and were breeding grounds for drugs and HIV. Good gay guys subscribe to the hetero-norm, they meet the man of their dreams and settle down in a monogamous relationship. But it would seem that many of these good gays, the ones with boyfriends, the ones who think they are in monogamous relationships, are still testing positive. Maybe some of these good gays are not as good as they like to think they are; maybe we should all stop being so damn judgemental; and maybe we should just welcome the advances in medical science that have brought us PrEP.

    There can be little doubt that much of the debate surrounding PrEP has been couched in moral terms. Only recently Michael Weinstein, the CEO and President of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation poured considerable funds into fighting its approval and went as far as calling Truvada a “party drug”, an outrageous comment on a drug that can help prevent transmission of the virus to a wide range of people, including gay men, sex workers and HIV-negative individuals in relationships with people living with HIV. A petition has been started to have him removed from office for trying to block one of the most revolutionary developments in the history of the AIDS epidemic. To quote Eric Paul Leue, Mr Los Angeles Leather 2014, who started the petition,

    “This petition is about whether we, the people, should be allowed access to accurate information, free of stigma and discrimination. Since 1980, HIV and its prevention has been framed in moral terms, and the people carrying the virus blamed. The head of our largest AIDS service organization should know that HIV prevention is not “a party.””

    PrEP is not widely available in the UK yet, but the PROUD study, of which I am a part, could result in it being offered to gay men more widely; offered to them, not forced on them. Isn’t it always better to have choices? If I am offered the chance of an extra level of protection against HIV, why should I be judged for accepting it? My body, my choice.
    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • COLUMN | Growing up gay – my story

    Inspired by Paul Vitagliano’s book – Born This Way: Real Stories of Growing Up Gay, I’ve decided to share my own story of growing up gay.

    I’m about eight or nine in this photo, it’s Christmas and I’m striking a pose in my Power Rangers pyjamas proudly showing off my new cross puppet. I remember loving to entertain others, being full of confidence and having no inhibitions. I remember being sensitive, caring and sometimes in a world of my own. My mum describes me as a child by saying I was “such a joy to have.”

    If you had shown me this photo as a teenager I’d have cringed with embarrassment. By my teen years I’d realised that I was different to others; I became very self-conscious of what my peers thought about me and was hiding my sexuality out of fear of what they’d think, say or do. I also became extremely self-critical of seemingly everything about myself.

    Today, I look at this photo and aspire to be like that younger version of myself. I am so thankful that as a child my mum instilled me with confidence to be myself and always made me feel loved. I am still learning and developing as I experience life, but there are many goals I’ve been successful in achieving and the others I’m working towards.

    If there are any gay youth who are experiencing what I did in my teens I would encourage them to stay true to who they are, only listen to the opinions of people who truly love you – they will love you for who you are, seek out support (Google: lgbt support) and come out when you’re ready.

    I look at this photo and think: how did my family not know I was gay? The answer is that they did! I was born gay and I wouldn’t be any other way.

    Born This Way: Real Stories of Growing up Gay by Paul Vitagliano can be purchased from Amazon.

  • COMMENT | Why We Need To Lay Off James Arthur

    Scrolling through my Twitter and Facebook timelines earlier this week I kept seeing the same thing over and over again on the various LGBT-related pages I follow; hate comments aimed at James Arthur for daring to want to put right his wrongs. How dare he do such a thing!

    Last year James Arthur caused a bit of outrage among gay people when he used a homophobic slur in a rap aimed at a fellow artist. Since then his career has faltered as the nation turned against him and branded him a monster homophobe.

    Although I do not condone the use of the words “f***ing queer”, I do actually intend to stick up for James here because I do not believe him to be a homophobe. What James is actually guilty of is speaking before thinking it through.

    In my book that makes him human.

    Can anyone honestly say they have never said something hateful or nasty about someone and then regretted it or wished they had thought before speaking?

    I know I can’t.

    That’s because I’m human too. Is that such a crime?

    Stonewall’s newly appointed Chief Executive, Ruth Hunt, tweeted James Arthur to offer him an opportunity to meet some of the organisation’s youth volunteers. Arthur tweeted back to accept that opportunity.

    Whether it’s a cynical move to get his career back on track or not, it’s still a good thing. It demonstrates that the perceived homophobe can’t really be one and that he is willing to go through some form of rehabilitation to right his past wrongs.

    Maybe becoming involved with Stonewall will be a massive wake up call for him, in that he’ll begin to think before speaking and realise the damage that homophobic slurs can cause to gay people. As leader of my own LGBTQ youth support charity I’d also welcome discussion with James Arthur and extend an opportunity to meet some of the young people that the charity works with.

    Sometimes I feel that the LGBT community becomes outraged too easily. There are genuinely awful things happening around the world that we should be angrier about. It was fine to be livid with James Arthur when he made that rap containing the words “f**king queer”, but nearly a year on and with him now trying to do something positive, I think it’s time people climbed down from their soapboxes and left the guy alone.

    Some of the comments aimed at James Arthur on social media sites have been appalling and I believe that makes those people no better than him when he used that homophobic slur.

    What we should be doing is applauding James Arthur for accepting his wrongdoings and trying to make amends. Surely everyone deserves a second chance?

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | World Health Organisation Moves To Medicate All Homosexual Men

    For the first time in history, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has suggested that all men who have sex with men should take antiretroviral medication. Warning that if no action is taken, there would be a serious risk of an HIV infection rates exploding around the world.

    The WHO is the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations. As such, they are responsible for leading global health matters, shaping the research agenda and setting the standards in health trends.

    Gottfriend Hirnschall, the head of WHO’s HIV department, says that infection rates of HIV among homosexual men are on the rise again, 33 years after the epidemic hit. Further, than this, he believes that the infection doesn’t hold as much fear to a younger generation with access to drugs that enable users to live with AIDS.

    The guidelines have been published after a period of a significant drop in HIV transmission rates between 2001 and 2012.

    Antiretroviral medication is the most common used method of managing HIV/AIDS, treatment being a combination of two drugs, in one pill, taken daily for the rest of the individual’s life. There are several issues with the use of such medication, the main one being an intolerance to the drug, which can have serious side effects such as gastrointestinal tract intolerance, hypersensitivity and central nervous system adverse effects. With such severe side effects, it must be questioned why the WHO would subject them on healthy individuals unnecessarily.

    The suggested approach is known as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), meaning that even those who are not infected would be required to take the medication. With the hope that it could cut the number of new diagnoses by up to 20%.

    The WHO believe that medicating ALL homosexual men will provide an additional method of preventing infection. Along with condom use and regular testing. But activists have suggested that introducing government mandated antiretroviral would discourage the use of condoms, currently the best method to prevent the transmission of sexually transmitted infections. Resulting in an increase of other sexually transmitted infections such as gonorrhoea, chlamydia and hepatitis in the gay community.

    PrEP treatment averages at roughly £10,000 a year, per individual. This is an extremely expensive medication, especially considering that the majority of those who will be forced to take the medication will not be infected. Unfortunately, by increasing the number of people taking the drugs, with the same supply, the cost of the drug would rise. This is one of the main complaints about the proposal, as it encourages the use of a costly medicine for a preventable disease.

    The second danger of introducing this medication would be running the risk of the HIV virus evolving immunity to current drugs. Recently there has been much concern about the overuse of antibiotics and how they have become less effective as viruses evolve immunity. HIV is already a deadly disease that has been a cause of death across the globe. If it were to further evolve, current treatment would become ineffective and we would be faced with the same crises that were present in the 70s and 80s.

    Those that are most at risk of infection are gay and bisexual men, who are up to 19 times more likely to be infected with the virus than the general population, according to WHO studies. But for transgendered women, injecting drug users and female sex workers, the risk of infection can be up to 50 times higher than the general public.

    So why are the homosexual community the only ones being targeted by the WHO? By targeting the homosexual community specifically, the WHO are contributing to the stigma that HIV is a “gay disease”.

    That, in turn, creates the impression that gay sex is wrong. using HIV as a way to discriminate against homosexuals.

    In a world where homosexuality is a capital crime in five countries and punishable by imprisonment in over 70 more, the issue of stigma, discrimination and violence are still a real threat to the homosexual community. The WHO has made it clear that it does not class homosexuality as a disease, but the recent guidelines would result in homosexuals being medicated as if it were one.

    The sad truth is, that almost every other high-risk group are seeing a decrease in HIV infection rate but the homosexual community is seeing an increase since 2012. New HIV cases are being seen, mostly, in young people. This can easily be explained by the fact that gay sexual education is far more unique and complex than what is being taught or more importantly what is not being taught in schools.

    Let’s not forget that compulsory sex education is not required by UK law and back in January an amendment to introduce compulsory sex education, including information about same-sex relationships, sexual violence, consent and safe sex, was rejected by the House of Lords.

    A far cheaper alternative would be mandating by law that all young people should be taught about every form of contraception, safe sex methods and importance of regular testing. With a comprehensive sexual education, the dangers of HIV/AIDs and other STIs will be made known to the next generation. Equally as importantly, taught in such a manner, the stigma attached to HIV as the “gay” disease would hopefully be removed. Education is clearly preferable over medication.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.