Slog
News & ArtsMonday, July 13, 2009
Savage Love Savage Love Letter of the Day
Posted by Dan Savage on Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:38 PM
I feel really shitty about a recent hook-up. I met this guy online who agreed to give me head. It was seriously the most amazing blow job I have EVER had. It lasted 1.5 hours and I was in heaven. When things were all over and I was getting ready to head out he mentioned to me that he was HIV-positive. I am neg and I've been tested recently, but the fact that he is pos has got me totally freaked out. Do I have something to worry about in your opinion??Terrified in Toronto
Officially? Yes. In reality? No. You should more worried about syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia, frankly, as well as your apparent willingness to regard ignorance as bliss where the HIV-status of an online hook-up is concerned. When it comes to the world's biggest bathhouse—otherwise known as the web—you should assume that all of your instant and anonymous hook-ups are positive and make your choices accordingly.
Go get tested, etc.
1
TIT,
Get yourself tested and invest in condoms. Repeat after me, "It has to be wrapped before it can be tapped." TIT, God gave you a brain so use it. I'm praying your fine, don't make this mistake again, ever.
Sorry, to go maternal on you.
Get yourself tested and invest in condoms. Repeat after me, "It has to be wrapped before it can be tapped." TIT, God gave you a brain so use it. I'm praying your fine, don't make this mistake again, ever.
Sorry, to go maternal on you.
4
Kim, that's a catchy slogan, but I disagree. The last time I checked, there were virtually no confirmed cases of transmission of HIV via oral sex. The chances of getting it that way are like getting struck by a meteorite. It's better to focus on the risks that really matter.
5
@1 - um, dental dams.
How do you know it's a guy, sexist?
@3 for the real world win that all the health officials like to pretend doesn't exist.
How do you know it's a guy, sexist?
@3 for the real world win that all the health officials like to pretend doesn't exist.
7
4:
The catchy slogan should be applied for oral, anal and vaginal. Where there is tapping there should be wrapping, until people are in committed long term relationships where they can prove through repeated testing that they are clean. A year at minimum, that's just my $0.02 and your welcome to disagree.
The catchy slogan should be applied for oral, anal and vaginal. Where there is tapping there should be wrapping, until people are in committed long term relationships where they can prove through repeated testing that they are clean. A year at minimum, that's just my $0.02 and your welcome to disagree.
9
@ 5:
I wasn't trying to be sexist. I was looking at the words used in the letter. The women I know, myself included, give blowjobs and receive cunnilingus. I'll admit I'm not a Canadian Nationalist as you are, so perhaps I presumed incorrectly.
I wasn't trying to be sexist. I was looking at the words used in the letter. The women I know, myself included, give blowjobs and receive cunnilingus. I'll admit I'm not a Canadian Nationalist as you are, so perhaps I presumed incorrectly.
10
the gay panic defense is obviously bullshit. but what about the HIV panic? if this guy goes around and does this for fun, someone will eventually bludgeon him to death.
12
@4 unfortunately there really is no safe sex with strangers. If you don't know this person, they disclose that they have HIV only AFTER performing a sex act on you ... kind of makes you wonder what other STDs they could be hiding, I am not saying that they definitely are hiding any just because they have HIV or anything, I am saying that ANY stranger could have ANY STD, even ones that can be passed from mouth to genitals and not tell you.
So the smartest way to keep yourself clean as possible is to protect yourself, always. The best person to keep you safe and clean is YOU. Don't expect perfect strangers that you met on the internet to disclose everything up front. Some people are selfish and horny.
So the smartest way to keep yourself clean as possible is to protect yourself, always. The best person to keep you safe and clean is YOU. Don't expect perfect strangers that you met on the internet to disclose everything up front. Some people are selfish and horny.
15
@ #7, a year min? what planet are you living on? 3 months should be fine, 6 months if you're paranoid.
16
@15, 3 months and 6 months are the timeframes that correspond with testing windows. Not the timeframes that correspond with trust and monogamy (or honest polyamory).
To be going bareback after 6 months is putting yourself in big risks. You probably can't trust someone to be completely faithful until you've known them a bit longer.
But yeah, using condoms for receptive oral sex is a great idea... but in practice it's not really done. Chances are you're fine.
And I say that being terrified of getting the HIV.
To be going bareback after 6 months is putting yourself in big risks. You probably can't trust someone to be completely faithful until you've known them a bit longer.
But yeah, using condoms for receptive oral sex is a great idea... but in practice it's not really done. Chances are you're fine.
And I say that being terrified of getting the HIV.
17
15:
No, I'm not paranoid. I just used to do research at USC School of Medicine on HIV 1 and it's translation, and am aware that there is a percentage of people who's bodies will not produce detectable level of antibody against HIV for years. Hence, why I said a year, so there would be more than one clean test. Seeing people die tends to make one a little cautious. I'd rather see people be safe than sorry.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml…
No, I'm not paranoid. I just used to do research at USC School of Medicine on HIV 1 and it's translation, and am aware that there is a percentage of people who's bodies will not produce detectable level of antibody against HIV for years. Hence, why I said a year, so there would be more than one clean test. Seeing people die tends to make one a little cautious. I'd rather see people be safe than sorry.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml…
18
Okay... we're talking about somebody GETTING a blowjob, so unless his dick has open wounds on it, AND the head-giver has lacerations in his mouth that are BLEEDING INTO THE PEE-PEE HOLE (or onto those supposed open wounds), well golly-gee, I think we can call this one "safer-sex." Dan's right - a beej is a potential for STIs but HIV? Not so much.
21
Well, a one and a half hour blowjob might put you at a bit higher risk than, say, you're average, gotta-do-the-laundry 15 minute blowjob. Maybe his dick was sucked raw by the end of it!
Or maybe I'm just a prude for not keeping my boyfriend's dick in my mouth for ONE AND A HALF fucking hours.
Or maybe I'm just a prude for not keeping my boyfriend's dick in my mouth for ONE AND A HALF fucking hours.
22
I think a blowjob, even a one-and-a-half hour one, is pretty low risk, and so the risk-to-reward ratio for a mind blowing one is pro'lly neglegible (depending on the persons). Still, it's really easy when one is in the thoes of passion to be seduced from within into riskier behaviors. We, as a species, get drunk with lust at a pindrop.
23
Speaking of getting tested, in this town (San Francisco) we now have cartoon penises on the sides of our municipal buses advising us to get tested for syphilis. How laid back has this town become?
Of course, Good Vibes ads are right next to the Coke signs, too.
Of course, Good Vibes ads are right next to the Coke signs, too.
24
Did he also wake up in a bathtub full of ice with a kidney missing?
Seriously, the whole "welcome to the world of AIDS" urban myth has been around since "And the Band Played On" was published.
Seriously, the whole "welcome to the world of AIDS" urban myth has been around since "And the Band Played On" was published.
25
Sorry to leave this as an unregistered comment.
Dan, you didn't tell this guy about post exposure prophylaxis. PEP is a day or a week (it used to be a month) of HIV meds that are taken shortly after exposure to prevent HIV from getting established. I'm no expert but I think this is all the rage among the bareback crowd. But it's what they also give to paramedics or doctors who get exposed on the job. It evidently works. Plus, the drugs make you sh-t your guts out, have constant nausea and zero energy...pretty good aversion therapy for the next time you think it's a good idea to go raw.
Dan, you didn't tell this guy about post exposure prophylaxis. PEP is a day or a week (it used to be a month) of HIV meds that are taken shortly after exposure to prevent HIV from getting established. I'm no expert but I think this is all the rage among the bareback crowd. But it's what they also give to paramedics or doctors who get exposed on the job. It evidently works. Plus, the drugs make you sh-t your guts out, have constant nausea and zero energy...pretty good aversion therapy for the next time you think it's a good idea to go raw.
26
@17 Can you site an article or study that has come out in the last 10 years that states that for some individuals hiv will not produce antibodies for years? The article you site was published in 1986 - our understanding of the virus has progressed quite a bit since then...It's 2009.
28
@23 re: the bus ad - I was just there last week and I tried to take a picture of that ad but there was always traffic getting in the way of the shot! the ad must be up on the internet somewhere but i haven't looked yet. send us a pic if you can snap one.
for those who haven't seen it, it's great - three dicks standing together (wearing clothes - just the heads are sticking up from their collars) and the ad says, "take pride in your health - get tested for syphilis"
love it!
for those who haven't seen it, it's great - three dicks standing together (wearing clothes - just the heads are sticking up from their collars) and the ad says, "take pride in your health - get tested for syphilis"
love it!
31
@ 26
Here are CDC guidelines for 1998 and 2006, they reference back to the 1986 article. I have been out of this field for a long time, and you maybe aware of newer more accurate information. The best that I can sum up, 95% of the time a negative result is accurate and 5% of the time its wrong (be it due too small viral load, or error on the part of the human who ran the test). That 95% of the population will produce detectable levels of the HIV antibody within 6 months of exposure. And, being a mom, I lean on the be cautious side, give each other a year to build the relationship and be certain of your faith in each other. I want people to live long, happy, healthy lives.
"HIV infection usually is diagnosed by using HIV-1 antibody tests. Antibody testing begins with a sensitive screening test such as the enzyme immunoassay (EIA). Reactive screening tests must be confirmed by a supplemental test, such as the Western blot (WB) or an immunofluorescence assay (IFA). If confirmed by a supplemental test, a positive antibody test result indicates that a person is infected with HIV and is capable of transmitting the virus to others. HIV antibody is detectable in at least 95% of patients within 6 months after infection. Although a negative antibody test result usually indicates that a person is not infected, antibody tests cannot exclude infection that occurred less than 6 months before the test."
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml…
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml…
Best wishes.
Here are CDC guidelines for 1998 and 2006, they reference back to the 1986 article. I have been out of this field for a long time, and you maybe aware of newer more accurate information. The best that I can sum up, 95% of the time a negative result is accurate and 5% of the time its wrong (be it due too small viral load, or error on the part of the human who ran the test). That 95% of the population will produce detectable levels of the HIV antibody within 6 months of exposure. And, being a mom, I lean on the be cautious side, give each other a year to build the relationship and be certain of your faith in each other. I want people to live long, happy, healthy lives.
"HIV infection usually is diagnosed by using HIV-1 antibody tests. Antibody testing begins with a sensitive screening test such as the enzyme immunoassay (EIA). Reactive screening tests must be confirmed by a supplemental test, such as the Western blot (WB) or an immunofluorescence assay (IFA). If confirmed by a supplemental test, a positive antibody test result indicates that a person is infected with HIV and is capable of transmitting the virus to others. HIV antibody is detectable in at least 95% of patients within 6 months after infection. Although a negative antibody test result usually indicates that a person is not infected, antibody tests cannot exclude infection that occurred less than 6 months before the test."
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml…
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml…
Best wishes.
32
Do you also cover yourself in bubble wrap and have the police close off the street before you cross the road? That might reduce your risk of getting hit by a bus. (I say REDUCE. A bus could fall from the sky)
33
@5: Dan called the internet the world's biggest bathouse. Isn't a bathouse the place where lots of gay men would cruise before the whole AIDS crisis?
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (34) RSS